I'm sorry I can't recommend it

Rating: 4/10 (11 December 2007)

There is a significant difference between a short story and a movie. An ending of a short story may prove to be a disaster in a film. And I think that's exactly what happens here.
A short story is not required to have a "happy" ending. In contrast, a theatrical film which expects a person to get out of their home, travel to the theater, and sit through two hours of cinema, had better have some kind of reward for the viewer. If not a classically happy ending, at least one which furnishes some kind of catharsis or resolution of themes brought up earlier in the film--a satisfying ending, if not a happy one.
This film fails miserably. The ending is unsatisfying, unhappy, and deeply depressing. Recall that earlier in the film, the question of euthanasia was raised and was firmly rejected. In the ending, there seems to be a change of heart. Why? The question does not need an explicit answer, but at least a hint of an explanation. Otherwise, the ending seems totally arbitrary (as it did here).
Beyond the euthanasia issue, the ending seemed extremely contrived. Rescue became available within a minute of the unfortunate killings? Oh, please. It's like deus ex machina, but one minute too late.
In sum, a basically unexplained enemy kills a lot of people in unpleasant ways. No one figures out how to fight back, and virtually everyone dies. The only difference in the deaths is that the bad people generally died first.
I always love Thomas Jane. He's so cute, and so intense, but is always a blank at conveying anything other than what's written in the lines.
If you love Thomas Jane or Stephen King, you may like this film. I can't say I hated it, but it was very unsatisfying.