Dread (2009) - Drama, Horror, Thriller

Hohum Score



Three college students set out to document what other people dread the most. However, one of the three turns out to secretly be a sadistic psychopath who uses this knowledge to gruesomely torture the subjects.

IMDB: 5.7
Director: Anthony DiBlasi
Stars: Jackson Rathbone, Hanne Steen
Length: 108 Minutes
PG Rating: R
Reviews: 18 out of 74 found boring (24.32%)

One-line Reviews (53)

The characters were engaging and some were even original.

Utterly readable and boring movie.

All said and done I quite enjoyed it.

It does start slow, and the build-up might have been better inter-sped with Ninjas or sex or something....

But when the movie is that long, boredom becomes a torture.

The decent into madness depicted here is powerfully dramatic and quite intense.

Additonally, in the short story Stephen's fear is going deaf (a fear transplanted to the Joshua character) and one of the most compelling parts is when that fear is realized.

The premise looked really cool only the outcome was really bad and boring.

It was also given to pointless jumping.


The interviews the characters do for the movie are boring and give nothing more to the movie.

"Dread" was a total waste of time and money and so far the worst of the After Dark Horror Fest movies I have seen from all four years.

I love horror/thriller movies that have twist endings but the only problem is that they're pretty hard to come by nowadays, at least ones worth watching.

This had me on the edge of my seat, and it surprised me several times.

Proof you can make a tense, riveting film on a shoestring and a reminder that Clive Barker is a great horror writer.

Unfortunately this is a largely uninteresting film saddled with unlikeable lead characters and a thunking lack of storyline.

REVIEW IN A LINE: One of the kind movie which stands tall from rest of the generic horror WHICH IS WORTH WATCHING.

It starts off very slow.

Altogether, the above simply made it annoyingly contrived rather than entertaining or thrilling; it's not half as clever as it thinks or wants to be, or in fact could have been.

I just share my own feelings, and for me it is a complete failure, and one of the worst movies I had the misfortune to watch.

All I can say is that this movie has a very original storyline, the actors are very good, the production value is good, and it is worth watching.

The movie is very slow at first, and it takes time to get to know the main characters too, even though they are good actors.

My impression was, that someone turned-on by pointless violence has lived-out once again his own lecherousness about human suffering.

Wasting time watching a boring movie is a pain already.

5 words: twist ending, underrated, satisfying, thrilling .

However, it has good points, well-done scenes that will keep your attention, and it's always entertaining.

Slow-moving, genuinely unsettling film, based on a Clive Barker story, written by the director, about an obsessive sadist, Quaid(Shaun Evans, whose character is truly a creepy, demented soul)who starts up a friendship with a wannabe filmmaker/student, Stephen(Jackson Rathbone)talking him into basing his thesis on fear, interviewing a plethora of subjects, observing their moments of dread.

It seemed overall pretentious.

The last half hour is the most intense, as the accumulating events and actions come to their conclusion.

:/spoiler: Without divulging the whole plot, the film is quite entertaining to watch, despite the difficulty sometimes.

The story was predictable even by the casual movie-goer's expectations.

All of the characters were, quite frankly, bland to me.

The unexpected gloomy conclusion is one of the best I have recently seen in a horror movie.

Anyway, good news first, there are some very good camera shots/angles used like the following the axe upstairs, I thought really gave these scenes an edge and for maybe the first half hour I was a bit tense expecting a slow build up and raucous end.

The pace is awfully slow even though it's not particularly long and that's what gets you.

In fact, when it happens, the viewer will welcome it because the movie is so abysmally boring up until it happens.

Unpleasant, contrived, false .

Bottom line: for psycho killer fans, it might prove a nice enough film, but I am not really into that, so I just got bored watching it.

In fact, I watch so many movies It's been hard to find anything worth watching lately.

Studenty horror, a bit slow .

Too slow for the films own good .

Tedious, Though Beautifully Shot .

The events and people are often contrived, people behaving unnaturally or occurrences exaggerated.

As far as being compared to recent Clive Barker films, this one is clearly better than "Book of Blood" (which was just boring), and on par with "Midnight Meat Train".

The beginning is disclosed in slow pace and the last part is horrific; I almost vomited with the scene of Cherryl and the rotten steak.

This movie had it all never before kinda script,good acting,good dialogs and more interestingly and importantly a Perfect end,I was completely satisfied with the movie and i highly recommend it.

The ending is pretty tough, but most of the film is dull and the only emotion I felt was pity for the poor gullible fellow.

"Dread" takes its time setting up its premise but i hesitate to call it slow-moving.

It's a real intriguing movie to watch and because it's being so original, you also can't really predict all the time what is going to happen next in it.

Hilariously enjoyable .

The screenplay and script are unique and well made, the story is very original and unfolds in an interesting and compelling way.

The film is air tight through and through, but I have to admit the ending is so intense that by the final scene I was relieved it was over.