Inside

Plenty of people have commented already, both positively and negatively. I'm in the positive camp. I'll try to help you figure out if this could be for you.

Art, life, human experience, ecology, our place in the world and in our minds. That, for me, is what this film is mostly about.

Arthouse, yes, but gorgeously so.

If you are a student of film or cinematography or photography this movie keeps serving up shots you wish you could create.

Dafoe's performance is brilliant - in a subtle and internal way.

If you thought Aranofsky's Mother was worth watching, this is for you (although completely dissimilar). If you have enjoyed Baraka, Samsara and the rest, this is probably for you.

In terms of plot, it is minimal and has no thrills to speak of.

I think it's important to say that there's nothing wrong with not liking the film, feeling bored by it, not wanting to see it. Those who will enjoy it are not above anyone else - those who are disinterested are not below anyone else.

I hope this has helped someone.

As the headline states, I expected more from this film since it's basically a one-man-show starring the extremely charismatic and talented Willem Dafoe. Based on the premise of the man trapped on the inside, I made the assumption that we would spend 90 minutes on the edge of my seat. With such a great setup and potential for suspense, this film's low energy, and plodding pace were a huge letdown. There were an excess of long, low key, environmental shots, which may have been intended to be "artistic", but had little artistic impact, and only contributed to the movie's slow pacing and rhythm. Personally, this is a movie I MIGHT watch at home, but definitely not worth a watch in the theater.

First off I really enjoyed this movie. It held my attention the whole time and Willem Dafoe did a great job at keeping my focus.

Movies in a single location with minimal cast are incredibly difficult to pull off but I think this one managed it.

The cinematography was spot on and the photography was there too. The acting made sense the script didn't feel forced and possibly the best atmospheric soundtrack in a very long time with use of tones rather than music tracks.

Now don't get me wrong I'm not fanboying all over this as there were a number of issues that arose but you'll have to watch it to make your mind up about them.

This movie will no doubt be boring to anyone who's a fan of say Michael Bay or Vin Diesel as it isn't an action packed joy ride.

For people who like something a bit weird but focused I'd definitely recommend it.

Not too many movies leave me with the "what a waste of time" feeling, but this was one. Although the acting was good, there were just too many ridiculous things going on, and it was just too draggy. And like the usual sucker I am for watching until the end, I kept hoping "well maybe the ending will justify this colossal waste of time"; but no. Run away from this movie! You are better off watching the sequel to "Dumb and Dumber", or even one of the really lousy "Pink Panther" movies with Steve Martin. I don't know why imdb requires so many characters now for reviews, so I'll just say I warned you.

Willem Dafoe plays Nemo, a thief who gets trapped inside a luxury penthouse after stealing some artworks. He has to survive on his own, with only his memories and some fish for company. The film is a tense and gripping exploration of isolation, identity and art, with Dafoe delivering a masterful performance that carries the whole film. Director Vasilis Katsoupis creates a suffocating atmosphere that keeps the audience on edge, while also offering some glimpses of humor and humanity. The film is not for everyone, as it can be slow-paced, repetitive and bleak at times, but it is a unique and daring experiment that showcases Dafoe's talent and charisma.