I don't know whether the writers of synopses gain kudos in doing so, but I would like to request that if English is your second or third language (and I truly take my hat off to you and admire you for being multi-lingual) then please don't write the synopsis for a movie listed in IMDb. English is a strange language to learn, and if you don't fully understand it, then the synopses you write can become tortured, the spelling hellish and the use of colloquialisms ridiculously distracting.Those who do have English as their first language, get off your butts and help out here! Don't leave it all to German, Brazilian and Spanish people to write English synopses.

With its haunted house and ghosts trapped in a cyclic dark past, 7 Below desperately wants to be Kubrick's The Shining. And who can blame it? Sadly, the result is worthless, never scary or exciting.And very poorly written. It features an inordinate amount of scenes with people sitting in dark rooms and chatting the night away. Unless you have a knack for dialogues to rival Tarantino's, this is always a bad idea. Conversations should develop characters while ratcheting up the tension AND telling the story. People sitting around and blabbering about how afraid they are (or revealing their unhappy past) is not a scene - it's filler between a jump scare and another.Compare with James Mangold's Identity, a movie with a similar scenario (and a comparably silly twist), which is however stylish and cinematic, always propelled towards the next set-piece, featuring crisp dialogue and active characters who are constantly doing something: searching for clues, escaping, organizing a defense against the mysterious threat, putting together the pieces of the puzzle. A passive character morosely waiting for something to happen (or for cheesy revelations to be tossed at him) is a recipe for boredom.Ving Rhames and a drowsy Val Kilmer cash their checks, the latter for probably like two days on set.3/10

I'll admit the acting was okay, the story was a bit weak and nonsensical at some points, but overall I enjoyed it. It didn't seem like the movie had that huge of a budget, so it seems like they did the best they could with what they had. I watched the movie on Netflix, not in theaters, so I guess people are upset they paid to see it and I understand. This certainly wasn't an edge-of-your-seat type movie, it progressed pretty slowly.I paid attention and caught three goofs IMDb didn't: 1. The house had a tin roof, and despite being in such a huge storm, you never hear the rain on it. 2. The grandfather clock is pendulum-driven, yet the "tick-tock" sound is from that of a small clock or a pocket watch. The chime is from that exact clock though. I own the same one. 3. Even though the storm hasn't even started yet, a tree had fallen in the road and barriers were placed around it sometime between when Courtney drove through and when she was picked up (which probably wasn't very long).

** SPOILER ALERT ** This film kind of started off okay but then took a major turn towards crapsville. It had almost every horror movie cliché and at the same time I'm sure the director stepped out for some milk and while he was out a backwards child took over for a while until the director returned and did the last 10 minutes of the film. The plot was all over the place and at times it seemed like they were taking requests on how the plot should go. The acting left a lot to be desired too, not the best. Val Kilmer and Ving Rhames must have owed somebody big time to be in this movie, because it can't have been for the money or the experience. ** SPOILER ALERT ** The gist of the film is that they all are part of the killings as the killer is re-incarnated as one of them. But who you say? Well to save you time and money, it was Courtney. The end. So I give this a 1 out of 10.