Whatever the artistic qualities of this film, I have to say that it has (at least) one redeeming point: it is a very interesting watch. One can only wander, what it would look like, had the director secured a hollywoodian budget for this project where poverty is occasionally visible, even though well masked. It is quite lynchian and just like with most every Lynch film, you find yourself enjoying the going-ons immensely, yet at the same time being deeply afraid that the ending will fail to produce a satisfactory solution. In this case, the film doesn't just end in coitus interruptus (a technique that makes Lynch very irritating) but does offer an 'instant satisfaction', that unrolls during the last 1 minute or so. Yet, as with all things instant, after the first rapture has evaporated, the whole thing seems somewhat silly and artificial. Nevertheless, the film captivated me, kept me guessing and was a very good way to spend 1,5 hours.

I didn't see anyone comment on the ending, other than to say it goes nowhere, and I don't really agree with that, so here's my thoughts: the protagonist (Jason Scott Campbell) gets his first clue on how to "end the movie" / "catch the killer" / "end the murders", when his teacher tells him "it's time for the protagonist to take control - everyone's been a victim so far, it's time for him to take control - and time for you to finish the movie." A further clue comes from his classmate, the guy making the other movie: "... there's no villain.. it's almost as if, the director, he's the villain, he's the one putting us through all this." That's when he gets the idea - to end it, he must take control, so he invites Natalia over, grabs a knife, sets up the camera, starts it recording and he and Natalia lay on the bed, the knife hidden beside him. Increasingly certain he's the killer and/or crazy, Natalia starts fighting him, afraid he's going to kill her (or perhaps playing along, understanding his intent).Then the "movie with a movie" starts happening, and quite simply the protagonist kills the director, or the person filming. Next the scene cuts to the class film set, and the ending of the movie and movie within movie is shown - and then Natalia and protagonist huddle while he says "it's over, it's over".Who was the director? I think that is left up to the viewer. The literal interpretation could be the person who set everything up entered the room - maybe the janitor, maybe someone else, and the protagonist killed him. Another interpretation, more magical but still inside the movie, is the camera was some kind of window to another dimension, or the mind/dreams of the director, and somehow a magical second reality was interfering, and the act of killing the "director" was a way to pick an ending and stop it. Yet another interpretation is, the whole work is not actually a horror movie but an inside comment on film making of horror movies, and the comment is, in movies such as this, or Blair-witch, etc, the villain is simply the director.Personally, I think in some cases this type of ending can be brilliant, but in this case we weren't quite there (thus a 6). The viewer wonders, was this an intentional plan of a writer with a message? Or is this just a cowardly way to end a movie from a writer who was unwilling to write an actual ending, or couldn't make up his mind, or ran out of money? And I think that is what bothers so many viewers about endings like this.

I had the pleasure of viewing Bank's film at the Boston Underground Film Festival recently. The theater was packed, and the director was on hand for an introduction and Q & A, to which the audience was very receptive. This film is one of the best I've seen in a long time, and for a first feature, this film presents itself as a phenomenal work. The acting is excellent- the leads have won numerous awards at several festivals, as well as the film itself, and of course, Mr. Banks. The film has a touch of Lost Highway as well as American Psycho, and nearly from the start, you descend into a type of madness into which you cannot escape, because reality versus perhaps another plane of existence blur continuously until the bitter end. With a film as strong as this, I was surprised to learn how young the director is- it seems as if he's been doing this for at least a decade. Everything about the production is very professional- I would not be surprised if Lion's Gate picked this up for distribution and released it in theaters. I hope that happens. This is a film that deserves to be seen. It crawls under your skin in a perverse, horrific, and sexually exciting way. And I'm a film programmer myself. I should know. No matter what film snobs may say, this is an audience film and one that's very enjoyable and deserves to put this director on the map.

Twists you will never imagine make every minute of this movie intriguing and fascinating to to watch. The acting is amazing and the director has creating a thrilling masterpiece. As you learn more about the characters in this film, things change, making you wonder if you were paying enough attention. Jason Scott Campbell is an amazing actor who keeps the level of intensity high as he winds his way through the maze of events in this film. You will be going between thinking he is the only sane one in the film to wondering how people could not know he is totally nuts. Or is it him? Or another director? Or the college professor? The cinematographer? Everyone is suspect at some time during the movie. This is one nightmare I would be screaming to wake up from.