ironhorse_somo
This movie had the potential to be pretty darn good. The historical aspect involved made it even more interesting. The acting ranged from passable (the leading man, who comes across as not likable at all,) to strong (Skeritt.) The plot was fairly good, until just after the half-way point, but left some threads hanging that I kept expecting to be tied up, but they never were. The ending was nothing short of unfortunate. It was as if the writers couldn't come up with a good ending, and took the cheap route out. I can think of a couple of endings that would've earned this movie a solid 6 or 7 rating. Unfortunately, the writers couldn't, so they're stuck with a 4 - and I'm stuck with my disappointment.
Emmett Dove
To be honest, this was a weird movie. It didn't have all the "hollywood" added to it. I was very interested within the first 15 minutes which is highly unusual for me. It tells the story of a man that restores homes from Virginia. At the start you will think his is having a panic attack but you will see that he suffers from skitzophrenia. The movie plays into the role perfect & if you have ever met someone like that (I am), it's truly wonderful how they had the "mind set" perfect. It also has a lot about history in Virginia & one of the oldest mysteries surrounding the United States. I don't want to spoil it for you, but if you want to venture off into a movie with lots of twists & a decent story line, this is for you. You will have to pay attention or maybe watch it twice. The first time is like, WOW, then the second you can see more clearly what is going on. Im surprised this movie doesn't have many ratings or views. Probably because its not "Hollywoodified".
jspradii
Very suspenseful in places, but there are too many loose ends that are never tied up. The ending was awful and rushed, at that. Could have been better scripted; didn't seem like the editor could have saved this one. Several additional scenes needed to be added to provide plot and character continuity. Like, "Who was the boy and what was his significance to anything? What was his relationship to Gene? Who was Gene?" On and on and on.......too bad, good subject; bad screenplay. Although I know the background of this particular film (my daughter played in it), it is obvious that there was not enough money to go back and complete enough pick ups to make this thing flow the way it should have. 3 of 10 only because there were some decent performances by the cast and crew.A lot of soft focus when it shouldn't have been used. Don't know if this was intentional or not, but it was distracting.
agates34
i have just finished watching this film. To say the least i was/am very confused about the whole project. I just cannot believe that Nobody read the script from beginning to end and said it didn't make sense.There were many different angles and leads that the writers could have taken. I saw so many different cut & pastes from movies, and ideas that were plastered together to make this................odd........The only reason i gave it a 2/10 is due to the fact that some big names were listed in the movie.what the hell? I would only watch this if a friend rented it from the $1 redbox and i was drunk.Sorry crew/actors... you tried but...
AD
