It ceases to amaze me whenever I read a film review. That old baggage of "Everyone's a critic" seem to ring ever more true than in today's Facebook generation. The role of a Critic was allocated to those with deep understanding and appreciation for the entire process of narrative film. This process refers to, but not limited to the writing of, casting, set design, location scouting, make up and special effects, filming, directing, editing and final compilation and authoring that brings it all together and is then presented to the viewer for enjoyment. The average person/reviewer gives no regard to this process. Another tell-tale sign of an amateur review that is easy to disregard is either an overwhelmingly positive review or a completely negative review. This makes me wonder what is reviewer's personal agenda... What is their intelligence and education level? Do they have a competing film? Do they have a personal dissatisfaction with the filmmakers? I have a friend that was involved in making a romantic film and anytime you mentioned another independent romantic film, he quickly and prejudicially shot it down.
With that said here is my review.
There are many notable points to this film and some not so notable. The story was an original one. At least it was not another 'family moving into a old house in the middle of nowhere only to be haunted by the ghosts of a brutal murder that occurred some decades earlier.' With considering of the budget of the film, one cannot expect the production of a Hollywood film. Nevertheless, it held up it's own. The story flowed smoothly, from beginning, middle and to the end. The lighting and cinematography matched that of a much bigger horror films. The sound could have been improved upon. In a couple of parts of the film I noticed that the sound seemed somewhat drop out.
Sometime I feel the need to watch the film a second time to truly critique a film appropriately. So I did. I noticed that there were a few things I had missed the first time. I realized the movie lacked gore and nudity. Remember when I mentioned the notable points. This was one of them. It seems filmmakers, especially independents, feel the need to include excessive amounts of blood and body parts or simply to play it safe and include nudity to have something to fall back on. Dead End relied purely on the story.
In conclusion, I'd like to say that Dead End was surprisingly better than I expected. I recommend it. If you don't have any personal disregard to the filmmakers and you're not a part of a competing film, there's a good chance you'll also like this film.
