befoulmetalroosa It reminded me of The Ring-the US remake. When the students had their pictures taken after they'd watched the video, their faces were distorted like the faces in the videos Simon had taken. There, the similarities end. While The Ring blended psychological and visceral horror relatively well, this movie did not. In fact, Simon didn't even notice the distortions to his videos until the third set of 'victims' died. And he was the only one to see it. No one else could see his delusions, including the dead coming back after him. It wasn't until I watched him bludgeon his best friend's head in with his own camera that I realized that the delusions were based on guilt. When, at the end of the movie, he rewinds to the point where he was getting ready to leave for the trip, I thought I realized the truth. That he'd killed his ex girlfriend the same way he killed his best friend, just so that he could score with his best friend's girl, Eva. At least, that's what I got out of it. The only time you see his face is when he shoots it in the mirror in his bedroom of his shared apartment. Perhaps that's where the 'guilt distortion' originated. Kinda hard to tell, since the movie was pretty much all over the place, with no real sense of direction. Undoubtedly someone else would get something different from the movie. Who knows?

jesse-72523 Interesting... that's the word to describe it. Very slow at times. So slow that I almost turned it off but I decided to stay with it and I'm happy I did. Right from the get go you can tell there is not a large budget to this film. It is definitely not a Hollywood movie. What really works for the film is how smart it is. Kind of like a puzzle where you have to put the pieces together. The dialog between the characters is very lifelike. And that can be seen as a detriment as a lot that is happening in their conversations is not that exciting. But it's the little bits of information here and there that adds up. There is also this one inciting incident that really makes you jump because you're not ready for it, and then you're hooked right to the end. Some use the word slow-burn to describe this film. Yes, that's definitely what this is. Slow- burn and tension. You will get hooked if you go for the ride. The ending is one to ponder over. I can see how some find it anticlimactic. But if you pay attention, it will all pay off in the end.

samples-sharon I really tried to like this film but it was so flawed it drove me nuts. If you were staying in a hotel and the manager was shot in the night would you really just go back to bed and sleep soundly with hardly a word about it? If you just found out from the police that a store you had just been to was now burnt to the ground and the clerk you were chatting with is dead would your reaction be 'I bought some gum and a drink'? Wouldn't you freak just a little bit? If you were asleep in a hotel room and your mate starts yelling there is someone in the room wouldn't you freak just a little bit? If your mate said to you that when he is filming people when their faces are skewed they die, would you really say well maybe mine isn't because you care about me? Really? This film is dull, unrealistic, badly directed and acted. Even the actors looked bored. I know its a film not real life but at least react with a bit of shock when people are dying all around you.

bob_meg Seve Schelenz's Skew, made in 2005 and just released on a semi-wide scale in 2011, makes two very bold statements on the subjectivity of the viewing experience.Firstly, you don't have to share the exact same world view as the filmmaker. His or her art either inspires, provokes, or in some other significant way touches you, or it doesn't. His idea of the film's plots, themes, and character motivations may or may not coincide with yours. But if the film is made well enough, that shouldn't matter. Secondly, never assume your narrator or hero is reliable, well-adjusted, or sane.This last point is especially significant as Skew is told from the point of view of a camera-addled, eerily withdrawn, and uniquely deluded protagonist named Simon (Rob Scattergood), and the road trip he embarks upon with two friends, Eva and Richard (Amber Lewis and Richard Olak). With the exception of a scant few shots, most of the film is shot from Simon's POV behind the camera. It isn't found-footage --- there are jumps to other perspectives beside Simon's --- but we're definitely inside his mindset for most of the film. This provides a special challenge to us, as viewers. We're given several keys to the "puzzle" of Simon, but then put "inside" Simon, or the puzzle, to figure it out.To call Simon an obsessive is an understatement. His face is literally buried in the camera for the entire trip, shooting anywhere between seven and ten tapes per day. He starts to find faces of certain subjects skewed or twisted as he records their images, often times seeing very vivid phantoms through the viewfinder but then not able to validate any of this when rewinding and playing back the tapes. Almost inevitably, the subjects with the "blurred" faces wind up dead. This led me to believe Simon was either killing all these people or aiding in their deaths in some way. Well, as it turns out...not quite. The truth is actually even a bit more chilling. The best way I can think of to describe Simon's relationship to his camera is to compare it to Anthony Hopkins' relationship to his ventriloquist's dummy in "Magic." The camera and the dummy are both shields, weapons, and the primary tools of the protagonist's destruction.The first time I saw Skew, I came to the wrong conclusion. That is, what I thought was going on by the end of the film didn't quite coincide with the director's intention (for Schelenz's full explanation, see http://coolawesomemovies.com/director-seve-schelenz-explains-skew/). Did that make the film any less interesting, compelling, or downright disturbing for me? Not in the least. Skew still contains some very jolting, jump-out-of-your-seat moments and the tension between the actors is very palpable and nicely played (Olak, in particular, voices the audience's growing frustration and irritation with Simon to particularly good effect).Simon --- not the camera --- is "skewed." His perception of reality is off---way, way off. His fascination with Eva, who doesn't share his feelings in the least, is probably the most blatant indicator of this delusion. His self-hatred --- taken to the extreme point where he can't bear to be photographed, videotaped, or even to look at himself in the mirror is another.Skew blatantly defies all traditional expectations of the psychological horror film, yet still leaves us with a very stark, vivid impression of derangement. It has it's flaws and Schelenz is not a perfect filmmaker: there are many ways he could have made his point in a much clearer and coherent manner and there is one scene in particular, in a police interrogation room, that blatantly doesn't work. It seems it's intention was to mislead but it only winds up confusing us. Despite these flaws (which Schelenz readily acknowledges in the link above, and kudos to him for that), Skew does work. It unsettles you and stays with you for quite some time. I wish there was more like it.