worst movie ever?

what i said was quite possibly an exaggeration. but i'll tell you this, while i was watching it i definitely felt like it was the worst movie ever. in hind sight i'm sure there are others that may surpass it. however, it's still damn close. i hold to my statement/opinion. now, keifer is a good actor, like i said, but this role and the roles he chooses are definitely not good enough for him. did you say this movie had an interesting plot idea???? yeah, for lifetime television maybe. the movie wasn't making my absolutely worst list until it hit absolute *beep* towards the end with it's neurotic, banal, swiss cheese style plot holes and ending. i'm not the slowest person out there, i'm pretty versed in film and can say that this definitely had the dumbest ending and probably most contrived.
my mother who adores columbo, murder she wrote and lifetime type 'mystery/thrillers' shared my sentiments. i usually can use her as a gauge with these things. you know it's crap when even she laughs at it. if she likes it, it's probably worthy of the jessica fletcher seal of approval or generically decent enough to watch instead of hearing the white noise in your head. put aside her opinion, and mine, how can anyone seriously like this movie? if you called a movie good based off one actor's general standing, i guess you could possibly remove it from the cacapile and place it in the cacapart2 pile. i wonder why keifer agreed to do this film. probably he too thought the plot seemed somewhat decent and then later saw the monstrosity for what it was and hid in shame for awhile in the ozarks or mountains of montana... (wherever he lives) i say, he needs a good role. he needs one worthy of him. i've liked him in many movies, and not particularly liked the movies themselves. but i definitely wouldn't say the movie was good just because keifer the beefer was in it. yes, i just called him the beefer. i don't know why, it's making me laugh though.

I just bought this movie on eBay a couple of weeks ago. It was really tough to find. What I liked is how it seemed like just a crime drama but then turned into a supernatural crime drama.

This was actually a very good movie.

I was guessing up until the end who did it, outside the obvious scenes of who killed who in regard to Harve (and I'm pretty good at figuring out movie endings).

Kiefer's performance was great, very Jack Bauer-ish (that's the standard I now judge Kiefer's role by).
Somewhere on this board it was asked why Kiefer does movies like this, straight to video, not Oscar worthy material, and I think it's because he is from England and he uses his name to generate backing for these Canadian/English directors to get future jobs. He's supporting either Canadian/English filmakers much like Jk rowling is by insisting only English stars can play in her Harry Pottrer movies.

Go see this movie, it's great!

I think Sutherland's amazing (most of the time) but i could not for the life of me finish this movie. He was quite convincing as an overworked drunk with personal issues but the horrible plot just makes this into a B movie.

I agree, it's way better than Taking Lives. That movie really falls apart once it's revealed Ethan Hawke's character is the guilty one.

This movie however was good from start to finish. Top-notch directing by Paul Marcus, a solid script with some fun dialogue, excellent performance by Kiefer Sutherland and I really loved the music.

The film started off well, with the cool quips and repartee of a classic noir flick. But it started falling apart mid-way. The plot became ridiculous, the smart dialogue dried up. The only thing that held it together was Kiefer Sutherland's performance. He's the only reason any of us have bothered to watch it at all.