|
Showing all 21 reviews...
|
|
 |
Who in Hollywood said "Yes, lets release this to the public, it o.k."? OH MY GOD this was a pile of crap! I can't even say anything intelligable.
2/10
12.4.2009 -
casserly5@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
There's no disquisign this one... It's terrible... I tried to give it a shot but truth be told... DoNt WAstE YouR tiMe! 0.5 out of 10.
1/10
14.3.2008 -
whodat@ - age: 18-25
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I hate this film, It has NO point. Not to spoil the end of it but they [...] and the bugs arent real, it's just a figment of there imaginations. They are both crazy and the only good peace is when the layd says: LOOK AROUND ASSHOLE!!!
1/10
22.11.2007 -
xo-babygreek-ox@ - age: 13-17
| | | | |
My biggest complaint about this movie is that it was entirely misrepresented during the marketing phase. This movie is simply about psychosis and is nothing about bugs as monstrous threat. The story itself was very slow in the beginning and then took a fast turn into the downright psychotic but wound up so ludicrous that I just couln't keep interested. The ending does little more than put the film out of its misery. Leave this one off your resume, Ashley.
2/10
11.11.2007 -
crooker41@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
Well, it was different. Wasn't sure what 'message' I was suppose to get from this film... wash your bed sheets?
3/10
1.11.2007 -
emanmark666@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
I'm sorry but I like the actors but not the movie. I know it was based on a play considering the fact that it takes place in one room and is centered on two people and their personalities. Good acting for sure... but I felt like I wasted my time here. A much better movie is 'Death and the Maiden'. It's a similar small cast movie adapted from a play but superior in every way.
4/10
12.9.2007 -
paulleslie12@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
DVD: "Bug (2006, Special Edition)"
I got to say if you see this movie you will not finish it cause it is crap!
1/10
1.8.2007 -
koppmark@ - age: 13-17
The movie was marketed to be something it isn't. As such it failed miserably to meet those expectations. Even for what it was, I never believed that any of their delusions could be real as maybe on could in the context of a play. I really found it quite pointless. Maybe, just maybe if it was marketed to be pyschological drama, not even thriller, I might have bought it.
1/10
18.6.2007 -
torontomec@ - age: 36-49
From trailer you think it's a sci-fi thriller but in reality its more of an psychological movie... Don't want to "ruin" this movie more but just gotta say there were no thrills or horror or anything of that sort... So if you're looking for a horror movie... Go with something else because this was just boring the whole time.
1/10
11.6.2007 -
im_peeking@ - age: 18-25
The 6 other people and I laughed when the movie ended. Not because it was funny, but because of how stupid this movie was. I want my money and my 2 hours back. I would have rather been swimming in a pool of fish guts.
1/10
8.6.2007 -
bikeboyburn@ - age: 36-49
I really don't know what to say about this movie. I didn't necessarily hate it and I didn't necessarily like it. It had really good acting, great directing, and the script & plot is quite interesting and keeps you wondering what is going to happen next. I cannot pick one specific aspect out of this movie that I hated. However, I still can't say that I really liked it. I must say it has grown on me more since I left the theatre and have thought about it. I have to give it a 5 right now, but by next week it could be an 8, or maybe a 2. I guess it is safe to say the movie is thought provoking.
5/10
6.6.2007 -
kmart22@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
Despite all of the people here panning this movie, it was excellent. Ashley Judd and Michael Shannon give tremendous performances and Friedkin proves that he really is a great director but building tension slowly but masterfully over the course of the film right up to its frenetic ending. This movie is campy, yes, but a very creepy psychological drama/horror. It is NOT a slasher type horror though, so don't go expecting to see that, go see it for what it is and you will enjoy it.
8/10
3.6.2007 -
thegradient@ - age: 26-35
This is an excellent movie. NOT a horror flick. If ya got a brain go see it. If not... Go see Shrek.
9/10
3.6.2007 -
dstutt@ - age: 36-49
I walked out with a big sigh. So did the other couples there. Yeah. SIGhhh. It was so slow and pointless.
1/10
30.5.2007 -
shabuavsi1@ - age: 18-25
Horrible movie. Nothing ever happened, suppose to be scary? Not one scary part...
2/10
30.5.2007 -
mattshull@ - age: 18-25
TERRIBLE MOVIE... Do not see I saw it with 8 people in whole movie... 2 people left early... The other 4 booed at end to the screen.
2/10
29.5.2007 -
glen1225@ - age: 36-49
Excellent acting, all the better with a solid script in hand. More development was needed on Judd's character to make her transformation more believable, but that is being nit-picky. That tight confines of the motel suite are well-exploited by Feiedkin. Great cinematography. See this after you make an appointment with your dentist.
9/10
28.5.2007 -
jeffreycacpa@ - age: 36-49
This movie is without a doubt, one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I know that statement gets thrown around a lot in reviews, but I am not blowing this out of proportion. This is the first movie that has made me walk out of the theatre. It is painful and Ashley Judd's disgusting performance isn't "artsy or vivid" in any way; it's just painful to watch. Save your money and NEVER EVER even bother watching this on DVD.
1/10
28.5.2007 -
pm,sirat@ - age: 18-25
A good, entertaining movie. Scary scenes. Enjoyed it!
7/10
27.5.2007 -
ericlee96@ - age: 26-35
This movie was so slow and dumb. No point to the movie.
1/10
27.5.2007 -
allburnedout@ - age: 36-49
Worst... Movie... Ever. About 4 different couples walked out. Could have been much better... But it just, wasnt. I want my money back!
1/10
26.5.2007 -
sassygirl_ont@ - age: 26-35
| 
