This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

It depends on what yer into I guess. It was overall a cheese fest. Although I did enjoy the heads in the fridge. That was cute. The couple were believable I didn't understand the ending. But it killed sometime before bed.

The start of this film is so, so good and offers up the promise of a cheap but inventive psycho-horror. This proves not to be the case. Far from it, in fact.Where to begin? Everything is shoddy! The acting is stilted with the lead actress in particular failing to match her emotions with the events occurring around her. The plodding, inane dialogue becomes an endurance test in unnecessarily long scenes. The director clearly has no idea how to use a camera to tell a story - his 'style' is a perfunctory point-and-shoot approach with some bad shot choices, awkward framing etc. The audio is terrible with much of the dialogue dubbed over.Here's the perfect encapsulation of how clumsily and poorly put together this film is: you can hear the director call "Action!" at the start of one shot. How the hell do you make that sort of mistake?! How incompetent do you have to be to not catch that? I won't say much on the plot because I'm not sure what the f*** was going on. I can deconstruct and explain the likes of Lynch's 'Lost Highway' and Kaufman's 'Synedoche, New York' with the best of them but I'm clueless as to what the muddled mess of an ending was about and nothing short of a loaded gun is gonna get me to go back and watch it again.Ignore the high praise of the early reviewers. They're clearly friends and family of the film makers. Not only do many of them have the same location as the film makers (Texas) but they've also signed up just to review this film and talk it up as if it's the Second Coming of horror. It's not. It's truly awful.

I only gave this film 4 out of 10 but..... This film had real potential but was let down by extremely poor audio recording, somewhat poor continuity and bad camera work. You could put this down to the fact that the vast majority of the tasks (Producer, director,cinematographer, sound editor) were all performed by Lex Lybrand. The locations were well chosen and gave added punch to the creepiness of the film, but too bad the lack of stability on the camera and focus distracted this in many ways. In saying that, the story, however, was solid though acting a little weak - this could have been the director's fault though. Even though it came across as a "C" grade (maybe "B") film, I was still captured enough to watch the whole thing - it certainly had the creep factor. I still recommend watching it as supporting micro- budget films is a gateway for these filmmakers to continue to produce more content as well as learn more as they evolve their processes and technical abilities.

Small towns aren't just weird, they're weird in a way that's completely unique and unsettling, and that's something that Meet Me There understands perfectly. From the moment that Calvin and Ada arrive in town, this movie is relentlessly unsettling, keeping everything on edge with exactly the kind of creepy atmosphere that you get in those weird, out of the way places that either drive people out or absorb them into their own weirdness, and it's a thrill to watch Calvin and Ada, particularly Ada, struggle with trying to escape only to be dragged back in again and again.Also, it probably goes without saying, but Dustin Runnels (the WWE's Goldust) is absolutely amazing in his role as a preacher who effortlessly moves from folksy to terrifying, sometimes in the span of a single scene. Great stuff, and well worth watching.