For Sale by Owner

A supporting cast consisting of Tom Skerrit, Tom Bower, Joanna Cassidy, Kris Kristofferson, Frankie Faison, and Rachel Nichols made For Sale By Owner appear to be very promising indeed, and each of these stars put in decent performances albeit all fairly small in this low budget flick. Unfortunately, from the start, Scott Cooper's abominable acting and scripting proved nothing could salvage this debacle.

The Ronoake legend is one that has received a fair amount of play the past few years in films and the mystery surrounding the disappearance of the 16th Century British colony is the backdrop once again here in this discombobulated tale. Father to be, Will Custis (Cooper) decides to purchase a dilapidated old Virginian home to partake in some historic renovation. When he discovers an old antique cross and a strange mural painted on the wall in the basement, things get a bit quirky. His wife (Nichols) doesn't dig the house and wants to call it quits and his father in law (Skerrit) wants to steal the credit for what could be an historic archaeological discovery. Top it off with ghosts apparently running around.

The film travels in a multitude of directions that lead nowhere and concludes with an absolutely ridiculous ending all in an effort to tie up all the loose strings. It's bad. However, it would not have been so lousy had it not been for Cooper who portrays a character so obnoxiously uninteresting I almost gave into the taboo temptation of hitting the stop button.

Anna? Anna? Anna?

a very well done and interesting journey with twists and turns. Great cast and an unbelievable ending. It makes you think and follow the story. Not a movie for short attention spans. Watch again to catch the clues. I would give it a 9 out of ten but i don't give 9 ,s . The locations are also really interesting. Give it a look. Skeet has a couple of great moments as well as Tom Bower as the sheriff. In the same vein as the sixth sense. Looks terrific great camera work the only thing maybe it is slow in parts but that is to weave the story deeper is my guess. Hope this helps it is nice to see something that attempts to be different and has a nice historical hook to it. Again definitely worth a look.

This movie had the potential to be pretty darn good. The historical aspect involved made it even more interesting. The acting ranged from passable (the leading man, who comes across as not likable at all,) to strong (Skeritt.) The plot was fairly good, until just after the half-way point, but left some threads hanging that I kept expecting to be tied up, but they never were. The ending was nothing short of unfortunate. It was as if the writers couldn't come up with a good ending, and took the cheap route out. I can think of a couple of endings that would've earned this movie a solid 6 or 7 rating. Unfortunately, the writers couldn't, so they're stuck with a 4 - and I'm stuck with my disappointment.

Average movie with dazed ,confused, schizophrenic ending

To be honest, this was a weird movie. It didn't have all the "hollywood" added to it. I was very interested within the first 15 minutes which is highly unusual for me. It tells the story of a man that restores homes from Virginia. At the start you will think his is having a panic attack but you will see that he suffers from skitzophrenia. The movie plays into the role perfect & if you have ever met someone like that (I am), it's truly wonderful how they had the "mind set" perfect. It also has a lot about history in Virginia & one of the oldest mysteries surrounding the United States. I don't want to spoil it for you, but if you want to venture off into a movie with lots of twists & a decent story line, this is for you. You will have to pay attention or maybe watch it twice. The first time is like, WOW, then the second you can see more clearly what is going on. Im surprised this movie doesn't have many ratings or views. Probably because its not "Hollywoodified".