SPOILER ALERTEveryone spoke about Jessica role and her mistake, no one mentioned why Evan was not rescued at the end, maybe the movie about him as well ?What about the two lesbian ? i didn't get what happens.The idea of repeated attempts reminds me of The Matrix when Neo enter the secret room and watch him self doing this thousands of times, however in The Matrix it was explained, here its not and i believe too much time spend on love scene between the Jessica and Evan with little about the manager who actually should be in more prime position in the movie.

I think that the reason why the neighbours fake their deaths to Jessica during is to show her what she would be doing to them in a sense (as in when she jumps out of the window to save herself, she does kill everyone else by having the fire fighters attention on her). For some reason the neighbours are aware of the cycle that keeps repeating itself (as in Jessica moves in, starts a fire, and kills everyone) but Jessica is unaware of this… it bugs me why this wasn't explained. But hey, I am probably wrong, and this was just a guess. It also bugs me that is the neighbours know that Jessica is going to kill them all once new years eve repeats itself, why doesn't say Ed tell her to "go away" when she first comes to the apartments. Some reviews have said that the reason they don't is because in fact the neighbours (e.g. Evan, Ed, India, Damon, Bale …) are themselves stuck inside the apartments and the only way for them to escape is for Jessica to stay with Evan at the end in the burning fire. But even so if this was the case, it was not explained in the movie. I do believe that part of it was for Jessica to redeem herself from letting her brother go.. But hold on… if Evan also was aware about the repeating cycle, as he does indicate at several times by saying things like "I've always loved you" and "even after all these days.." or something.. And "you'll understand soon".. and does surely indicate he is aware of the cycle.. YET why when in the end scene with Jessica and Evan talking, and then making out and starting a fire, does Evan say and do exactly (EXACTLY) the same things as the previous night, as if he had no memory of that night. Also he repeatedly stands in front of the falling wardrobe, but surely if he did have memory of the cycle like things that he said indicated, he would known to dodge the falling wardrobe. Why is it the neighbours repeat the day the same again (shown when again standing on the balcony after Jessica spotting Damon's body and when Ed AGAIN gives her a new toothbrush at the end of the film, yet says something to also show his awareness of the cycle) even though they are aware of this loop like when India says "you're going to bugger it up again this time aren't you". They are completely aware of the loop, yet repeat the day exactly the same as if they aren't aware like Jessica. The thing that baffled me the most is why the hell couldn't the firemen find Jessica's and Evan's bodies at the end? Where did they go? And when the firemen were looking did the camera look at something on the wall as if they were there? Why is Evan so sneaky and secretive about something.. He kept saying you'll understand to Jessica… Understand what? That she's in a cycle and needs to redeem herself? Because how could she possibly understand when she forgets. Also how can it only be the people in the apartments that are affected by whatever's going on, because when Jessica is first driving to her new apartment in both scenes.. She drives past exactly the same people, so obviously these people are repeating something as well, and are possible aware of it as the second time she drives past them at the end of the movie, they stare at her. It could be a groundhog type day, but in the film 'Groundhog Day' this was made clear! Unlike in this film. And if it was a groundhog day surely they would decide to not do the same thing each day. I admire the moral of the story that Jessica got a second chance to 'save her brother' (kind of).. But where does she and Evan disappear to.. Seriously? And why? … I have many many more questions I just this that I've written enough now.P.S I do apologise for the pathetic screen name, I used an old email.. But if somebody can, please answer everyone's questions, I like to talk to the writer/producer/director.. Whoever themselves!

You know there are two types of movie watchers out there. Passive watchers who kind of just put a movie in and if the mood,day,lighting and everything is right they like it. The problem is with these people when they don;t pay attention to them a movie is "flawed" or "filled with plot holes". These are the people that, for whatever reason have short attention spans and spend more time trying to find similarities to other movies so they can call it a ripoff of something else(I mean isn't everything a ripoff of something else at this point?) then just sit back and enjoy.Then you have the second bunch of people who when they sit down to watch a movie its like a ritual to them. And they may get really into the movies they watch. They don't want to talk during or discuss the movie while its on and they're not easily distracted to begin with. I fall in the latter group as do a few reviewers here. This movie is not bad at all and it definitely doesn't deserve its low rating.I mean this isn't a cookie cutter movie, but it also doesn't take a genius to understand...just your attention span and 1 and a half hours of your life.To possible viewers, no this movie isn't flawed, it isn't a flawed mess either. Everything is right there its just up to you to put the puzzle together. If you only like movies that are cut and dry with an answer for everything then you probably won't like this.If you want to turn your mind off from the world, then this is a great flick. Don;t watch it with a bunch of friends though because it requires your attention.6 out of 10 stars is an Honest to goodness revies for this movie that I expected to be in the 5-6.5 range.

Well, it's not completely awful, but it's pretty bad. (You can get some idea of the level of rip-off involved by examining the DVD cover: you've got a digit inserted in the name of a number. How many times have we seen that before?) There's no deep thought required, since all the metaphors are transparent and every scene has been foreshadowed. Plus, it makes no sense. Neither of the alternate "endings" is plausible. I never believed the main character would take EITHER of the courses of action depicted. When a secondary character is trapped by a piece of furniture, you never believe that he can't get free, especially with the help of the lead character. And why do the other tenants survive in one case and not the other? The lead character's actions shouldn't have had any effect one way or the other. So you're left with a 78-minute web movie that probably played OK as a sort of high-tech serial. What's going to happen next week? But it never comes together in a feature-length version. Not worth your time.