Mark Stromberg At first glance - a normal low-budget film in a genre almost-Horror. But I do not recommend, based on a stupid and primitive violence. In addition, if the horror is not scary, it is disgusting and it is already - not really a horror film. The plot is almost non-existent in it, the script is sucked from the finger.What could be a plus, namely the ability to be rented for $ 300 a film turned out to be a minus. The movie was filmed in such a way, that is not much interested in the viewer .. NOT intriguing nothing at all, except to inflict physical harm or kill someone. What makes this creation, disgusting product, but unbecoming to view. Degraded- layer emulsion.The director, of course, has its own style *, but the potential for its development is limited to primitive violence, because he * only on this reasonable. The very same film about mediocrity persons, who do not make sense as shooting is not something that horror, and anything at all, and doing terrible things on the way to his 1st movie - this is their horror, in fact about the film itself.Cut so that with a certain probability may be able to tighten the film fans, until the end of viewing, but The usual bold viewer will want to turn off after 5 + minute (if not sooner, then later)

ellissamantha2 I found paying attention to this tiresome and a challenge, a challenge I apparently could not conquer cause I'm pretty sure a spent more time daydreaming than being entertained by this film. The acting was average for a low budget and I am not reviewing to actor bash and I think the actors were fine and it was just the dialog they were handed along with the execution as a whole that just built no suspense to allow viewers to connect to the characters or the film as a whole. It simply failed to pull me in. With that said I thought perhaps it was just my mood so I took a second attempt and my opinion hasn't changed. The fake reviews on here are so misleading, no way people are giving this a 10 star unless involved in the film themselves which is sad because if the film was at all descent it would get 5-6 star average on it's own which for the horror genre is good on here and rating this a 10 star isn't gonna magically make the movie good, if anything it raise expectations and leaves viewers even more disappointed than they originally would be after watching.

yalibarkan I opened an IMDb account especially to warn people from this waste of time. All the rest of the reviews are by the cast and makers of the film. Actually calling it a film is doing the cinema wrong, it really is more like a student film. A bad, long, boring student film you just wished you haven't watched.If you love the Horror Genre, I invite you to write an honest review as well (after trying to see the movie of course) just so other fans wouldn't have to go through the disappointment of finding out this movie's rating (7.4 at the time this review was written) is misleading.I didn't manage to get through the first half an hour. Those who can, please contact your doctor. You have Alzheimer.

TaylorJedMartin It's rare I find a thriller/horror film that wraps me in and keeps me enticed. CUT! brings you a clever, smart, witty and entertaining horror flick that will leave you guessing all the way through. Brilliant performance from David Banks in the lead and David Rountree is equally as captivating. Rountree leaves an impressive directorial mark with excellent casting and superb performances. Locations, shot selection, and scene choices came together very well allowing the story to unfold with a stylistic classy touch. The score and post effects were spot on and we all know so much of a good horror flick relies on great audio. CUT! shows you that amazing work can be done with the right people, the right attitude, the right planning and a little bit of capitol.