Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Again, as i have said for other films, this is not entertainment unless you are a certified psychopath. I am quite sure the director of this film worships Satan and wishes that he was the main character of this film who brutally tortures the other characters and kills them and leaves one alive to suffer for only God knows how long and gets away with it never coming to justice. The message behind this film is a serious one sent form a truly sadistic person who really wishes that evil would always win. If you are a psychopath and going into the mind of Satan is your favorite thing to do, then you will love this but if you are just a normal person who likes to be scared and entertained, don't watch this satanic sh#t!

I can't believe what I just watched... I love horror/gore/terror in films, but this was just ... something else. If you want your boundaries tested beyond the point of entertainment, watch this film. The Saw franchise has nothing on Dread.I can't stand films where the antagonist ruins countless lives and experiences no consequences. I can't stand films where the protagonist dies an underserved death which isn't necessary. This is a pretty bad review, I know. I've been sitting here for a while trying to express how I feel after that experiences. The purpose of the film was probably to achieve this exact reaction so I guess the filmmakers succeeded. Uuuuuurrrrggggggghhhhh I just feel so dirty! Never again.

Highly refreshing; monumental horror of the modern era. Dread is a flawless mix of storytelling and gruesome, sadistic terror. Its deeply original, and should be extremely discomforting even for toughened horror followers. Beneath unrelenting suspense is a dark and addictive tale of college buddies and one truly demented individual. 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. I search extensively for top notch horror cinema and Dread is at the forefront of what I've come across. The essence of the horror story is captured in every way in this movie.

I waited years for this Clive Barker short story to be made into a movie because the premise of it was just too good to be true. As I sat down to watch it I was confident that I would enjoy the ending, because I knew the story. How hard could this be -- to keep to the story's main theme -- I wondered smugly as I hit "Play"? Apparently, too hard.I loved the acting, and I enjoyed the character development. If you have never read Clive Barker's "Dread," then you will enjoy this movie. It is well-made, I was not aware of budget corners being cut, and the follow-through with production was solid. So what is my issue? My issue is that *SPOILER* the theme of the short story was totally bastardized. Now that we have established that this is a SPOILER review, I will elaborate: Do not read further if you do not want to know about the movie's main issues or do not already know about the story's ending. Stop here, watch the movie, and then read the story afterward. Then I hope you will agree with me.In "Dread," Barker writes about an experiment that someone is doing on human subjects in which the subjects bare their worst fears. The problem is that the human subjects do not realize that the experiment will take on an illegal and horrific stance: The person conducting the experiment begins to hold the subjects against their wills and expose them to their worst fears. The character from whom we see second person single perspective for much of the story is afraid of being totally isolated, sense-wise, due to a childhood trauma. The experimenter finds a way to do this to him, and the victim breaks. Another victim is a vegan, and she is made to eat meat. In the end, the person hurting these subjects is hacked to bits by one of the subjects, one whom he drove insane. The brilliant catch? The mad scientist guy is terrified of clowns, and the person whom he drove nuts, who comes back to kill him, was found on the streets, placed in a homeless shelter, dressed in clothes that didn't fit him (like a CLOWN), and then returns to hack the man into pieces. Do you see the brilliance in this? It is so simple. Barker writes a story about complete and utter satisfying revenge coupled with the most awesome case of "do unto others" that may have graced the horror world in past years.However, the people who made this film decided to lose the brilliance and go nuts on the vegan girl. Yes, let's lose the main plot in favor of torturing a vegetarian, because we all like to hate those green pinko hippies.The ending sucked so hard I can swear that I was being pulled toward the TV when its final minutes played out. As I clung to the arm of our sofa and my legs reached horizontal status due to the black hole-like suction of the ending's worthless let-down, I felt this overwhelming sense of sadness. Clive Barker works so hard to make us do what Stephen King and Lovecraft do, which is to jump from two feet out when we go to bed. We can't just walk to the bed and lie down, because something is under the bed, waiting to grab our legs, and it likes to eat the heads last. (King says the head probably tastes the best.) Because Barker is continuing with this tradition of making us do late-night, last-minute, spastic aerobics, Barker should be rewarded with talented filmmakers preserving the main theme of his story. He wasn't in this instance, though, and it ticked me off.My advice to you? Watch this film first, and then read the short story. Save the best for last.