Well...this was one of the major disappointments I ever crossed my eyes with...The movie can be "summarized" in one sentence: "The fight of two preachers, who are "god-wannabes" And that's it.the movie is almost every second blah-blah-blah...the "action" parts of the movie are only in the beginning when Charles wife and son are murdered...and in the last 10 or 15 minutes beginning when Charles is taken to the woods, to be shot...The acting is not awful, but, hell, the dialogs are so.............stupid...this movie is truly dispensable...unfortunately almost every movie that comes from Hollywood, nowadays, is dispensable.........even the majority of the B class movies like this one...Don't waste your time

The premise of this film was more than adequate. The actors were adequate.The body of writing was not. At all.He stands there, his back faced to her. She runs a monologue about how jealous she was of his wife. Not only is the whole long-monologue-to-a- person's-back thing REALLY teenage-soap-opera corny, but every single one of her lines in the speech was forced. It sounded like she was reading a script, not saying it from her heart - and it wasn't the fault of the actress. I was actually impressed by her delivery, because the lines were just really, really bad.And it's like that throughout every important part of this film.When the brother is preaching to his communion of teenagers? YIKES. Just wow.Screenwriter needs to go back to the drawing board with how he writes dialogue. He sucks. Bad.Everything else about this film was alright. Actually, everything else was way above average for a small-budget film.4/10

A faith healer barely is making a living in the wilds of Alaska . He withdraws into himself after his wife and child are killed by intruders to his house. He meets a young woman with whom he makes a bond. She eventually takes him home to meet her family and things become deadly.This is a good but not great film. The Alaskan locations make a nice background for the story of a group of people lost in their own personal wilderness. The cast is pretty good and is nicely balanced. The trouble with the film is that some of what happens once everyone ends up at the girl's home is a little odd. Its hard to explain what actually bothers me with out giving too much away, but I find the motivation and the head space of two of the characters a little odd. Its not bad, but I found it hard to fully connect with the characters the way I probably should. It also makes some of what happens a little hard to fully accept. Having said that I have to say that I like the film; I don't love it but I did like it. It's the sort of film that hovered around the edges of my psyche after it was done. Would I recommend it if one had to pay full price in the movies, probably not, but I think that if one wanted to see a good, decidedly not your typical Hollywood film, one should give this a shot on home video or on cable.

I've watched quite a few movies in my life, so when I say that this one was by far one of the worst I've seen (that was actually made to be good) it's not an understatement. The whole movie, I thought, was pointless unless there was some ambiguity that I didn't comprehend while gouging my eyes out every time the antagonist spoke. The end was all screwed up and I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone unless you like meaningless dramas. I know there is probably a theme, but the story had so many things going on with the main character that I couldn't tell. Don't watch.This is the half with spoilers, more like questions that I would LOVE to have answered. Like one, why on Earth did the director think that Tim deserved to get his head beat in, while Luke got the easy way out with a shot to the head by who? HIS SISTER. uhh, I'm pretty sure that Charlie was the one who's life was completely ruined when the guy killed his family, shouldn't he be the one doing the killing? And not just a headshot. The way he treated his sister/friend and Charlie, I thought he deserved at little bit more brutal of a death. Just my opinion