gcg837979 I watched this on Netflix VOD thinking it was a remake of the 1989 Scot Spiegel film. I didn't pay attention to the plot summary, and viewed if for the better part of ten minutes before realizing it bore no resemblance to the previous movie. In fairness, there are about ten movies called "Intruder" or "The Intruder" on IMDb, so I suppose it's my bad.This film was a curious entry into the slasher sub-genre. It had no budget and an unknown cast, but pulled off some nice, tense moments. There's a quirky suicide motif running through the movie that felt completely out of place and disjointed, but gave the movie an eerie feel that mislead me into thinking it was going to be smarter than it really was. Strange. Ultimately, Intruder (2008) is a slam dunk if you love those back of the shelf grade z blockbuster flicks, but be warned if you expect splashy effects and production value from your entertainment, as you will find neither.

jakehmltn1987 First off, I LOVE no-budget indie films. Most of them suck, but occasionally you find a gem, or at least one dynamic enough to keep your interest. This film falls into that category.The masked killer genre typically caters to people in need of cinematic comfort food. It has to be simple, bland, and go down easy without too much of an aftertaste. With that in mind, Intruder may prove to be a tough sell for slasher fans. This Halloween-based thriller is not cinematic Doritos. It has a spook-factor I haven't experienced from a micro-cinema horror in a while, and revolves around an intriguing, if over-thought, protagonist. Occasionally, elements are introduced that seem out of place and disturbing, creating a disjointed feel that unnerved me. The performances are VERY STRONG, from the female lead to the supporting characters, many of whom leave in impression with only a single scene.In terms of kills, the film puts most of its eggs in the suspense basket, making the actual "money stuff" more of a period than an exclamation point. Intruder actually manages to ratchet up a considerable amount of tension; rare for a grade "z" indie. Yes, there certainly is a "cheese factor", and yes, the zero-budget seams are more than apparent, but that's inevitable in this sort of movie.Being that the film is (sorta) structured as a murder mystery, the "end twist" is a bit of a head-scratcher. However, it had an impact, unlike most horror film endings, which all too often fall into the paint-by-numbers category.The DVD supplements are excellent. The deleted scenes are intriguing, and the blooper reel is actually funny. There are two audio commentaries, both of which kept my interest and managed to avoid being self-congratulatory.Overall, I liked Intruder enough to pick up a copy from amazon after renting it. It's a thinking person's slasher (if that exists), and has a number of remarkable elements. If you can only tolerate well-budgeted spfx fests with name actors, you will not find much to enjoy, as this is a maiden effort with more than its share of flaws. If, on the other hand, you tend to give low-budget horrors a chance, you'll dig the atmosphere and scares, and find it worth a look.7 1/2 STARS.

rosscosjunk In contrast to the "main" review on this movie with regard to the below average IMDb rating, I would have to strongly disagree.I find it very difficult to imagine how it's even scored 3.8 (current score at the time of writing this comment).This movie is the absolute definition of "amateur" in every sense (right down to the movie poster). The acting, if it can be called that, is terrible. The story / plot is none existent and I have seen much finer movies produced by young students.I could only manage to watch 20 minutes of this movie (and I try very hard to watch an entire film before forming an opinion). I fast forwarded beyond this and found no redeeming sections in the entire film.To the Director: Please "attempt" to learn your trade (Or employ someone who has) before attempting to release another movie. You will not make any friends with this, therefore I can only imagine you are out to either rip people off or make enemies (In the first case, shame on you, in the second, I hope you used a false name).

Saintthomas1985 This movie's WAY too smart for its own good. The basic story involves a mentally disturbed young woman and her companion being terrorized by a brutal predator on Halloween Night. Plot-wise it's "been there, done that". Unlike the original – superior – Spiegel film from '89 (which this is not in any way a remake of), the director is clearly trying to put a good deal of depth into this film (next time, let's have a little less character development and more decapitations, ce va?) To give credit where it's due, there's a solid amount of craft involved here. The director has a good visual style, and the performances are strong (unlike most low-budget slashers). There are some solid suspense scenes, and a decent amount of gore and nudity (more of the former than the latter). There's also a sex-murder scene that is one of the more stylish and effective I've seen in recent memory (and includes a shot you would only expect to see in a gore-porn film). The film never really transcends its budget. The fx are mostly (reasonably effective) flash cuts, and a few of the shots don't match (particularly in the first act). The sound design stands out as quite strong, but some of the elements are tinny and distractingly under-recorded.Still, Intruder will hold novelty if you're into atmospheric horror on a budget. The principals are talented people, and I get the impression that novice filmmaker Caiafa probably has a really good film in him (he comes across as intelligent in the informative DVD director's commentary). It moves at a gazelle's pace (the 85 min running time felt like a half hour), and has a few superb scenes. But as far as killer clown exploitation goes, I'll take my blood and guts without the side of drama, thank you very much!Saintthomas1985 (check out all my reviews!!!)