Coventry I certainly don't intend to say that "Shadow" is a bad film, and I don't even want to discourage anyone from watching it; the only thing that is simply undeniable is that it contributes almost nothing to the horror genre. The story, written by director Frederico Zampaglione , shamelessly cashes in on the biggest and most profitable horror trends of the new millennium, namely vicious torture porn situations (eerie devices in dark and sinister cellars) and silent & nameless creeps that mercilessly ambush ignorant tourists to feast their perverted torture fetishes upon. During "Shadow", I spotted elements and ideas that were previously used in films such as "Saw", "Hostel", "Frontière(s)", "Blood Trails", "Timber Falls" and possibly a few other titles I already forgot about. Relieved that he's finally back from serving in the Iraq war, avid bike rider David goes on an adventurous trip that was recommended to him by a friend. The area, known as "The Shadow", is breath-taking and David even meets the girl of his dream. She's a French beauty called Angelique and she's also obsessed with bike riding; what are the odds on that? Their freshly found happiness rudely gets interrupted when they run into a couple of redneck hunters and are forced to abandon their bikes to hide into the thick woods. Little does David know that this only the beginning of the nightmare, as the Shadow also homes a cruel and psychopathic creep who likes to torture people. The thing that surprised (or is it annoyed?) me the most is the severe lack of sick and nasty violence depicted on screen. All the shocking stuff, as well as most of the killings, occurs off-screen, which is quite unusual for a torture porn flick. The movie does manage to be reasonably suspenseful, especially because David and Angelique are nice and amiable persons, whereas the hunters are loathsome bastards, so during the cat-and- mouse games you automatically cheer for the biker couple. Experienced horror fans can also entertain themselves by spotting all the clichés, for example the soldier flashbacks or the "decorations" inside the maniac's lair. The whole ending is sort of like a mixed bag. I certainly admire Zampaglione's courage and ambition to try something completely different, but the result is principally unsatisfying and leaves quite a lot of questions unanswered. At least you cannot claim that the climax is obvious or even remotely predictable, so that's already an accomplishment on itself. Still, considering we're already in familiar terrain, I personally would have preferred more gore and bloodshed rather than a surreal twist- ending.

filmakerspake I've read many negative reviews about this film. Some complain about the coherency and pace of the film, while most complain about the ending. Let me start by saying this is one of the best horror films, if not one of the best films I've ever seen, and I've watched thousands of films from the silent era all the way up to present time.What Shadow does so well (BIG SPOILER) is to accomplish the true elements of a dream. It changes pace and setting quite quickly, and effectively. Going from backwoods terror to what some might consider Nazi torture porn doesn't seem like a well flowing narrative, but it works while your watching it, and is only clarified by the ending. So are other strange occurrences such as the rednecks being in what appears to Europe, and the portrait of our 43rd President. Personally, the reason I believe it struck such a chord with myself is because it reminded me of my own dreams. Not so much in the content, but in the way it can rapidly change and go downhill. Most people were very angered over the ending, and didn't take the time to appreciate what director Federico Zampaglione was trying to do. That was to present a dream in it's truest nature. If one was to go back and examine the intricacies of the dream, I think they would be surprised at how the elements are truly dreamlike. Maybe those individuals have never really had a vivid dream.Overall, the movie derives a great deal of inspiration from many other classic films. Some of its visual imagery personally reminded me of An American Werewolf in London (An American man traveling in a foggy, European land with apprehensive locals), as well as Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal(The Nazi Butcher very much resembling the characterization of death in that film). It keeps ones interest, and is genuinely frightening. It doesn't overuse gore, and really is a step above films such as Hostel or Saw. It uses suspense and a feeling of real, sheer terror. Actor Nuot Arquint, as the Strange Nazi Toad Licker (Which many people felt was a gratuitous scene, but hey its a dream, it doesn't have to make sense) evokes fear into the audience without the heavy use of make-up, or as is popular today CGI. His appearance on screen for some reason reminded me of what it might have been like to see Boris Karloff appear on screen as the Frankenstein Monster, or Bela Lugosi as Dracula. As for the ending, if analyzed, can be extremely thought provoking.I ended up watching this movie almost by accident, my brother recommended the film. His taste in movies is usually poor, but every once in a while he finds a gem (Check out Goon starring Sean William Scott, very surprising indeed). I think the less an individual knows about this film going in, the better. All in all, this is one of the best modern day horror films I've ever seen, with enough class to remind one of what the experience of viewing a horror movie should be like. This is an under-appreciated classic that, I am sure will one day receive its due.

preppy-3 David (Jake Muxworthy) is biking through a beautiful and huge mountain range. He meets Angeline (Karina Testa) who is doing the same as him. They bike together but soon have two psychotic hunters chasing them. But there's someone chasing the hunters and them! It starts off pretty good. The cinematography is beautiful, the music unsettling and Muxworthy is very good in his role. Then, halfway through (40 minutes in), it slows down and becomes incredibly boring. Then, at the very end, it throws in a twist that was so stupid and old that I ended up hating the movie. Want to know what the "twist" was? ENDING REVEALED IN THIS PARAGRAPH!!!! David was in combat in Iraq. He was injured by a bomb...and the whole movie was a dream he had while unconscious!!!! That is a cheat and just annoys people. That was totally inexcusable and ruins the movie. SPOILERS END Also if you're looking for graphic gore forget it. You HEAR things happening but you never actually see it. No nudity or sex either. It is only 77 minutes and it IS well-made but that ending...I can only give it a 5.

Kmnaut Truthfully, I'd give this 8/10, but I feel obliged to try and balance out some of those bad reviews, because I think those reviewers didn't get it.There's a lot more going on here than the usual "sadistic creep tortures people". The film builds up to the punchline twist quite subtly. There are plenty of visual clues, including metal objects of a certain shape and one laugh out loud moment involving a portrait of a well known American, and there are dialogue clues (especially from Angelina). Even the title of the film is a clue as to what this is about.I think the writer/director struck a perfect balance here (I didn't see the final twist coming until it was almost upon me, and then everything suddenly slotted into place).It's not "Hostel", not torture porn. The film makes a point. In that regard it's closer to "Martyrs" and "Never Let Me Go"; Although nowhere near as harrowing as those last two films, it's still a cut above the usual genre flicks.Great pace. Good acting. Nice soundtrack. The villain is brilliant. Worth watching for him alone.A horror film that deliberately plays with clichés but ultimately has more depth. It really doesn't deserve the low score.