I was pretty surprised with this movie. At first, I thought it was controversy for the sake of controversy attempting to masquerade as a deep message. By the end, that opinion didn't change, but I was fairly entertained.

Some good scenes, and by good I mean actually put together well, but good Lord the content is just horrendous. It's shock value for the sake of shock value. The acting is absolutely awful and it's really low budget. Better than Uwe Boll's average movie though so maybe that's a plus or something.

This is far from the most horrific movie I have seen but it has a really shocking start and a pretty surprising ending. I would say the 5 -10 first minutes and the 5 last is what make this movie watchable. rest is really not good at all.. There's many reasons for that; Parts of the acting is terrible. For instance the reaction of the main character when he finds out his family has been taken by a serial killer.. Guess you have to blame the director for that though. The movie jumps back an

Holy crap! An Uwe Boll movie that is actually watchable! Doesn't relie on CG like his other film and has some decent scares. However, the acting is horrible as always and the script is terrible. But, it's still a huge improvement from Boll's other films.

I am used to gory scenes but the axe smashed face stuff in this one was really something.

Hey Uwe Boll don't start your movies with PETA shock videos next time, the message you're trying to get across is a retarded one to begin with. There's a difference between someone dying in a movie and video of dogs being skinned alive. The only reason this doesn't get a 0 is because of Michael Pare slumming it. Pare watches videos of people/animals decomposing in a room and he starts to cry out "WHAT DOES THIS MEAN". Garbage. Oh and light doesn't exist in the world of Seed

Well, I'll be damned. A Boll movie that doesn't rank with the lowest of the low. It's all cheap shocks and exploitation, but it's shorter than his last few outings, it has a smaller cast with less dialogue and it focuses on practical special effects (centered fully on gore!) instead of Boll's trademark dubious CGI. A definite improvement.

this movie sucks!!!

pisses me off that people were right about uwe boll, before they even had the proof

this was one of my true deep psycohligcal masterpeaces. um yea it was so psyohlical for you idiots wearing red THATS WHY U DIDNT FACKING GET IT LOOSERS.. IT WAS TO SMART FOR YOU, FACKIN IDIOTS

"Say what you will about Saw 3 and Hostel 2, but compared to this malignant wreck, those (yes, harsh and brutal) horror flicks have the subtext of Shakespeare and the moral compass of Superman."

Even with everything wrong with this movie, I think that this movie ended better than I would have given a Uwe Boll movie credit for. There were some pretty good scenes as well, but the editing and some pretty bad flaws with this as well.

Does Boll's bleakest film have any depth to it? Maybe not. It stands out against other nihilistic and violent horror films from the decade though in having more thought to it. It has an intentional air of eeriness that makes the brutal and erratic nature of the slight plot more effecting. Only the animal cruelty footage undermines the film - its placing in the beginning credits, never to be included again elsewhere, is the only moment Boll's tendency to crowbar in pointless effects is visible.

Taking my low rating into consideration, calling this one of Boll's better efforts might take form as the ultimate insult - but I really mean it. You can sense he's trying here. It's still very bad, of course.

so boll ditches poorly written video games as source material and tries out his writing chops, which consequently are right on par with his abilities as a director. the joke is on us, because we're still watching him.