eloisebean Started out okay, typical B movie, but eventually nothing was happening. I began to space in and out of the movie, and lost track of what his motivation was. At one point he was trying to find a job, and was complaining about having to take pictures of real estate, and then the next moment he's looking at photos. He suddenly comes to the conclusion that the pictures were telling the future. Maybe it was edited poorly, or maybe it did explain, but I dozed off because it was starting to get boring. Either way this is a snooze fest. I personally thought they should have ditched the whole camera storyline, and gone with the fat greasy stalker that was following the girlfriend, while she was jogging. That was the only creepy thing in this entire movie.

jmix66 The actress portraying Claire in the film is untalented and unattractive making it a two-fer. And things get worse from there.The plot isn't too bad (haunted camera) but film was ruined by mediocre to terrible acting by the leads. You just never believe the protagonist and his girlfriend are really couple or that his problems are really driving his motivations. They just seem to "show up" stand around and repeat their lines,I rented this RedBox which is how I would advise people to watch , if they care to. Better yet...see if you find it on a streaming site and watch it there. It's not worth a purchase if you looking to do that.

airsnob So this was rated pretty high on Amazon and on IMDb. A 6.7 isn't too shabby . So I rented it. With my bank account down pretty low, $5.99 I want to be well spent, I am meticulous reviewer of movies , because there is nothing worse than spending money on a crap film . First of all, it isn't terrible. IMDb is really bipolar when it comes to ratings. People hand out horrible ratings for films when they don't like them, unfortunately they're just not realistic. I think anything between a 1-5 should be considered B movie , bad production values , horrible acting , the works. This movie is not that. It's not B movie quality. The acting is good. The script isn't bad, except I do have my complaints. The script was crazy confusing in spots. The entire serial killer thing - I mean I figured that the camera must have belonged to the guy ( Im not a total idiot) what I can't figure is when that was ever introduced in the movie. I thought that I must have missed the auction scene where they said the camera belonged to the serial killer and they were auctioning off his stuff . . Because out of nowhere comes in this connection to the serial killer and the camera. Yet then there was the camera being from before WW2, ( yet the camera can date pictures ) and that didn't seem to go anywhere either. There was just some inconsistencies in the script. For someone not that bright , this might've seemed like a confusing mess. ( don't ever watch movies with someone not that bright ) the other thing is , the whole PTSD thing with the main protagonist... the movie took forever to get started or for anything mildly interesting to happen. They used this time for character development except this was extremely obtuse and almost purposely hidden , like we don't really find out exactly what this guys problem is till he is talking with his buddy at the bar. Which was well into the movie , and then we are supposed to believe that a photographer has PTSD ( a severe case) like as bad or worse than a combat vet. The movie started off not seeming very realistic to begin with. The characters were hard to believe ( I've never met any guys who speak like these guys also) but if you stick with it, it gets more interesting ... This isn't a horror movie ... this is a good first independent movie I would say in the thriller genre. This movie shows potential , and talent . I would applaud this film if I knew it was a first project for writer / director . I think that this movie reminds me of some other firsts - like for example Absentia, This movie has better production values , but on the same page is that film with interesting script and good acting , just not that great of a film. But good for independent standards and budget limitations. I look forward to the future with this director and writer. It's not a bad movie and I think some people will enjoy it more and some less. I thought it ended much better than it started and the later connections were cool. Overall I give it a 6, although it could easily be a 7, I just didn't get that into it , it didn't pull me in ..

Donald Buehler I saw the world premiere at the 2017 Florida Film Festival and was very impressed with the idea of the film - its presentation - and impact. Jack Zeller, played very effectively by Christopher Denham, is a psychologically damaged photographer back from Afghanistan. He is evidently suffering from PTSA and is trying to get back to doing what he loves - professional photography. As an encouragement, his fiancé, Claire, buys him a vintage (WW II era) camera (naturally made in Germany.)One chilling aspect of the camera is that a camera repair store announces that "this camera is not capable of taking photos." Nevertheless, Jack gets a gig working for her real estate company and takes 10 rolls of film of various settings and properties with this "unworkable" camera. When the film is processed, there are surprising photos which I will not describe (you can imagine since this is a horror film.) How he reacts and tries to deal with these photos is the tension in the movie. The plot is different, well conceived and exciting. The music and sound effects add measurably to the feel of the film and effect of the events being portrayed. Overall it is an excellent effort from first time director Aaron B. Koontz. I look forward to future efforts by Mr. Koontz. If you get the chance to take in "Camera Obscura," please do - very worthwhile.