christopher-77

I can't give this a low, low score because it is a technically proficient movie - good camera, good lighting, and realistic environments and dialog.

Unfortunately, the script was utterly boring.

It's clear the writer and director were trying to make a connection with the audience, and cause them to well up with tears for our poor, afflicted main character (Jaime Foxx). But, when the cresendo came and the climax passed, I was just playing mental gymnastics wondering "When will I start caring?" It's yet another example of a great movie affected by an un-remarkable and un-moving script. Too bad, I really wanted to like this one...

Take care, ... Christopher

This movie relies too heavily on nudity and hot chicks who are scripted as being "easy". I was in a frat in college - a real party frat, too - and it wasn't anything like this.

* There aren't A-List celebrity musicians playing at the frat party. * Girls don't randomly flash each guy as he walks through the door. * There aren't topless waitresses serving perfect martinis on a tray.

I feel like this is some 40-year-old's idea of what he *wished* his frat life is like. I'm not even sure if the writer was actually ever in a fraternity.

The only reason I gave this movie any points is because from a technical standpoint the lighting, camera-work and set design are okay. Honestly, the production wasn't bad - but the script SUCKED. If they cut their naked girls budget by 25% and spent the money on another scriptwriter instead, this could have been a decent movie. Instead they went with two first-time writers that must have just gotten their WGA cards a few weeks ago.

I hope they try and improve their skills! Don't give up after one bad script - maybe it was the studio's fault.

M. Night is being lambasted about this film; I won't say this film doesn't have a ton of flaws (believe me, it does), but it's clear to me that he is on a tract to duplicate the successes of Alfred Hitchcock. It is obvious Hitchcock is a huge influence... nay, a source... for much of M. Night's experimental film-making.

Unfortunately, he's turning off a lot of people with this style of film-making.

Let's just get it out of the way now - the idea is unique but the screen writing is atrocious. This film needed a healthy dose of panic. If the film-makers had injected 1/10th of the panic-stricken dialog from the movie 'Cloverfield', this film could easily have been a frightening thriller.

Instead it just plods along delivering cheesy overly-dramatic lines that are seriously out-of-context.

The actors aren't panicked when they should naturally be, and often times it appears they are just standing around waiting for their fate rather than running off in the other direction, away from the terror that is coming after them.

I can see where M. Night was going with this, but I honestly think the studio should have called for a re-write. M. Night is great, but clearly he needed help on the dialog and character actions of this film.

Now let me get to the worst part - M. Night gave away the 'twist' almost 25% into the movie! From any other director I don't mind, but I've come to expect a 'surprise' from M. Night - kind of like, waiting for the jack-in-the-box to spring open, even though you know it's coming. Unfortunately the 'twist' was cited early on, which left me thinking 'ok, now what?' until the credits rolled.

I give M. Night a 5 out of 10, because it seemed like he genuinely tried to do something magical here, but just missed the mark. Next time, Mr. Shamalan, PLEASE accept the help of some gifted WGA member, even if you throw out most of their rewrites.