Paura.com

I was interested to see if time had been kind to this film, or if the original loathing I felt during the release still held. Well the answer, it's worse then I remember, time has of course been unkind, so it now looks dated, but worse, it's an incoherent mess, that makes absolutely no sense. I will give some credit to Natasha McElhone, who does at least try and give a sincere performance, but she was up against it in this dire film.

At the time the production values were pretty good, so I won't slate it for ageing, but I will slam it for being a terrible film, that makes no sense at all, it never decides whether it wants to be a thriller or a supernatural horror.

Avoid. 2/10

I'd rather watch Anti-Smoking Commercials than this because at least you'd see real horror. I saw this film when it was fresh in theaters. Hearing no negative feedback (or any for that matter) I thought it looked interesting so I went to see it. Considering I was one of about 4 people in the whole theater I jumped to the conclusion that this movie was bad, and was it. The whole movie is very dark in scenery and in acting.

The movie is about a website (feardotcom.com) that if you go there some dead chick asks you if you want to play a game, and then eventually kills you. Behind the website is a snuff film maker that shows footage of him killing people 'erotically.' The director of this movie must has some screws loose in his head. It's like a cheap cheesy very poorly done 8mm ripoff.

I'm all for movies in the 'Bottom 100' of IMDB. I enjoy movies that the critics hate. But this movie just makes you wonder, who would put out money to release this?

Investigating a spate of similar deaths that may be virus related, officer Mike Reilly and Department of Health's Terry Huston are left stumped by the connections in the similar deaths. However as the deaths continue, some video taped clues surface and guide them. They uncover a website that may be related to the deaths and also reminds Reilly of the cruel doctor Alistair Pratt. What CAN it all mean?

In an attempt to be fair to this film, I was in the gym when I watched this film and was jogging for the majority of the time. Maybe that means I wasn't concentrating and thus missed the good side of it, or I was too focused on it (to avoid the pain) and became nick-picky. Either way I'm sure my opinion of this film would be the same in either situation. – that this film is polished nonsense.

The plot is so lacking a central focus point, a driver if you will, that at times it is as disjointed as some of the butchered bodies on display. Those strands that do exist are very loose and don't really hang convincingly well together. The end result is that there is no real tension to speak of – certainly no fear. While I did think that the main idea of the website was good, it went nowhere of merit.

What was left was simply a lot of flashy MTV camera shots and cinematography to try and give the impression of weirdness or an impressive film. If the substance had been there in support these might have been more impressive, as it is they only serve to highlight how utterly hollow they are.

The cast are all pretty average. I only watched it because I saw Dorff's name in the credits but he did nothing to really speak of. Likewise McElhone easily slips into scream queen mode. Rea's evil doctor was OK but not expanded on at all or used well at any point. The support cast of victims all run round scared (or bleeding) as required – no more no less.

Overall I was disappointed wit the film. It had an interesting, if not great concept to work from, but failed to build any sort of substance and comes off just looking like a long music video with gore.

If the survival of horror films depends on titles such as this "FearDotCom", we are indeed facing the downfall of the genre. This is lame, uninspired and repetitive garbage that irritates you from start to finish. Director William Malone's idea of suspense exists out of underexposed and fuzzy images of murders edited together in boisterous flashes that actually show you NOTHING. Add a poorly written script about a murderous website and completely unconvincing characters to this and you've got yourself one of the biggest cinema-turkeys since the new millennium. If the premise of this film rings a bell, it means that you recognize it from the Japanese cult hit "Ringu"…. Or the slightly inferior American remake "the Ring". Only, the videotape has been replaced by an internet website and the poor victims have only 2 days left to live after being exposed instead of 7. Typical for an unscrupulous rip-off…Faster, louder and modernized! The elaboration is a mess: weak dialogue, plot holes all over the place, no style or atmosphere and very bad acting. I can't believe class actors like Udo Kier and Stephen Rea were talked into accepting roles like this? Surely they can still do better even though they both have seen their best times. Stephen Dorff and the leading lady deliver lousy performances in roles that really don't fit them. Dorff as a tough, experienced copper? Doubtful… Perhaps what annoyed me most about the cast (shallow, I admit) is seeing how one of my all-time favorite B-actors, Jeffrey Combs, is given such a small and insignificant role! That's Doctor Herbert West from Re-Animator we're talking about, dammit! Show a little more respect, Malone! If you love horror, you should avoid "FearDotCom" at all costs! It's bad for your nerve system.

At time of writing Feardotcom is down as the 53rd worst rated movie on IMDB and I truly don't understand why. Let's make something perfectly clear, this is a bad movie but it's in no way bad to that degree.

Starring Stephen "Blade" Dorff, Natascha "Truman Show" McElhone, industry veteran Stephen Rea, one of my all time favorite actors Jeffrey Combs and the token cameo appearance by Udo Kier it certainly does have a decent roster.

It tells the story of a website which when visited gives you 48hrs before you go insane and die. Basically it's Ringu/The Ring (1998) just with tweaks. Sadly those tweaks aren't very good and the movie has come out as a bit of a confused mess.

I get what they were trying to do and disagree with other reviewers that the film didn't make sense, it really did. It just wasn't very good and it felt like such a great cast were thoroughly wasted on this, especially considering it's a blatant ripoff of The Ring which had its US remake the very same year this came out.

Bad film? Absolutely. One of the worst? Hardly.

The Good:

Natascha McElhone and Jeffrey Combs

The Bad:

Stephen Rea and Jeffrey Combs feel wasted

Plot falls apart

Takes a lot from other films