what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

As a Scot, I was pleased to see various locations in and around Glasgow as the setting for this movie. However, despite the setting, I am certain that this shall remain one of the worst examples of film-making that I will ever have to endure.The worst thing about this truly atrocious movie is surprisingly not the woeful acting performances, with an appalling Charlie Sheen at the front of the line; nor indeed is it the very poorly written script. Both aspects are beaten to that title by Charlie Sheen's desperate attempts to be regarded as a serious actor by simply going under the name of Charles Sheen.Next time, Mr. Sheen would be better to focus on giving a performance with at least some depth and emotion which the audience could connect with. Many a poorly scripted film is saved by one or two stand out performances. Sadly, only Glasgow delivered on this one, with Mr. Sheen's performance only adding to the endless list of flaws attached to this movie.Overall, Postmortem is struggling to score 1 out of 10.

Albert Pyun's directing seems to be improving with age. This is a perfectly respectable thriller, a movie that you would hesitate to call "inept" in any way - unless of course you're a personal enemy of Pyun's. However, it's also a bit too long and sluggish, and not as exciting as it should be. It jumps to life only occasionally (mainly in the chase scenes). Charlie Sheen is not very convincing as a boozing, worn-out, depressed yet brilliant writer/ex-detective; he's both too young and too clean-cut for such a role. (*1/2)

This was a nice try at doing something different from the typical American serial killer flick but unfortunately it ended up being only the setting that changed. Its a pity that in true Hollywood tradition an American had to show the Scottish police how to solve the murder (yawn). Not only that but the makers of this drama had Scottish actors speaking in American idioms. This might go down well in the mid west but anyone from Scotland will probably squirm a few times.The acting is not too bad, but Sheen mumbles his lines and Ivana Milicevic's Scottish accent sometimes drifts into the mid Atlantic. Having said all that though I certainly enjoyed the film and was happy that in choice of actors and setting there had at least been an attempt to move away from the formula serial killer movie.

Having watched numerous Charlie Sheen movies, and seen more or less the same type of performances from him in each one, I was not expecting this. Charlie Sheen manages to pull off quite a watchable performance as James Magregor, a weary but hardened cop, who goes to Glasgow for some light relief from his lifestyle...?....The film itself was quite slow, but the choice of location and the addition of a few smaller actors who are barely recognisable from other films, made the look of the film quite arthouse and cult-like compared with most of Sheen's other film work. There is a lot of use of the steady-cam, which at times becomes an annoyance,but it doesn't detract from the film The director really seems to capture the tension and fear in the film, and for a film that was shot entirely in twelve days with a mostly unknown cast, that aint bad. Overall, good thriller with some great support from the excellently cast unknowns! A must see for Sheen fans!