Such a frustrating disappointment

Good concept, poorly executed.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

First up, I do not want to rate this film, and I will let everyone to look for themselves what the others rate. I am pretty sure that this film won't get any higher than a two stars rating.Come on, this film isn't worth to be commented upon at all. The acting is, at its best, mediocre and wooden. Even the main actress did not carry her character well. The policeman is realistic, but still has an amateurish aura in his acting.The film did have a twist. But it was not hard to figure out who the real villain was. Like, d'uh.And what is it about the flashback ?? The editing was so poor, it made sorority film student look like Steven Spielberg. The flashbacks were so poor, I felt that my DVD player is spoiled, that it rewinds back at its whims.Overall, not a film I'd recommend others to watch.

Having seen the lead actor, Will Lupardus, in a superb short at a film festival in Boston ("Westsider"), I was looking forward to seeing this feature-length "erotic thriller" at my local Blockbuster, since I do not recall it being given a theatrical release (at least not here in a "small market" like Los Angeles).A director's talent or lack thereof, can be noticed immediately in this amateurish piece of digital video embarrassment. The film is about a woman (Aubrey Caldwell) leaving her cheating husband to "find herself" in some deserted location (supposedly the hip Laurel Canyon but it looks more like some hellish spot in Woodland Hills). Once there she meets a leering pool boy (whose point in the film is completely meaningless), and, more importantly to the plot, a kinky couple (Lupardus and sexy, South African girlfriend Lee Anne Davis).After a ménage à trois (implied but never shown) the much older (by at least 15-20 years) and not-so-good looking Aubrey makes a play for twenty-something Lupardus. Lupardus explains he is into her (why??) but she must respect his "special needs." None of this makes any sense. There is zero chemistry between the two leads. The actors look confused like they have no direction. The script does not help matters either as there is no dialog that explains the attraction.The end of the film (which I won't spoil because I'm sure you can't wait to check out this cinematic masterpiece), makes little sense as well. An effeminate male character from the beginning, who looks like he's reading lines off a cue card, makes another appearance which is supposed to explain things but only irritates. Maybe if the director bothered to shoot in more than two locations it might help. This isn't good enough for the worst Cinemax late night entry. There is a little nudity -- none by the South African hottie and, hilariously, none by lead Caldwell, which makes you wonder -- why bother making a pseudo-porn without the porn? For masochists only. Seriously. Don't judge Lupardus by this film. I've seen him in better work. Look out for "Westsider" which had a great script and a real director.

I rented this from the vending machine I thought it was some cool independent movie in the vein of Poison Ivy, but the very 1st scene looked like a made for TV movie. I couldn't stop looking at the bags under the lead actreses's eyes she looks 50 but she is playing younger.This movie is nothing but soft core porn minus the porn. The one scene that shows nudity, again you'll be too busy looking at the weird un-sexy lip movement of the actress to notice. The only reason I continued to watch it was because the lead male reminds me of someone I know. Then there is the plot twist, the actor that is suppose to be obsessed with the lead actress comes across as gay, so it is totally unbelievable. This is not a professional cool independent film it is more like former porn industry people trying to go legit.I forgot to add the scenes where they re-used footage seemed to last forever even if you speed it up on your DVD player. There are a lot of bloopers too, like the pills she puts in the wine she drops a big capsule by mistake and when he picks it up you see the big capsule but he doesn't? They obviously stole this from Misery so no big spoiler here. Then when she is captured she is wearing jeans but when she escapes she is wearing shorts. If you like to make fun of movies then rent it.

Oh dear lord, where to begin...Me and my girlfriend decided to watch this not in the expectations of a great movie, but perhaps as a mood enhancer, since it was rumored to contain some decent sex scenes.Boy were we wrong.I just had to rate this movie 1, it has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever, The extremely thin plot was padded out with _alot_ of reused footage, hell they even reused stuff in the sex scenes themselves, which where sadly enough, as boring as the rest of the flick.I reckon the poor actors did their best with that they were given, at least their outstandingly wooden performances managed to hide some of the non-existent directing, but they still failed to produce any believability whatsoever.All in all, this movie is what happens when you let wannabe filmmakers lose on a set with second-rate porn actresses who are trying to make it big. Let this be a lesson to all of you aspiring movie makers out there: Friends don't let friends drink and drive editing machines.