Michael O'Keefe You may say this is a Shane Van Dyke project; not only does he star, he is credited with the screenplay and also directs. Supposedly based on real paranormal activity that took the life of a pretty young woman named Samantha Finley(Erin Marie Hogan). This supernatural horror film opens with a disclaimer that Thomas Finley(Van Dyke)was convicted of raping and killing his sister and murdering her doctor, Edgar Lauren(Norman Saleet), who also claimed to be a psychic. Ellen Finley(Fia Perera)feels something strange has entered her home shortly after the death of her husband. Dr. Lauren convinces her that she probably has reached her loved one from the "other side". But it seems most of the abnormal activity in the home is happening in her daughter Sam's room. Son and brother Thomas has installed night vision cameras in the home in hopes of catching paranormal footage. This is what we see...the allegedly "actual footage" of the events that led to the murder of Miss Finley. Thomas committed suicide while in prison. Obviously low budget and just not enough of the "good stuff" the viewer hopes to see.

leejohnson-nwuk I have to give Shane Van Dyke some words...just because you come from a TV family does NOT mean you are capable of being a TV or film star! I have seen Shane in a few productions and to be honest, he is a talentless actor and now, as a writer and director, he proves he is also useless at these roles too. I have just sat through one of the worst productions I have ever seen. It was not only badly filmed (we all had a giggle at the shot of him on his lap top when he is pretending to press keys and scroll!), the acting was bad! The woman playing the mother in this film was terrible! if you want actors to improvise Shane, then get actors who can improvise! This woman was appalling. I watched Paranormal Activity a few years ago and found it boring and terribly written, acted and directed, however, having now seen this atrocious piece of garbage, I consider paranormal activity a genius production. I have read some reviews of this on IMDb and am totally surprised anyone could class this as good. Are these people part of Shane's gang? Look folks, before you consider watching this, let me save you time, it is a complete and badly done rip off, using a cheap camcorder and BAD acting. Writing wise, it's suffering a great deal from the fact it has no writing and seems all improvised. Badly Improvised I might add. Somebody should inform Shane that a new career really does need looking in to. It is surely not enough to merely trade on your family name, surely you Americans can see where the talent is and where, in Shane's case, it is so obviously lacking. I am a fan of Dick Van Dyke, but Shane, I am sorry love, you just haven't got what it takes.

Kurt Mathisen The title of my review is just an example of what is more interesting or remotely exciting than this film.For a second I thought it seemed familiar, Paranormal Entity... Paranormal Activity, oh but which is which!? It could indeed easily be mistaken. "Hey man, you hear about that film?" "What that Paranormal uh..." "Oh god what was it? Acti-Entity?" "Hmm, it's something like that! The one where the girl gets dragged out of bed," "Ha-ha, oh yeah, I think it might be Paranormal Entity? I can't be sure; we'll just have to buy both of the DVD's to find out for sure." "Well that was crap, let's watch Die Hard!" "YEAH!" As you can see, it's a clever tactic in a way, the fact it can be easily mistaken means it can be easily watched; then you feel so low after, having wasted your money and then need John McClane to restore the equilibrium again.This film is a complete rip off. The style of filming is identical to Activity too; the only slight difference is... Okay to be fair the story isn't exactly the same as PA, but the plot is pretty much the same thing. There are even scenes in particular which share a remarkable resemblance to PA.Overall it's not worth noting anything more about this film, compared between the two films, PA wins. So the conclusion is pretty obvious really. I thought it deserved a two, just because of how the film ends; okay I lied. The ending was pretty bad too, but what did make it worthwhile, was that after I used the DVD as coaster for my coffee cup; not straight away or anything, just over time, used a crappy DVD I found lying around; ended up being this one by coincidence.So just a quick, bullet point overview.1) Acting is laughable in some instances.2) If you're desperate for any kind of nudity, skipping to the end is all you need to do.3) Poorly directed, poorly written (even for a rip off).4) Can use DVD as a coaster.

bevfoosteele This film is like all the other story,s of paranormal nature.The first thing to get out the way is that the video footage is presumed to be real even though you can access a cast and crew list from anywhere on the net. Secondly it losses its realism as you can see strings and pulleys in certain scenes .If your a horror fan then this film is a no no, all you will do is criticize and moan like i am , but on the other hand if your a screamer person that still believes in the tooth fairy and troll's then this would make a good sleep over film for you and your girly fluffy mates to watch whilst cuddling your care bear and brushing your my little pony .I gave this film a 1 out of ten because of the poor acting and the bear faced cheek to call it real footage.