Insane

This is the first time I have written a review. I have been using the IMD site for a number of years and always found it very useful, especially when it comes to deciding whether or not to watch a movie or not. When I decided to watch "Insane", it had a rating of 7.4. I thought I was in for a good night's entertainment. This was not the case. This movie is not the worst I have ever seen but I have given it the lowest score that was available to try and balance out some of the outrageously high scores that could have only been given by the mother of the director or the mother of one of the actors. Don't pay money to watch this movie take your partner out for a meal instead.

This is a run of the mill horror movie for the most part with the typical same old predictable scares thrills and chills of every other horror movie of this type you've seen before. A lot of these movies have terrible acting and the acting here is not stunning or anything but it's not terrible by any stretch some of the actors in this are actually pretty good. The story is predictable and the same old scares you've come to expect before so that is the main problem with this movie. Not sure what else to say but I have to write more lines. Great Swedish movies are hard to find but it's even more hard to find one from Finland.

How is it possible that this has a rating of 7.4? and the review on here giving it a 10 must be working for the makers of this awful rubbish. The story line is a direct copy/ripoff from psycho, the acting is poor, and the music score is f####,but then again the low budget attached to this film should have been a dead give away. My advice if you really want to see this crap, push the fast forward button, believe me you won't miss a thing, and for those teen agers thinking it might be half OK cause of the gore and boobies it might have, forget it! a bit of blood here and there, and sorry no boobies.

This is the runner up for worst crap of 2011, 1 out of 10!

This is the second time I've come back to a movie only to write it a review. First time was "The Grudge", to which I felt obligated to pay proper respect and give a praising review as of which it was worthy! This time - the complete and utter opposite. This is the first time I've felt the need to rate a movie 1.

It took me a while to get my hands on this movie. The waiting made me move from "anticipating" to "anxious". My, did I waste my time... I don't like trashing somebody else's art, as people obviously worked hard in order to create this film. I just honestly find it hard to understand how they spent 750k dollars and came up with, well, this.

The acting? I'm pretty sure this was the first gig for the actors and actresses here, though I didn't check. They might have tried, but their low level simply wreaked to high heaven... The story? Not original, not intriguing, not interesting and not good. The script? Predictable to the level of it being preposterous. Many times you could just guess what was about to happen or what a certain character was about to say. The ending? No twist, no new realizations, not a thing.

I honestly don't mean to sound condescending or uppity, I'm not one to talk or pass judgement as I've never worked on a movie and have never published any piece of art, written or visual. However, this "movie" felt like someone woke up one day and thought "Hey, why don't I make a movie?" he then proceeded to get some friends and their friends to write it, shoot it, be in it and write the music for it. And of course, to go on IMDb and rate it 10 so people would think it was worth the watch.

Painfully unprofessional. Next time, kindly show us a little more respect than that. Everything here is just my opinion (though most other reviews I've just read for it agreed with me, and weren't as nice about it), but if you ask me - I say stay the HELL away from this "movie".

ps If you suspect me of being in anyway biased, you're absolutely right. I'm biased by the fact that I've watched this. If you wish to prove me wrong - rent the movie, by all means. Just make sure you imaging me laughing and saying "I told you so!" when the credits roll. Cheers :)

Provided, of course, your definition of "time" happens to roughly equal "the last 3 Psycho movies". Let's face it, there's just not a lot you can do with the "mentally unstable man-child who owns a hotel and hates women" angle. What little there is in that well was done in the original Psycho film...and even that was heavily influenced by Ed Gein who, contrary to what appears to be popular belief, never owned a hotel.

And that's pretty much the plot...a few people get offed at a hotel owned and run by a mildly creepy guy who seems a bit too attentive. The kills are kind of fun but there's hardly enough to justify a whole film. They even introduce characters just to kill them a minute later. Understandable, considering there's only really 3 main characters. You gotta stretch the film out somehow. The film itself isn't bad, it's just not terribly good. I guess if you have some time to kill and you're not faced with a plethora of terrific options, it might be a good way to waste some time.