M. Qtips (M_Qtips) I just got blown away by this movie. Yes, by conventional film standards, it sucks: almost no story, no narrative arc, almost no dialog for the second half, nothing is ever explained, entirely full of insipid depthless characters who are either brutally loathsome (most of the men) or spend a hell of a lot of time doing nothing but wandering through a darkened building whimpering and screaming (most of the females), spends too much time indulging itself in banal torture porn conventions without going anywhere. I don't even think many of the characters had names. It doesn't even have a trace of the pretentious art-house conventions some films stoop to in order to try to justify the obvious lack of conventional movie-making skill.And yet, I loved it. I was floored and genuinely scared watching it. I will definitely watch it again. It's barely a story, it's more just a tapestry of murky, mounting fear, presented for its own sake. In some ways, it's comparable to Fellini in its broad, expositionless, near-abstract presentation of something more wrested from the subconscious than designed to satisfy the intellect.Its focus on tone rather than narrative is reminiscent of, yes, found-footage origin The Blair Witch Project, but even moreso, of old Giallo horror films, films that reveled in the idea of fear and focused more on creepy mood than the more conventional trappings of movies as "quality" entertainment. No part of the movie is really all that dependent on any other part an any strict way, and it even abandons its "found footage" first-person perspective before it gets to the end. But even so, once it finds makes one of its several shifts and finds its footing about halfway through, abandoning what seems to be a banal brutality-as-spectacle approach and shifting to the stuff of deeper, more phantasmagoric nightmares, it becomes easily the only truly scary film I've seen in a long time. I'm not going to include spoilers, but there are moments in here as iconic and viscerally chilling as Nosferatu's long-fingernailed shadow gliding silently up a stairway wall.I was genuinely surprised to see "The Inside"'s low 3.3/10 rating on IMDb, but it makes sense. It succeeds in a much less polished, and quieter, but otherwise similarly unconventional way as Lars von Trier's "Antichrist", another film that doesn't even remotely attempt to be enjoyable as a movie-going experience, which, like this film, deceived a lot of people into thinking it was a bad movie instead of quite the opposite. I almost gave it 9 stars. I still might. This film knows exactly what it wants to be, and it unapologetically is that and only that, to the very core. If you don't like it, the problem may not be with the film, but with you. Despite the rocky beginning, this film's ultimate odd, offputting achievement deserves to be considered a misfit classic.

biteandkissme I can't believe I managed to sit through all of this, it was just horrible. First off, like most amateur camera movies, you can't see half of the movie.Second off, the sound, nothing but screams, whimpers, whining... it was very annoying.Third, the monster? seriously? uhm, no.Seriously what are the kids doing in a place like this for a birthday anyway? Doesn't make any sense.And what is that guy doing going back there, without letting the cops know, in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT? Makes even less sense.The whole thing was horrible. My ears are still bleeding from all the screaming. I really don't recommend this movie.I know it's low budget, but the story might have been better if we actually saw the whole thing.

mfcoder-imdb This film is about 80% "found footage" so if Blair-Witch-like puts you off, probably not for you. Shot on video, it has the feeling of low- budget, but much better than many low-budget horrors.Firstly, although the acting amongst the females is a little too 'screamy' they're in quite an unpleasant situation almost from the start, so it's understandable. The script is fairly realistic, and the antagonists that arrive are suitably menacing and unpleasant - this isn't a film full of nice people, and it's definitely worth its rating, more for the scenarios, than for any graphic blood-letting.The story itself is fairly interesting, and the suspense quite gripping. It feels as though there's a prequel story to be told which would hold my attention.Not a stand-out movie, but evidently a "one-man" show (written, directed, produced by same guy) that is far better than similar ones in this genre, and you definitely feel it has merit.There are more than a few 'huh?' moments in terms of what the main characters do, but there is much left untold - and I feel it's okay for not every aspect of the events to be tidied up and given a neat explanation.In summary, much better than I expected. Professional looking, and well executed. A film-maker to encourage and look out for.

unendurable_lampoonery I just saw this film at Monster fest Melbourne, and must say when it started I was already annoyed by screaming girls and shaky camera work, which i was expecting as it is another "found footage" film that i am getting very tired of. But then the vagrants come in and I'm thinking, this is messed up this could be really sinister and nasty, and then it dragged on, and on, with silly little cliché glitches of the camera extremely similar to the tall man series on you tube. then the over used baby cry that is never fully explained or reasoned and also chuck in some witch craft and satanic symbols on the wall, and I'm just thinking. "what is this film." people ended up just laughing through out the movie screening. I think a movie where you never care about the characters to begin with then you are made to feel a bit scared for them, then hate them again, and then I just wanted the film to end, but it just kept going. A number of people walked out on this film screening, I stayed as I will try to give everything a chance and this is sadly just bad.