Jogos de um Psicopata

I was kind of looking forward to this movie as it looked like one of those that might make me not be able to sleep for a while. However, I just watched it and the story was interesting but I was not frightened at all.

The acting isn't very good. In most scenes where something intense is supposed to be happening, the actors just seem to overreact. In other cases they don't seem freaked out at all by what's going on. But the worst part about the acting is that the 'evil ones' mostly just make you laugh. It's like watching a comedy that spoofs horror films.

The sound effects also contribute to a negative part of this film. The voices you hear in the background are just too typical. For example, I could swear I had heard the 'laughing child' voice in at least 20 other horror movies.

I really hoped that this film would stand out. Unfourtunately, the story is the only part that's unique. I haven't read the novel but I think it's safe to say that this story is much better imagined than watched on the screen.

3/10 stars. Sadly, it's not worth the watch.

Ted Dekker and Frank Peretti are amazing authors, and their book 'House' is still one of my favorite, and one of the (if not the) scariest book I've ever read. The movie was... okay. The initial problem I saw was the fact they tried to fit five-six hours of reading into an hour and a half of film. After watching the movie, I also realized that if you didn't read the book, you'd have absolutely NO CLUE what was going on. None whatsoever. That's a problem. Because I read the book, I was able to keep up with, generally, what was going on, but the film did not do the fantastic book justice. But now onto the movie.

The acting was typical Christian-movie acting. There's an old saying in the Christian Film industry. 'We cannot take the able and make them faithful; we must take the faithful, and God will make them able.' This is no exception. The acting was second-rate, and sometimes not believable. The music was good, and the special effects were pretty great, too, but no 'A-movie' quality. The story, like I said, is non- sense and confusing to those who have not read the book.

Here's the bottom line. If you read the book, go see it. If you haven't, don't. You won't get anything from it.

Well, as a guy who occasionally watches movies from the horror genre, i found this movie quite interesting. If you are a person who doesn't like too much gore and blood but need to get ur adrenaline pumping for sometime, then i would suggest you go for it. This is just one of the rare horror movies without all that. Shouldn't be rated R for sure, i feel that quite a few 15 - 17 year olds would also enjoy this movie. The 6 stars are for making a movie for the rare category of people who like horror movies with no gore.

I would have rated it higher but the story made no sense, some of the characters made no sense and i ended up kinda confused in the end with a lot of unanswered questions. Like some of the people commented, the movie does not suck and it isn't too good either. I would suggest watching it if you just want a few thrills without the nightmares that come with them

I didn't even realize this was a Ted Dekker story until the end of the film, which explains a lot. He's also responsible for the "story" in the lame Seven knockoff cleverly titled "Three". He also writes Christian horror, whatever the hell that means. Michael Madsen is usually a recipe for disaster in any movie not titled Reservoir Dogs, and he screws it up here as well. Apparently Christian horror is about as effective as Christian rock. It looks like horror, kinda smells like horror, but it's not really horror. I'm not too religious myself, but being a Christian doesn't mean you have to stomach half-baked garbage like this just because it's written by someone who touts himself as a Christian writer. It's like liking those horrifyingly bad Left Behind books. Don't excuse bad writing just because the writer is a Christian. That's weak sauce. Use your head, people. There is also no reason for this to be rated R whatsoever. I can't remember any swearing and there was hardly any blood considering all the death in the film. There's an interesting concept in the flick somewhere but it gets lost in the shoddy camera-work and hit-or-miss acting that proves everyone involved is not quite ready for prime time. It gets one extra star for the awesome Bill Moseley, though he's wasted in this disappointing wanna-be horror film. Ted Dekker and Dan Brown should get together. Maybe between them they might be able to come up with a fully-functioning story. I said might...

Heading to see a marriage counselor, the Singletons (Reynaldo Rosales and Heidi Dippold) blow two tires on an Alabama back road. Looking for help, they stumble upon the isolated Wayside Inn and find another couple there as well. The place is run by a creepy family (Leslie Easterbrook, Bill Moseley, and Lew Temple) and they offer to let everyone stay. After a rather tense dinner, the Singletons try to leave but are confronted by The Tin Man, a masked figure who demands the visitors pay for their various sins.

Based on the book by Ted Dekker and Frank Peretti, House was given a limited theatrical release in November 2008. It opened in my area (we're just down the road from The 700 Club), but I didn't go see it. I kind of wish I had as R-rated horror film aimed at Christian audiences isn't likely to happen that often. Director Robby Henson does a good job creating atmosphere (the SAW films were obviously a huge influence) and the production does well masking Poland for rural Alabama. The script is a bit simplistic ("Light destroys darkness" says the angel surrogate character) and the story steals a big page from Carnival of Souls (1962). The supporting cast is good as the crazy family and reads like the line up at a horror convention. To solidify that fact, Michael Madsen also shows up as a cop.