The Man Next Door

Yes, I love this movie..it's so lame, it's excellent for drinking parties with friends =P I don't know if there actually is, or was, a person that thought that this movie was good, but I find that VERY hard to believe. I watched it with friends and we laughed our asses off. Especially the line about the smell of fish coming from upstairs. I find it quite impressing that you can tell the smell is coming from upstairs. Furthermore, there was a rotting corpse..THAT DOES NOT SMELL OF FISH! But anyway, I'd totally recommend this movie if you a) wanna have a good laugh or b)are a young filmmaker and you wanna learn what NOT to do when making a movie..

I can't believe somebody can give this film a 10! It's atrociously bad, although sometimes it's funny. Sometimes it seems a Mexican soap-opera... The first scenes at the parade are brilliant, though. See it for laughs, at your own risk!

This movie is the best independent film I have seen. I have 9 hours of college credit in psychology, and this movie hit on so many emotional levels - fear, guilt, betrayal, angst, and terror...it truly is a thriller! It should be compared to the independent greats such as: Blood Simple, Pi, Halloween, etc... not recommended for young adults, it is undoubtably an adult thriller! If you love Hitchcock, you will love "The Man Next Door".

but he sure has a bad taste of humor, then. He so to see was the only one (and hopefully will always be the only one) that gave this film a 10. This must've been after numerous bottles of vodka, because I don't see how you ever can earnestly even give attention to this product. For my part, I only do it in an attempt to prevent people from spoiling their temper and wasting their time. This is by far the worst movie I ever saw, and even the predicate 'movie' gives it too much credit. Believe me: if you hate yourself, are in a really sick mood or seek for some stimuli to throw up (for instance after a wild party) - go see this film. If one or all of these reasons are absent: stay cheerfully away from this aberration.

I agree with most (at this time only five!) reviewers, that this movie is pretty bad. Weird enough one of them on the contrary gave a raving review (and a mind-boggling 10!), comparing it to no less than Hitchcock. Well, this movie could help young film-students to learn exactly why Hitchcock was such a great director and what's wrong with this film. Because the premise isn't that bad at all, and Hitchcock could probably have made it into a terrific movie.

Here almost everything fails: the direction, the extreme lame dialogues, the lack-lustre photography and colors, the editing, causing all kinds of sudden leaps in the continuity, and last but not least the acting. Except for trusted old pro's David Huddleston and Virginia Mayo, the maker chose (for artistic reasons? or more probably on account of a low budget) for the younger parts mainly amateurs, who dutiful but without any conviction recited their learned-by-heart lines. How former Hollywood-beauty Mayo, here at age 77, ended up in this (her last) production beats me, to be honest it didn't do her legacy any justice. The only positive thing I can say is that the three young actors all were very good-looking, that's at least worth something; although their looks were wasted on this film.

I guess the ambitions were aimed way to high for the low budget, and the fact that writer, director and producer were united in one person probably didn't help either: no-one to control and correct one of the others.