suite92 The final surprise: watch to the end to get your greatest disappointment.Cinematography: 4/10 Indifferent. Doubling the budget, and buying some reasonable video and lighting equipment would have been a good investment. Soft focus, camera jump, long dark and fuzzy intervals, stupid framing errors, and over exposures were some of the problems.Sound: 2/10 Often hollow. The incidental music was irritating, but not evocative of fear or dread.Acting: 3/10 Between bad and who cares.Screenplay: 0/10 This is the worst part. Who needs motivation? Who needs explanations for physical events in a non-supernatural film? Apparently not these folks. Even if the actors had more skill and training, they would not have been able to overcome this obstacle.

gavin6942 Tonya (Ailsa Marshall) is dumped naked into a room with thirteen strangers. She is player fourteen in a sadistic game where only the survivors win. With each player given clues and tools to survive, who will be left? And who is behind this? Not everyone tells the truth, so can the players trust each other to keep themselves civil? You're going to see review after review comparing this film to "Saw", and some comparing it to "Battle Royale"... still others referencing lesser known films. And, it's true, there's a "Saw" vibe here and a "Battle Royale" vibe... but don't let that dissuade you. There is nothing new about survival horror and it won't go away any time soon. And, if done correctly, that's not a bad thing.I've also seen certain comments concerning the low budget and overabundance of white light. I don't deny these aspects, but in complete honesty they didn't bother me one bit. As long as your film has an interesting story -- and this one does -- and isn't a complete shambles, you have me hook, line and sinker. My only issue with this film was that I had a very strong suspicion of the ending from the very beginning. I was even more convinced after a big clue was dropped in the interview scene.Fans of "Saw" will like this, as will people who like puzzles, so long as they keep an open mind and don't judge it strictly on its low budget and similarities to other films. I was thoroughly engaged by the interesting characters, destruction of film stereotypes, and ultimately the very clever writing inherent in the picture. Allegedly this film was thrown together roughly overnight, but it doesn't show.

joemamaohio Tonya (Ailsa Marshall) awakens inside a room with a collar around her neck, and thirteen other strangers with no answers. Why are they all there? It's soon revealed that they're all a part of a game - to stay alive. One of them is a killer, one is a pedophile, and one is a rapist. As the group begins to turn on one another, they also begin to die one-by-one...some by obvious hands, others when the lights go out. Who is really behind this game, and who will make it out alive? Dare I say it? For a low-budget film, I actually enjoyed it. It was amusing watching and guessing who would die, who would live, and how it would all end. It's like the card game Mafia...when the lights go out, someone is killed, and then everyone left alive suspects everyone else. It's a good film to watch when you have no other options, but it shouldn't be your #1 option.

lord_agin I am not a big fan of horror movies, and nasty examples like "Breathing Room" are the main cause for it. For a non-magical horror movie to entertain me, it must, above everything else, have one thing: an intelligent and satisfying end. I don't say that the good guys have to win, but at least the movie should end in a fashion that shows me, that all the crimes committed were not only possible, but also have the bad guys a working plan on how to get away with all of their crimes, and that is something I completely miss in this movie. Following are my main points of criticism:[1] As I understood it, all the murders were committed while the white light was out and a soft red light was on (with the exception of the three to five seconds of the actual murders, during which it was pitch black, making it impossible to see anything not only for the victim, but also for the killer). That should not keep anybody from seeing what was done and who executed the deed, I mean, she would have to move towards her victim and be panting afterwards, if she really did run so fast (and often). The filmmakers tried to hide this fact behind a lot of camera-jiggling and -wobbling, which should imply that nobody saw clearly, but I found it plainly ridiculous.[2] What was her (and her cronies) motive? What did they gain from this carnage? This topic is never even touched once.[3] How did the killers meet? I refuse to believe that you just "find" a bunch of people who are willing to abduct and butcher completely innocent people by the dozen, or at least help the actual killer to do so.[4] How did they plan on disposing of the enormous amount of bodies?Apart from that, the acting was mostly average, and thus far from credible for an impossible situation like this.I gave this movie 1 star, because I really regard it as a shameful waste of my time. Don't believe me? Go waste 90 minutes of your own time.