Audra Crane The film is bad on virtually every level-even student films run circles around this for quality. The dialogue and acting is dire. The exposition dumps are hilarious. Virtually all the actors seem to be just reciting lines into space, there is no sense that they are talking to each other or have any sense of timing. The lighting fluctuates wildly. The tone flicks all over the place and the lead actress can't decide whether to be chummy with the ghosts or terrified- so she goes back and forth throughout the film. She also receives and forgets information consistently- maybe the script changed throughout filming. If I had to hear the fake asthmatic gasp of the lead one more time, I might have had an asthma attack myself. It's completely inaccurate as to English inheritance law and just generally doesn't make much sense. Part of the reason my review is so harsh is that I am very leery of all the 10 star reviews- an adoring mother wouldn't be able to give this 'baby' more than a 6 and an honest review is truly a 1.

ladycatrin I usually love ghost stories, but this was dire.To begin with, in parts of this film I got the impression that someone on the crew had watched 'Moondial' one too many times and decided to make an adult version. So frankly, not even particularly original.Then there's the lead actress. I've seen better in school plays - wooden, unattractive and looked continually puzzled throughout the entire film. It has the feel of something shot by a group of friends with a hand-held video camera - so amateurish it's ridiculous. Is this a student film project? If so, I don't know what it's doing listed here.If you're thinking of watching it - seriously, don't waste your time.

tom_strudwick It's one of those dramas that's so bad that it almost hits the point of being very funny, the script is absolutely dire, direction appalling, lighting purely armature, the only thing letting it down from a true so bad it's good feel is that the sound design is only quite bad; it adds no suspense to the story although trying hard, but doesn't at least destroy any speeches. There's continuity problems of seasons of out door shots throughout. And finally last but not least the acting is appalling. For a professional production it very much has the feel of a university media project you have to feel sorry for the sorry for anyone who had to put their names to this.

sealandfilms Steven M.Smith. A name to remember, a future light of UK independent film making. Time of her life, is a very impressive first effort from this writer/director, as indeed too was his directorial debut of notable admiration. But the real triumph was his almost single handed quest, dogged determination, and a shear single-minded focus, to achieve the ultimate goal of making that first movie. Steven's first effort should be noted, as a beacon to all would be filmmakers. why? Because he's done it, he's made that journey of ups and downs. He held the whole production together with string and gaffer tape, whilst juggling cast/crew and finances with both hands tied behind his back. When he ran out of money and the usual doors slammed in his face, he somehow found enough to keep going. At the end of it all, I guess this films entire journey will probably have taken over two years of his life, maybe even more, and in all that time I know his dedication would not have dropped below 110%. All young would be filmmakers, or old, need to learn from people like Steven, as this guy has completed the journey on which many of them wish to travel. And for all of Steven's endeavours he now has to his credit a truly wonderful first time independent feature. Well Done!