Wonderful character development!

Very best movie i ever watch

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Where do I start?The Story was non-existing. Acting was pretty mediocre even for independent low budget horror movie standards. Background score was abysmal, loud and totally inappropriate for most part of film's run time.Much hyped creature effects has less than 10 seconds screen time.Less said about the film's screenplay the better. Overall, the director made mess of what seemed like a somewhat interesting premise.

...is while you're wondering when this well-intentioned misfire will be over. Co-written and directed by a young Kansan auteur who is apparently more at home in the short form, "Nailbiter" is far from a terrible film, but sadly not much closer to a good one. It just is what it is: heavily derivative make-work, yet another illustration of Sturgeon's Revelation.The acting is nowhere near as bad as some have claimed here, with a particular nod to relative newcomer Meg Saricks, but the cast is hampered by mostly uninspired dialog (and plotting) and a few too many "oh, c'mons!" to ignore. No, I'm not going to bore you with another recap of the story, but the set-up is particularly clumsy, what with our little band of heroines ignoring tornado warnings for nonsensical reasons and then falling prey to a whole series of unlikely occurrences, stupid decisions, and unwilling suspensions of disbelief (Please, oh, please, oh, please! Just how many times do we have to put up with the dropped cellphone signal gimmick?) It's just plain lazy writing, say I.Sadly, I can't really claim any good reason to even review films like "Nailbiter," other than to perhaps warn a few people away from them, as well as express my displeasure with the sort of deceptive marketing that promotes them, the blatant cherry-picking of unreliable blurb whores, and the indiscriminate websites that host said mavens. "Delivers serious tension" - Ain't It Cool News. Liar. "A stellar claustrophobic and paranoid horror thriller" - Cinema Crazed. Not. "Sharp and deadly" - Bloody-Disgusting. What, your ticket stub? "Ingenious, creepy, delightful" - DreadCentral. Who are you sleeping with?All I know is this one didn't cost me a dime, but I still feel cheated out of the time I spent with it.

I really thought this movie had a chance. Good idea, bad execution. So, the acting was... I just don't have an adverb that adequately describes how bad it was. The supporting actors were especially stiff and unbelievable. There was no chemistry at all between... you know what? Never mind. It was just bad. The youngest sister was unconscious for most of the movie and it was still crappy acting. I didn't even know it was possible to poorly act unconscious. Baby Jesus in heaven! And the whole movie is just "The Hills Have Eyes"/any-werewolf-movie, but in a storm cellar. The "action" sequences were laughable. Wait, you'll like this! I swear to God, there's a part where one sister throws the other sister a gun and the slow-motion catch is an honest-to-God "6 million dollar man" ripoff. But baaaaaaaaaad. Just baaaaaaaaaad.shakes his head and walks away

Wow. There's bad acting........and then there's this...I read another review where they said "really well acted" It's not possible that we're watching the same movie.In all honesty, this is, hands down, the worst attempt at film making I have ever had the extreme displeasure of suffering through. At the 38-minute mark I turned off my TV......I've never done that before.....that should tell you just how horrendous this movie is. On the bright side? Well, I now have a benchmark from which all really, really bad movies can be compared. I am wondering if this was the Director's first attempt? And the cast, writers and producers' first venture into cinema? If so, they get a mulligan.........if not, then they need to make it their last venture into cinema.