Inside

In life there,s a saying,"Talk is cheap",and in film,the saying go,s even more to the point. Take this movie.I have worked a bit on both sides of the lens,and we all know that by keeping sets,locations,and camera set-ups limited ,one can save money.Once this tepid thriller gets going,it never leaves the prison that the story takes place in .Low -budget action star Luke Goss must have had high hopes,or just needed to pay the bills when he took the part as lead in this one.Now,its not to say this is a really bad film,its just not a real good one. I waited for it to pick up,and it finally did in the last reel.the story is o.k. ,the acting decent,and the players did a good job.What thrills are there are cool enough,but there was,nt enough meat on the bones,so to speak,to make this a great meal.I got up a few times,but i asked ,and i did,nt miss anything.The pay-off at the very end was,nt much,and pretty easy to guess.In a sci-fi vein,this one is not really worth seeking out,but if the RedBox has nothing else,you could do worse.Sorry,just my take on this one.

Whilst Inside is not a terrible movie, it fails to adequately compel its audience into viewing it more than once.

It offers a potentially good story line, that they could have done so much more with. The films ending is an anti-climax at best, and the only shining parts are the actors commitment to true-form acting and the small element of fear the title imparts on its viewers.

4* - Below average

I'm hardly a fan of Luke Goss. I remember him from his Bros days and always found it hard to take him seriously as an actor. 'Inside' is a film which is basically set inside two dark prison cells for almost the whole movie. Therefore, the 'cast' is effectively Luke Goss and the cellmate next door.

For a movie to work like that, you need to have a pretty strong lead. Amazingly, Luke Goss pulled it off. He's obviously come a long way in terms of his acting ability and I really wanted to like the film as much as I admired his performance.

Sadly, the rest of the film just isn't fast-paced enough to ride the ninety minutes out. It is cheap. Sometimes a lack of budget forces the film-makers to come up with imaginative ways of creating tension and using special effects. Here, it shows. With just the one primary location, shot in near-darkness and whatever 'threat' which stalks the prison never really seen, you can easily get bored. Perhaps setting it in a LOCKED prison cell didn't help matters. Seeing as prison cells are designed to be basically inescapable, you can't simply have the protagonist walk out and explore wide and varied locations.

Yes, it creates a claustrophobic atmosphere and there are the odd bits that might make you jump, but, ultimately, this film is never going to appeal to the masses. If you were a die-hard fan of 'single-location' films like 'Buried' you might be able to sit through this, otherwise steer clear.

Full marks to Luke Goss for a great performance, now he just needs an equally decent vehicle to match his ability.

Myles a newly arrived prisoner in county jail is assigned to his cell next to a truculent hard timer . Soon after lights out screams are heard and Myles and the rest of the cell block find themselves in deadly danger

You can see what INSIDE is trying to do . It's a minimalist horror thriller with a very small cast . Some congratulations should be in order because it's always nice to see a low budget movie trying to scare the audience and at the same time not having to rely on gore to appeal to the lowest common denominator . On this level the film is moderately effective

The downside is however that if you're trying to make a try classic in this genre then the screenplay should be perfect . It is some what clichéd but that's not the fundamental problem . The problem is that there's some very obvious plot holes that'll have you saying to yourself " Why didn't so and so do such and such a thing because if that was me I would have done the sensible thing and ... " Well you get the idea ? In other words the screenplay needed a bit more development to set it apart from its peers . That said I didn't bother reading the opening credits and wasn't until I came to this page and found out the protagonist is played by pretty boy Bros member Luke Goss who despite being the front man of a very untalented manufactured British pop band from the late 1980s did manage to convince me he was an American actor playing an American character

And it seems obvious that there wasn't a lot of money (location wise) to be spend. Still after the beginning and the middle part of the movie (yes that's a long time), this does have some pace and it does get stronger. It's also not only the pace that changes ... but more if you actually watch it.

Luke Goss might not be a top actor and you might also see him struggle here from time to time (phone call bit is really bad and should've been deleted from the movie), but he can convey when the action "hammer" comes down. The final moments of the movie almost redeem the whole movie (if not any character), but is it enough?