I typically don't read don't read reviews of a film, or even know what the synopsis is, until I seek the flick itself. I'm a horror nut so if the film is horror that's good enough for me. Like anyone else, I like to be surprised. A lot of times the studios or promoters miss their own mark and market the film as what it's not. For instance, I stayed away from "Enemy At The Gates" because it seemed to be just a sappy love story with war in the background. It wasn't.I've been looking for extreme horror lately and I kept on seeing this title pop up so I decoded to check it out. Just the title alone, "In Their Skin" sounds like it'd be a companion film to "Martyrs," So I rubbed my hands in anticipation, turned down the lights, and put this on. Boy, was I disappointed.Firstly, it was shot on digital media. The look and sheen of the movie was so smooth that everything looked plastic. The mother was an awful actress with horrible makeup. I'm not saying that everyone else was Academy award but she was a low point. The plot is a complete ripoff of "Funny Games" so it gets zero points for that. And, even though the movie looked cheap, I kept on thinking, "I guess they poured all their budget into the upcoming special fx which would be the intruders making "Martyrs" of the family.." Boy, was I wrong. No one had their skin removed. I was robbed! Nothing of the sort happened.The reason I gave this 2 stars, despite the massive holes & horrible script, is because I felt sorry for all those involved in it's creation, from the actors to the director to whoever made the film look as pale and lifeless as a corpse. "In Their Skin" is recommended viewing if only to show film students how to not make a movie. The 2 stars is also for the fact that they did make a movie. When was the last time I made one?

"In Their Skin" follows a fairly common premise among post-millennial horror films: a family vacationing in a remote summer home find themselves trapped and preyed upon by a group of killers. Here, the family is an unsuspecting wealthy couple who has just lost one of their two children; playing counterpart is another family who yearns to live as them.While the central premise of the film is certainly straightforward and unoriginal (comparisons to "Funny Games" and "The Strangers" are inevitable), the spin here with the antagonists attempting to simulate lives of opulence and wealth is certainly different; the problem is that this central difference does not necessarily elevate the film's other shortcomings. Things start out fairly standard, and suspense is built tenaciously over the first forty-five minutes to an hour quite impressively. The problem? It disappears once the antagonists take full hold. This could partly be a scripting issue that leaves the film feeling uneven, but it's also an issue of performances— as good as James D'Arcy is, I had trouble believing him in this role, especially as the film progressed; Joshua Close's performance was slightly more believable, but even still, both of the male leads seemed miscast. Selma Blair and Rachel Miner however both work really well in the film; Miner is especially phenomenal here. The film ends with the suggestion of a family restored, but the details of the horrendous events that precede it seem undercooked by the end.Overall, "In Their Skin" is an unusual mashup of home invasion thriller conventions with vague social commentary and a problematic chemistry among the cast. The first half of the film is remarkable in building a sense of realistic suspense, but the film dovetails into mediocrity once the villains take charge. While not a bad film by any means, it still leaves a great deal to be desired in terms of scripting and casting. Worth a watch for the moody cinematography and applause-worthy buildup of tension no less. 5/10.

I'd say that pretty much everything about this film was done badly. Most of the time I was confused about what was going on and why these things were happening. Nothing was explained in much detail, and alongside that, the plot was weak, and it was easy to guess what was coming. Not so much a horror, more a thriller. Even that would be pushing it.The story line had a lot of potential, the intruding family had potential, but did not come across as intimidating or scary in any way. If anything the child was more scary. Unfortunately, this film was overall a flop.

Home-invasion thriller is nothing new. We have seen them before in movies like STRAW DOGS (1971), right down to FUNNY GAMES (2007) and THE STRANGERS (2008). As formulaic or shopworn that particular subgenre is, home-invasion thriller can still be a gripping cinematic experience if done with the right level of skill and intelligence. Fortunately, first-time feature director Jeremy Power Regimbal's IN THEIR SKIN (formerly known as REPLICAS -- which sounds too sci-fi for me) manages to give this an otherwise same-old genre thriller with a disturbingly edgy undertone and particularly heighten the movie with compelling performances by its leads.The setup is familiar: upscale couple Mark and Mary Hughes (Joshua Close, Selma Blair) are trying to overcome their grief after the recent death of their young daughter in a car accident. They decide to travel to their family's country home with 8-year-old son Brendon (Quinn Lord) in hope to spend some quality time together.After a strange encounter with a mysterious truck that pulls up to their property's gate before driving away, the couple are woken the following morning by neighbors Bobby (James D'Arcy), Jane (Rachel Miner), and their 9-year-old son Jared (Alex Ferris). Apparently they brought over firewood as a kindly gesture to welcome them as new neighbors. Although Mark is feeling weird with their off-putting behaviors, he ends up reluctantly agrees to invite them over for dinner that night. So far, so good until Bobby becomes so persistent on asking deeply personal questions, which made both Mark and Mary uncomfortable. The supposedly pleasant dinner turns even more disastrous when their son Jared puts a knife to Brendon's throat when they argue over a video game. Mark feels something is not right, and force them to leave, even though the neighbors have been repeatedly apologize.Then that same night, it doesn't take long before Mark and Mary find themselves under siege, with their dog apparently shot somewhere in the dark woods. This time, the same neighbors forcing their way back into the house. A violent cat and mouse ensue, and the neighbors begin to reveal their true motivations. Soon the Hughes learn that their neighbors are one bizarre, yet psychotic family intends to get rid of them and assume their identities.Director Regimbal does a good job building up the slow-burning tension piece by piece, while the sudden shock of unflinching violence is cleverly done in a restrained manner without relying heavily on elaborate gory set-piece to make its point. Co-star Joshua Close, who also writes the screenplay, gives an equally thought-provoking storyline that builds on the characters' psychological depths as well as playing the cards right on its genre convention. Meanwhile, Keith Power's bone-chilling score and Norm Li's darkly atmospheric cinematography are equally well done to provide the necessary claustrophobic feel required for this kind of genre thriller.Above all, it was the cast that gives this movie an extra edge. Both Joshua Close and Selma Blair give emotionally compelling performances here, while James D'Arcy makes a truly creepy psychopath here. His particular scene, which is nevertheless the movie's centerpiece, involves him forcing the couple to have sex in front of him, before proceeding for a near-rape sequence between him and Mary. Rachel Miner, in the meantime, is equally creepy as a meek invader who has a disturbing mind on her own.While there are times this home-invasion thriller does relies too much on its genre convention to get everything goes around, IN THEIR SKIN remains a solid little thriller nonetheless. Again, kudos goes to Jeremy Power Regimbal, who made a good impression with his directing debut. He is certainly a bright filmmaker to look for in the future.