Patrick McCord doesn't accept the explanation of his sister's mysterious death as suicide, and instead teams up with a team of paranormal investigators to delve deeper into the inexplicable circumstances that surround what he believes to be murder. The team's investigation leads them from one bizarre and frightening clue to another, at the center of which seems to exist something evil and terrifying, a presence well beyond their wildest imaginations and experiences. Before long, they realize this deadly entity has now targeted each of them, and they are confronted with the impossible challenge of defeating it and saving their own lives. In the end, what survives, and is presented here, is the disturbing footage that Patrick and his team shot, footage that if seen by others, likely endangers the viewer, marking them as the next victim of this powerful and evil force. Be careful what you chase - you just might end up catching it.
Patrick McCord doesn't accept the explanation of his sister's mysterious death as suicide, and instead teams up with a team of paranormal investigators to delve deeper into the inexplicable... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Mark D (br) wrote: Visually and narrativly ambiguous, but the question is does it benefit? the answer is i dont know, couldnt figure it all out. So it needs another watcjh. Best thing i can say for it though is that it was intersting, and obviously inspired by 'Soylent Green'
Barbara F (jp) wrote: What the.... did i just watch? Give me hot pokers to the eye. This will have to be the worst movie I have seen., Words escape me.
Kenneth B (nl) wrote: Hmm well not as funny as I remember but there is some decent parody at work here. I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.
Megan D (gb) wrote: Why wasn't i called Mavis Davis?!
Gordon C (br) wrote: Anybody out there who's read many of my "reviews" will know that one of the things which interests me most about movies is their presentation of ethical and/or moral dilemmas, and here we have a film which is all about ethics.You could take it as an object lesson in precisely what is wrong with utilitarian philosophy. I've never had much time for utilitarianism myself, and here's the problem: in order to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number, is it ethical or moral to abrogate the rights of the individual?Dr. Myrick takes it upon himself to kidnap homeless men (and possibly women) and perform medical experiments on them, ultimately leading to their deaths. His justification is the benefits which will ensue for humanity as a whole if and when his experimentation leads to a cure for spinal injuries.Dr. Luthan disagrees, and in case I've left any doubt about it, let me state outright that I'm right there with him.You can make up your own mind. The film will certainly give you something to think about.I also think it's nice to see Hugh Grant in something other than his usual self-deprecatory comic lead roles. I think he does a fine job in this film, showing more range than many might otherwise credit him with.And Gene Hackman is always worth seeing.
Valre B (de) wrote: Frais, beau, avec une pointe de melancolie slave.
Sunshine s (fr) wrote: Ann, a radio psychologist called Dr. Love, dispenses advice, but is hopelessly mal-adjusted herself. Eve, owner of a small bar, is beautiful and promiscuous, but as she's also lonely as hell. Into their lives walks Mickey, either a wayward genius or
Laine R (ca) wrote: A perfect balance of excellent writing and graphics. I understand why every known actor would want to be associated with this film. (My Opinion has nothing to do with how suprising the apperance of Mr. Telfer is) No sarcasm intended
Jerry S (it) wrote: Name evacuates people and no wonder. Anything what starts with the word 'mars' and included with 'moms', it will make you wanna puke, but not everything isn't wrong with this film. Ending is predictable and too happy. Gribble is way too weird.
Trecia R (au) wrote: This is such a great heart warming movie!