everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

I am not joking when I give this movie 2 thumbs up. The star of the movie in my humble op ion was the actress who played Sarah. According to the movie credits her name in Ashley Morgan.I found her performance in this feature to be nothing short of Oscar worthy.. I can't wait for the sequel, I hope there is on.. Ashley was an absolute scene stealer. I found myself routing loudly for her character.I honestly found this movie very entertaining, I found it accidentally when go ogling the movie Inception.I now have seen both movies, and dollar for dollar I would rather watch Interception every time.I mean, I still don't understand the plot of that first movie, I don't know who was asleep and when,or even why the characters kept going to sleep and dreaming more and more dreams.At least, I could follow the plot in this movie. I bet dollars to donuts, Ashley Morgan goes on to become a famous actress.

Most of the other reviewers have it right, but no one mentioned the inconsistencies. Here's a list. 1: There is a disk that will be used to set off or turn off an atomic devise and it has to be encrypted before it will work. Apparently any method of encryption will work. It might make more sense if an unencrypted disk was needed. 2: When the main guy is handcuffed behind his back and not tied to anything, he apparently believes he needs to get un-handcuffed before he can make his break. 3: Similarly, when the girl has her hands tied and mouth taped, that seems to be enough to keep her from trying to escape. 4: The nuclear bomb is blown up with a smaller bomb to disable it, but no one seems to worry about radiation and there is none reported 5: The bad guy wants to blow up a large Colosseum with gobs of people in it so that he can sell the plans for making the device to other terrorists. Are plans what is needed for any terrorist to make a nuclear device? Wouldn't detonating almost anywhere be as good for advertising purposes? 6: When our hero tries to get the water out of the lungs of the lady after going under water, his first attempt seems to be to exert pressure on her neck, not her chest. 7: When they use a card to break in on a Saturday in a highly regarded information center, there is no one on guard. You just need the entry card. Meanwhile the bad guys find a way in without a card. It's never shown how. These were just the things that jumped out at me during the playing. I'm sure that if I were to see it again (not a chance) and looked for the problems, I could double or triple the list. So, if someone ties your hands behind your back and puts tape on your mouth and makes you watch this movie, just walk away.

It lists "A Clay Brothers Film" as if that will mean something. Who you may ask are the Clay Brothers? I'm not sure. One, the co director and star John Will Clay was, according to IMDb a volleyball coach in a Hannah Montana movie, a Sailor in Deja Vu and an uncredited groomsman in Elizabethtown. His brother's credits seem to be only this movie. Neither their credits not this film make me think that they'll be the next big thing anytime soon.The plot of the film has a computer programmer getting the code key for a prototype weapon that was stolen by terrorists. The terrorists need the key to set off the weapon and so the chase is on.Low budget film might have been something had the script been better, the directing more imaginative and the performances better modulated. The film is such that it looks good and actually reasonably professional (and trust me I've seen a great deal of bad looking films lately) but there is no clear indication as to whether the film is serious or not. Take for example the scene where star John Clay is grilled by a policeman after bringing someone to the hospital. The dialog is incredibly silly in that its of the Dragnet just the facts style of writing. Adding insult to injury is the performance of the actor playing the cop who seems to be mugging to the camera. Clay isn't much better since he seems to be reacting to a scene that is playing in his head and not what is going on in front of him. I wasn't sure if I was suppose to laugh or feel tension Actually I did neither and reached for the remote in anticipation of needing it for a rapid exit. This is just a silly movie. (Its also a film that feels like its a glorified home movie with all the friends and family being brought in to be part of it).Its a mess.To be honest I think the heading over the title should be changed from "A Clay Brothers Film" to "THE Clay Brothers Film" since I'm not sure that there will be another.

The premise of the movie seemed interesting, so I gave it a watch. Unfortunately, the acting was so horrible that I couldn't focus on the movie. This movie will probably stay in my "worst 10" list for a while. Why? The acting is beyond bad - all of the actors exhibit delayed, awkward, or incorrect emotions in almost every scene. It seems like the director/writer couldn't figure out whether they wanted a drama, comedy, or tragedy - so they mixed it all up.It's a really awkward film with bad directing, acting, and plot. Some movies are so bad that they're funny, but this movie is just painful to watch because it's bad but tries to pretend like it's not.In short, it's the first movie we've watched where my fiancé has said "We can turn this off if you want - this is horrible." If you want to see what a movie would be like with no real plot and bad acting and directing, by all means watch this movie. If you want to be entertained, however - stay away.