Poorly Done, Clichéd, Bad Acting

Rating: 1/10 (16 December 2006)

Okay, so bad acting, poor plot, cheap effects and cheesy photography are what make "the greatest horror movie of all time"? My 15 year old son said, "Well, maybe they liked it, because it's old". Yeah, either that, or Sam Raimi paid dozens of friends and family to vote for this clunker!!! Hey, it isn't a horrible movie: just dumb. I suppose if you're drunk, and have nothing better to do on a Saturday night, then rent this movie. Oh, in one of the "scary" moments of the film, my son said, "These people are dumb... they're retarded". The same might be said for anyone who actually believes this cinematic garbage is "essential viewing for a movie buff." (For "essential viewing, try "The Maltese Falcon" or "Amelie" or a film by Fellini or Bergman, if you want essential viewing... but NOT this sad waste of film!
One final note: the fact that so many folks on IMDb rated this film "10 stars" should be a red flag (suspicious sign, for those of you who have never heard the expression)-- Evidently, the average reviewer on this site is 1. uneducated 2. unsophisticated 3. under the age of sixteen 4. never seen a truly great film or 5. is a shill for the movie industry. I mean, ten stars should be reserved for a film in the top 100 greatest movies: not this sad little excuse for a story.