This film is labeled as a horror/thriller, and the audience could be easily fooled into thinking it is because of the Ouija board concept. Alas, The Invited is little more than a romantic love story between husband/wife wrapping itself around a convoluted horror plot. Along with the muddied plot and love aspect is an overwhelming use of religious subtext. This movie literally makes mention about how important faith is throughout and degrades the aesthetics characters as being the ruin of mankind. So, just to get this straight, horror fans ARE NOT INTO romance or having a religious agenda shoved down their throat. That's why we watch horror-strictly to avoid said things. As for the ending, it made absolutely no sense. It was a sad attempt at a twist. It didn't work. This is not a psychological thriller. Why did you bother?

No one looks forward to writing a scathing review of a movie. I think most would say that one always looks to be genuinely entertained when spending one's money on a ticket. Who WANTS to be disappointed going into a flick? No one. Which is the attitude I went in with when seeing this movie at the Crest Theatre in Sacramento last month. OH MY GOD. This ninety-some-odd-minute painful excuse of a film was, hands down, the worst movie I have ever viewed in my 30 years of watching movies. I do not mean this to be cruel to the filmmaker or the cast; I mean it literally. Absolute drivel from start to finish with some of the most melodramatic, cliché and predictable dialogue ever put to paper. I love a good horror flick as much as anyone, but there was nothing, not one single thing, in this movie that was scary or even admirable where horror film-making is concerned. Why? Because the filmmaker apparently decided to employ every and any "scary" device or trick or sound effect he'd ever heard or seen before in a horror movie and it therefore backfired as unrelenting silly moments of predictable cliché. By the way, what's with Pam Grier showing up at the house with this bizarre "slave accent", only to have that same silly accent disappear once they're all up in the attic? I took additional offense to this movie once I learned that the director is an acting coach in Sacramento. I repeat. OH MY GOD. Like Simon Cowell chewing out horrible singers when he learns that some of them are "singing teachers" back in their hometown, he should have this director standing before him; he'd have a field day with McKinney. The acting in The Invited is so bad - Lou Diamond Phillips being the worst of the lot - that the filmmaker might find it prudent to switch his credit to an Allen Smithee film. No joke. This movie could literally kill his business as an acting coach. Then again, would that be so bad? A famous director once said, "With such easy access nowadays to digital film-making cameras and editing tools, virtually anyone can be a filmmaker. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY NECESSARILY SHOULD. If The Invited is representative of the quality and caliber of film-making in the Sacramento region, then Sacramento film-making is indeed in deep s--t.

I too saw the Sacramento Film Festival showing. I really, really WANTED to like this movie. I didn't. It was disjointed and at times illogical. The elements are there, but it definitely needs more editing. A lot more editing. I think it is telling that in at least one of the cast lists online one of the main actor's photo(Carlos Alazraqui) is represented by a cartoon monkey, which doesn't seem like a ringing endorsement. Oddly, Carlos' character was portrayed the most interestingly. I also thought Megan Ward, who played the primary protagonist, did a good job. Lou Diamond Phillips wasn't up to par, but, again, that could be an issue with editing. Or not.

I saw this film last night at the Sacramento Film Festival and it is, by far, the worst fill-length film I have ever seen. This is not an exaggeration. I've seen some bad movies and this tops them all. It's not even all the blood that makes it horrible...it's the entire story. It's filled with cliché plot lines and has so many loose ends that you're left wondering what the director was thinking. The word at the festival is that he has a prequel and sequel to film, but I really hope he doesn't. They're only bound to be worse than this one and I don't want to see them.I know some people who read the original script and was told post-film what the original ending had been. The original ending would have been far superior and would have made actual sense to the overall story, but no. The director decided on an ending that was hideous, unnecessary and sick. In fact, I would label this entire film as unworthy of anyone's time and/or money.I will say that the only bright spot in this film is Ellen Dow. She's always awesome.