That was an excellent one.

A Disappointing Continuation

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Brilliant acting. Brilliant effects. Brilliant story. Brilliant film. Simply brilliant on all levels and easily the scariest movie I have ever seen! David F. Sandberg took Man's greatest fear (the dark) and effectively turned it into a terrifying tale.

Lights out has decent scares and a strong concept to drive it. But unfortunately it's second half doesn't quite live up to its first 35 minutes.

Young Martin lives with mum Sophie. Dad was recently brutally murdered, and adult half-sister Rebecca moved out ages ago. Mum (who has struggled with depression since childhood) appears to talk regularly with someone who isn't actually there. But we have seen some sort of creature which dwells only in darkness - put on the light and it is gone.This horror film gives us a new and intriguing monster. Reminiscent of Doctor Who's Weeping Angels, this entity appears to exist only in darkness: flood it with light, and it is gone. Gradually we uncover the backstory between Sophie and childhood friend Diana, and how it impinges on the horror the family is going through.The story is fun, though not wholly convincing (the effect of light is inconsistent: sometimes the entity appears to disappear, sometime it appears to become invisible but it's still there, and sometimes it is visible and the light blisters it. And what exactly happened to Diana to create this entity, and how does the link with Sophie work?). More to the point, I thought the relationships between Sophie (Maria Bello), Martin (Gabriel Bateman), Rebecca (Teresa Palmer) and Rebecca's boyfriend Bret (Alexander DiPersia) were credible, well-written, and very well performed. We were given characters who were real people: we cared, and hoped they could survive their ordeal. It is unusual to find such well-realised characters in a horror film.The film was visually effective, with the lights on/lights off moments being particularly well done. There was an over-reliance on mad-you-jump sound hits - these weren't necessary because the basic set-up was scary enough on its own.I saw the resolution coming slightly ahead of time, but it worked well nevertheless. And I was particularly pleased that the movie didn't have a contrived shock additional ending tacked on at the very end.This is one of the better horror movies of recent years.

After seeing the viral horror short, which was pretty effective I thought maybe it carry over to a feature, but not a chance.This was the 2-minute short scare gags running for 90-minutes. Scene after scene with just unbelievable bad writing and unrealistic situations. Every piece of dialogue was overly written exposition to make sure we got jam packed information of background stories so we are supposed to care about them. Typical formula Hollywood writing. Cram in information through dialogue (TELL) rather than SHOWING us.Sometimes you don't need to give us that much exposition. It can inferred in good writing scenes.A prime example of bad writing it the scene where the boy's sisters takes him from his mom in the beginning. The mom doesn't want this to happen but she just stands there helpless and et's her "daughter" take her son away. Not even an attempt to resist. Nothing. No mother would ever let that happen. the movie is just filled ridiculous scene after scene like that. The boyfriend brings this up, not at the time or in the car, but AFTER they get home. Right, again, would never happen.Skip it.