I thought this was a pretty darn good little thriller.

It's centers on Richard Dane (played by Michael C. Hall), a rather dull familiy father who works as a framer - yes, he actually makes frames for pictures. One night he surprises a burglar in his house and kills him.

The burglar's father (played by Sam Shepard) - who has just been paroled from prison - is understandably not a huge fan of Dane. But just when you think that the movie is going to turn into a cat-and-mouse-game, like Cape Fear, it turns everything on its head when Dane realizes that the person he killed isn't the person the police tell him he has killed - and there's a reason for that.

Enter Don Johnon - who's the real star of this movie.

Dane and his two new buddies go on a search to find out what the police are up to and why, and it takes them deeper into the criminal underworld of twisted snuff film - with everything that entails.

Oh, year, it totally ends bloddy.

The acting is top notch - especially Don Johnson, he just kills it in every scene. The plot is one step ahead of the audience at all time, which in fairness can be a bit off-putting cos' the movie almost changes genre a couple of times.

But all in all it was an enjoyable watch.

PS: It takes place in the late 1980s - hence Michael C. Hall's ass ugly haircut.

This movie felt like two movies in one.

I read that some things for the book were omitted. I've read some of Joe Lansdale's stuff. I'm a fan.

The movie itself was good. It was nice to see Don Johnson as a badass in something. Music was great, the visual feel was good. All in all a decent viewing for me. I like watching simple movies like this from time to time, that are well done. This was a competently made movie with an interesting 80s - like atmosphere.

I wasn't a fan of Jim Mickle's two previous movies: Stake Land and We are what we are.

I thought this was ok.

I take all the points Sniper made in that it serves as an enjoyable thriller which took an interesting, unexpected turn after the first act. Some have had problems with that shift but I dug it. Its a rare thing for a seemingly generic film to pull the rug from under you so I have to give it kudos there. However, how it ultimately transpired was where I had the biggest problems with it.

Contrary to Sniper and Demento, I thought Don Johnson's character strolled in from a different set,; caricatured, over-the-top and ill-fitting within the film's context. The drawl, the attitude, the wardrobe, everything. He's the classic case of a writer adhering a little too much to the "make your characters pop" advice, whereby you try to insert this really distinctive, cooler than cool, periphery presence who ends up sounding like a cartoonish version of a real person that only appear in films. Yes, this is a film but he layered it on far too thick.

The crux of my issue with the film though was that I simply couldn't believe Richard would've gotten so involved in Russel’s "mission" as he did. Firstly, he was portrayed as a mild mannered every man, as Sniper stated, and I get this is his arc but I didn't buy it, too extreme. This wasn't helped by the fact that his motivations were pretty low. Russell’s situation wasn't any of his concern other than a curiosity to find out who was the guy he was supposed to have killed. He barely knew Russell and owed him nothing. The dude was leaving bullets in his son’s room a few days previous and now they’re a kick-a?s-take-names tag team!

The film tries to convince with the police cover-up revelation that this is conceivable, that they share a common desire to protect/reconcile with their sons but I couldn't endorse Richard’s decision to drop everything and go seek revenge with him, for him, you know.

On top of this, he is essentially abandoning his wife and kid to sneak off on a highly dangerous escapade under the false pretense of work (if I remember correctly). What about his own devotion to them as a father? I mean, what if he had gotten seriously injured in the final showdown? Do you think his wife would've understood his obligation to Russell, his reasoning for going along? Fu?k no! And neither could I

I didn't quite understand why the cops were going to these ridiculous lengths to protect Freddy either. They fake his death so the Dixie mafia will stop looking for him but he’s already in witness protection so shouldn't he be safe anyway? Why do the cops care so much by attempting a risky cover up like that?

Also, why were they trying to kill Russell by making it look like he was drunk and fell asleep on the train tracks? Again, it seemed needlessly risky and unnecessary on the cops’ part. Just turn him loose or charge him for terrorizing Richard’s family…or let him flee to Mexico as he was doing when they hauled him in. Basically, just be done with the whole murky business.

And finally, a guy in witness protection is elbow deep in the snuff business? How did this go unnoticed by the witness protectors?

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Contrary to Sniper and Demento, I thought Don Johnson's character strolled in from a different set,; caricatured, over-the-top and ill-fitting within the film's context.

Can't disagree with you there, Col, but...damn he was badass!!!

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Contrary to Sniper and Demento, I thought Don Johnson's character strolled in from a different set,; caricatured, over-the-top and ill-fitting within the film's context. The drawl, the attitude, the wardrobe, everything. He's the classic case of a writer adhering a little too much to the "make your characters pop" advice, whereby you try to insert this really distinctive, cooler than cool, periphery presence who ends up sounding like a cartoonish version of a real person that only appear in films.

I agree. But I still liked it. I really can't suspend disbelief no matter what kind of movie I'm watching because in the back of my head I still know it's a movie, so sometimes I'm fine with characters like that. I find them cute. Plus I've always liked Don Johnson, so it was nice to see him in something good.

Quoted from Colkurtz8 The crux of my issue with the film though was that I simply couldn't believe Richard would've gotten so involved in Russel’s "mission" as he did. Firstly, he was portrayed as a mild mannered every man, as Sniper stated, and I get this is his arc but I didn't buy it, too extreme. This wasn't helped by the fact that his motivations were pretty low. Russell’s situation wasn't any of his concern other than a curiosity to find out who was the guy he was supposed to have killed. He barely knew Russell and owed him nothing. The dude was leaving bullets in his son’s room a few days previous and now they’re a kick-a?s-take-names tag team!

From hearing what people that read the book have said. In the book it's explained that Michael C Hall's character didn't have a father or lost his father, something like that, so the Sam Shepard character because a sort of father figure. That apparently was expended on and explained in the book. Where in the movie they cut it and sort of hinted at it.