IMDb user comments for
FeardotCom (2002)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

367 comments in total

---

25 out of 31 people found the following comment useful :-
FearNotCom, 22 December 2004

Author: mfrost8232 from Luxembourg

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

'Feardotcom' was filmed in Luxembourg (apparently standing in for New York, I think.) and hasn't been officially released yet. I saw it as one of the featured films during the Luxembourg International Film festival. (Cinenygma) - One of the executive producers, who introduced the film, said it wasn't 100% finished yet, and that even the title might change. However, since every second of the film was even more tortuous than the depravities depicted on the screen, I believe no amount of focus groups or editing could save this film. I'd say 'straight to video', but that would be a major waste of plastic and cardboard. I suppose if they market it as a parody, they might salvage the cost of, um, the catering during the film.

Stephen Dorff plays a hard-boiled detective who's haunted by that one case that was never solved. You know he's haunted because he walks around with a 3 day growth of beard. Which stays at the same length the whole film, even though the film covers quite a few days (it was hard tell, nothing was very coherent) And guess what! His old nemesis from the unsolved case is killing again! Oh boy! And since we now have new cases to solve, AND they're dying from what looks to be a virus, we need to bring in the woman scientist and nominal love interest (Natascha McElhone - who displayed quite amply in 'The Truman Show' that she can't act. She must work cheap, or maybe they needed someone to make Dorff look good.) We know she's a scientist because she wears glasses. And just for grins we get Jeffrey Coombs as Dorff's partner, whose main role appears to be running around spouting non-sequiturs. Speaking of which, there was a writer listed for the film but I'd bet a Ben Franklin that they were making up the dialog as they went along, and probably for a different film. It's too bad 'Deep Space 9' went off the air - it might have prevented Coombs from getting caught up in this travesty. And there's Stephen Rea as the mad scientist, looking vaguely like Geoffrey Rush mad scientist character in 'Mystery Men.' Now, I could have sworn Rea could act, so maybe they are two of them? Amazingly a director is also listed, but from what I can tell they pretty much turned on the camera, came back later, took the film to the editing room, forgot to turn on the lights and just started editing. That would explain a lot.

And what of the plot? Ha! There isn't one! Well, OK, maybe a little one. I think the deal was that the girl killed in the unsolved case somehow inhabited the internet and is killing people if they log on to the mad scientist's site, where HE tortures women until they beg him to kill them - and all for $9.95! (but just for grins they (the unfortunates who log into fear.com) only die after 48 hours, because, I think, that's how long it took her to be killed) But I think you'd need a broadband connection, because somehow when you login, this girl living in the internet puts a hex on you, which involves you falling off your chair and eventually trashing your apartment and nose bleeds, and um, dying from the fright of your worst fear (like being cast in this movie) and I really don't think that could happen with a dial up connection. Um, anyway, she's going to keep on killing people unless the mad scientist is caught. And her body is found too. I mean they threw that bit in there about finding the body, but then when it was found, it didn't count for anything! Now, doesn't that just bite. Damn fickle internet ghosts.

**SPOILER**

Actually this whole film was a spoiler, at least it smelled spoiled to me. Anyway - the final scene where Dorff and the McElhone rush into the mad scientist's lair (located in an abandoned steel mill or nuclear plant - the film couldn't make up it's mind what it was - it identified it as both during different scenes in the film) and stop him only seconds before he's going to kill his latest victim had me rolling in the aisle with laughter. It was just like watching an old horror film from the 30's or 40's. Maniacal laughter, bug-eyed expressions of madness, flashing lights, tilted camera angles. So they manage to save the girl, but then the mad scientist shoots Dorff, and then stabs McElhone then Dorff grabs a keyboard and logs into feardot.com which drives the mad scientist so mad - he dies from fear! Then Dorff dies, and McElhone, who was in love with Dorff (oh, did I leave that part out? - apparently they fell madly in love in some 30 second scene earlier in the film - some real in-depth character development going on here.) sort of cries over his body, but um, somehow she's no longer stabbed! Maybe it was her Multi-vitamin.

**END OF SPOILER**

So -um, in conclusion - I can't imagine any changes to this film possibly making it watchable. I'll be surprised if gets released at all (though the executive producer said Warner Bros had picked it up for US distribution, and Columbia-Tri-Star for the rest of the world. Let's hope they come to their senses.) You have been warned. Go watch 'Donnie Darko' instead!

---

26 out of 36 people found the following comment useful :-
Terrible, 30 July 2003

Author: rbverhoef (rbverhoef@hotmail.com) from The Hague, Netherlands

Not far in the movie I realized I was watching a terrible version of 'Ringu', the Japanese movie that inspired a very good US movie named 'The Ring'. It has the same elements. A medium that kills because you watch it (in 'The Ring' a videotape, here an internet-site), a little girl that is probably the key to solve the problem, a woman and a guy searching for the answer, both saw the site and therefor they both have to hurry, and why they have to hurry has something to do with earlier events. Here they have 48 hours to solve this mystery that involves The Doctor, a killer who broadcasts live killings over the internet. Well, not just killings. He tortures a woman for a long time and in the end there must be a point where the woman asks him to be killed. And so it is done.

To tell more about the messy plot would be stupid. I am not even sure if I understand everything. After you have seen the internet-site you die of your worst fear in 48 hours, that I did understand, but why do 'infected' people see the little girl over and over again while she herself was killed as an adult? I probably missed it but like I said it doesn't really matter. The scary visuals have something admirable. The images are really haunting but again I liked the videotape from 'The Ring' a lot more. May be you will like it for the images and some scary moments, but I think you can find a better movie. 'The Ring' may be.

---

20 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
No wonder people claim the horror genre is dead…, 23 January 2005

Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls

If the survival of horror films depends on titles such as this "FearDotCom", we are indeed facing the downfall of the genre. This is lame, uninspired and repetitive garbage that irritates you from start to finish. Director William Malone's idea of suspense exists out of underexposed and fuzzy images of murders edited together in boisterous flashes that actually show you NOTHING. Add a poorly written script about a murderous website and completely unconvincing characters to this and you've got yourself one of the biggest cinema-turkeys since the new millennium. If the premise of this film rings a bell, it means that you recognize it from the Japanese cult hit "Ringu"…. Or the slightly inferior American remake "the Ring". Only, the videotape has been replaced by an internet website and the poor victims have only 2 days left to live after being exposed instead of 7. Typical for an unscrupulous rip-off…Faster, louder and modernized! The elaboration is a mess: weak dialogue, plot holes all over the place, no style or atmosphere and very bad acting. I can't believe class actors like Udo Kier and Stephen Rea were talked into accepting roles like this? Surely they can still do better even though they both have seen their best times. Stephen Dorff and the leading lady deliver lousy performances in roles that really don't fit them. Dorff as a tough, experienced copper? Doubtful… Perhaps what annoyed me most about the cast (shallow, I admit) is seeing how one of my all-time favorite B-actors, Jeffrey Combs, is given such a small and insignificant role! That's Doctor Herbert West from Re-Animator we're talking about, dammit! Show a little more respect, Malone! If you love horror, you should avoid "FearDotCom" at all costs! It's bad for your nerve system.

---

28 out of 44 people found the following comment useful :-
Stupid Dot com, 30 August 2002

Author: mm-39 from Winnipeg

I hate horror movies that evolve into a waste of time. The plot becomes too unbelievabe, and gets across as stupid. This film starts out all right, and is a cross between 8mm and Videodrome. The idea of a virus invading the mind threw the optic nerve, and attacking the eletormagnetic impulses in the mind is scary, and I hope will never become a reality. Instead of following up on this scary idea, the movie become too unbelievable. It contains idiotic scenes where the viewer says to himself you got to be kidding! I wish I saved the $15 for my wife and myself, but it has been a awful summer for movies. 3/10

---

8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
a waste of time, 31 August 2005
Author: maverick_2009

This film is all about piercing your psyche and i think that it really is a good movie (for about the first 45 minutes)then it just completely changes track and spins out of control to a very anti climactic ending, a waste of Good actors both Stephen Dorff and Natascha McElhone are actors who deserves much better, feardotcom was a good movie if you only watch it once or just watch for 45 minutes as i've said before, it just spins out of control and you don't make sense out of anything. the only reason that i gave it a two is that Stephen Sorff and Natascha McElhone, have great screen chemistry, don't watch this one unless you haven't seen the ring or the grudge which both rock in comparison to this one , a waste of time is the only thing i can think of

---

10 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
Your Fears Are Justified!, 2 February 2003

Author: dromasca from Herzlya, Israel

This movie has one of the best titles I remember lately, but unfortunately there are not too much more good things to say about it. A good idea turns into a completely absurd story, and I challenge somebody (maybe the script author) to explain me the logic behind what happens on the screen. OK, one should not expect too much logic from a horror movie, but the rest is poor quality as well - bad acting, a lot of cheap violence, and very little real thrill. There is some hidden quality and good pace in the filming, but it gets lost because of the lack of coherence of the story. Avoid this film, unless you are one of these guys who never lose any horror movie. 5/10 on my personal scale.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Wow. . I could have watched paint dry instead!, 22 March 2006

Author: moovie_grrl from United States

I've seen my fair share of bad movies. But I can honestly say that this is in my top 3 worst movies. Usually, when I see an extremely bad film, it's so awful that it's funny - which makes it somewhat entertaining. But this film went into another and far worse category. A film so awful that I got a headache - not because the plot was so complex and intelligent, but because the plot was so ridiculous and unrealistic.

It's simple: when you go in search of a killer, call for backup. Don't go alone into an empty building. Have some common sense! Unfortunatelt, all the characters in FeardotCom, seem to have been born without the common sense gene.

I could suffer through dozens of cheesy horror flicks where the victim getting chased by a killer conveniently trips and falls down while the killer get increasingly closer. . . I could even suffer through poor acting in a horror flick if the plot is entertaining and at least scary.

But, when the plot of a film is neither logical nor entertaining you get one movie: FeardotCom

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Decline of tne new millennium..., 20 December 2006
Author: insomniac_rod from Noctropolis

And I wanted to see this movie back in 2002! I'm glad, no, I'm proud that I didn't waste my money on this movie back in 2002 when it premiered on theaters.

This is one of the worst Horror movies from the new millennium and not even Mr. Stephen Dorff (known better for his B-movie roles) could save this from the trash can.

The plot had potential but it's poorly executed and makes "The Ring" look like a masterpiece.

The f/x are CGI mediocrity and there isn't any remarkable production value.

My advice is : forget about this movie. It's not worth your time, money, or anything. It's not even recommended to make fun about it.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
"A Killer Web-Site Is About As Scary As A Killer Videotape", 26 June 2006

Author: Matt_Layden from Canada

Four bodies are found in New York City. Is there a coincidence? Well, they all died 48 hours after logging into the site FEARDOTCOM.COM....yes, it's feardotcom.COM

Sounds like the ring eh, well it is and it isn't, because with the Ring, you get more into the reasoning behind the video tape, in this movie you have some guy filming himself killing people, then people die from their worst fear after going to feardotcom....sorry feardotcom.com. This film falls into the category of "RIPOFF".

After seeing the opening scene I know that this movie would be average at best....I was wrong, it was below average. If you have a choice of this or the ring...make the smarter one, and see the ring. Or better yet, go and see Ringu, it's atmosphere and creep factor outshine both of these films. Notice I'm talking about other films, other then FEATDOTCOM, that's how bad it is.

Let's judge the similarities shall we?

People die after seeing web-site.

People die after seeing a video.

The lead female discovers a dead body in the water.

The lead female discovers a dead body in the water.

The dead body is from a little girl that people see before they die.

The dead body is from a little girl that people see before they die.

After they're dead, they have a terrified look on their face.

After they're dead, they have a terrified look on their face.

Should I tell you which scenario is from which movie...does it really matter?

At least Dorff entertained me for a little while, but please kill everyone else in the damn movie. Even the great Combs was underused and abused.

"I think your perfect for the lead role, come with me"

"well, I don't know you, and you look kinda freaky, but what the hell, I'll go with you and tell no one, and surely sign my death warrant"

Well, maybe that last bit wasn't in the movie but it might as well should have been.

PLEASE!!! This movie is really really terrible, I can't stress this enough. I found myself trying really hard to like it, and ended up hating it even more and who the hell at the age of 5 plays at a STEEL MILL??? Let alone a blonde girl with a white ball. The script and directing in this movie really brings it down because it has no idea what's it's doing. It seemed like they watched the Ring and decided to bring it into the new generation of viewers and make it the internet. It has nothing going for it, besides the cool looking box-art, which we see once or twice in the movie.

---

10 out of 16 people found the following comment useful :-
The 'Ringu' of Internet – A Ghost Story, 22 October 2004

Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

After some mysterious deaths showing the same symptoms in the victims, Terry Huston (Natascha McElhone), from the Department of Health, investigates the possibility of a virus in the city with Homicide Detective Mike Reilly (Stephen Dorff). However, they realize that all the victims have visited an Internet site called 'www.fear.com' forty-eight hours before dying. A further investigation shows that there is a ghost on the web killing its users. Meanwhile, Detective Mike Reilly is also investigating a murderer called Alistair Pratt, 'The Doctor' (Stephen Rea). This movie has good and bad points. The story is plagiarized from the excellent and original Japanese 'Ringu', but the American 'The Ring' was a copy and became a success. There are some flaws along the confused plot. But there are also interesting points. For example, the dark and rainy atmosphere recalls 'Seven'. There is a sort of contrast between the modern (computer, Internet, cars) and life in the 30's or 40's (old buildings, classic costumes and furniture), recalling a film-noir, with a beautiful photography and style. There are also some reasonable special effects. The cast is slightly above average, with Natascha McElhone, Stephen Rea and Stephen Dorff. Therefore I dare to say that it is a watchable movie and I do not agree with the User Rating. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): 'MedoPontoCombr' ('FearDotCom')

---

---

Page 1 of 37:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history