scary, but not suspenseful

Rating: 3/10 (2 August 2015)

This movie is scary enough to grab audience attention for a while, which is not bad for a scary movie. The movie set is also very good, and it worth to look at them more than once. And that's it...I can't come out with any other pros. Solely being scary is not a qualification for being a good scary movie, there needs to be some suspense, and this movie has no suspense at all. Probably I saw too many good scary movies? The story is pretty bad, and the main character is full of flaws. It might seems ridiculous to someone, but I find it to be a major problem that in most movies, actors (and actress) play a much younger role than themselves, and for some older-looking ones like Nicolas Cage, playing a older character is more often. But Daniel is not that type of older-looking guy, and I think he is even a little bit younger-looking. He was about 22 years old back then, and he looks like 22, or even a little bit younger than 22, and he plays a lawyer with a wife and a son who can walk and speak to his father. It seems like at least 30 years old...I actually like Daniel Radcliffe's performance in some other movies, but for this one, he is not only too young for the role, but also has a very average performance.