Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

radioflyerpunk I don't take any pleasure in sticking the boot in on a film so woeful, but I have to write this purely for selfish reasons. See, what keeps happening is this: I see a film called Don't let Him In listed, and it captures my attention. So, my interest piqued – I enjoy even below average horror films, mostly – I look at the synopsis. And I think, "Sounds good." So I set it to record, and look forward to watching it. Then, when the mood takes and I have the two hours set aside, I sit down to watch it. Get a few snacks ready. A drink. Lights down. And then I play the movie.The first few seconds are fine. But then: a vague gnawing in my stomach. Not the good kind of edginess a decent horror might give you; rather, an uneasy feeling that I'm an idiot who doesn't learn from previous mistakes. But I'm unsure, and keep watching, hoping vainly that maybe I'm wrong. But the opening sequence ends, and I see that shot of houses. And it sinks in. The dread and discomfiture spread through me. Then, the next shot of the house. I'm still not absolutely convinced, but in my heart, I know. Then the killer blow: the shot – THAT shot – in the kitchen. The skewiff, seemingly rushed framing. The ropey sound recording. The stiff acting from miscast people who seem unsure about what they're doing. I can't ignore the truth anymore: I've been here before – several times. Because, like my own private horror movie, this keeps happening to me.I keep recording Don't Let Him In, having forgotten that I've seen it, and that it was – truly – one of the worst things I've ever sat through. And I seem to block it from my mind (that perfectly generic title is so easy to separate from the film it belongs to) and forget that it ever happened, and record it again, and sit down to watch again, and I am swamped with anger and disappointment. I stop the film as the girl is doing her best to act like someone coughing in bed, and delete it, promising to never let this happen again. A few months later, I see a film listed called Don't Let Him In, and think, "Hmm, that might be interesting..." So: enough. This ends, now, here. As said above, I take no satisfaction in trashing these folks' movie, which I'm sure they worked hard on. Plenty of others here have gone into the details of what makes it so awful (as well as some shameless shills giving it 9 and 10...seriously: at least try and be cleverer about lying on behalf of your friends/employers), so I won't do that.All I want to do is say to myself: Please. Remember. You have seen the British horror film called Don't let Him In. You gave it 1/10 on IMDb. Learn. Stop forgetting that you've been here before. See the warnings earlier. Recognise the title. Do not set to record.Make this the last time. Burn the title into your mind: DON'T LET HIM IN. You can't keep doing this to yourself.Here's hoping.

Leofwine_draca At first glance, DON'T LET HIM IN is an intriguing slice of low budget British horror. The plot sees a group of four 20-somethings travelling to rural Devon for a restful weekend, only to get caught up in the ferocious antics of the 'Tree Surgeon', a serial killer who enjoys hanging the body parts of his victims from trees. What follows is a tale packed with twists and turns as character motivations and hidden secrets come to the fore.In terms of production values, DON'T LET HIM IN is a perfectly serviceable slice of low budget entertainment. The setting is atmospheric and the performances are decent, even though a couple of the characters are completely annoying. The film isn't outrageously gory but there are some bloody moments along the way. So what, then, is the problem? Well, it lies with the script, which relies on contrived situations and unbelievable actions on the part of the characters for effect. These people do the dumbest things imaginable to further the story, and at a certain point you just stop buying it. The story also ends about 20 minutes before the running time, leading to a boring extra scene tacked onto the end. Not great.

Michael 'Hallows Eve' Smillie The only reason I watched it is because I paid $4 to see it (and I feel ripped off). So I put a scratch through it and took it back and said I couldn't watch it so they said I could get a replacement movie for free. I win. :) This movie had it all, bad acting, cliché storyline, and you have no interest for the characters. I couldn't wait to see them die. I watched this up to the end just to see if it got any better at some stage... and I'm still waiting for it to get better! This is a case of where the cover looks good... and that's all that is good, apart from some of the death scenes. But a good death scene does not a movie make as they say. There is a cool eye scene though, you'll know what I mean if you have already seen it. So in summary, I thought it was *expletive* and give it a 2 out of 10, ONLY because it had a couple of okay bloody scenes.

skanktilludrop This movie was a complete waste of my time. It was as if a middle schooler with no imagination wrote it and never had it edited. The film was predictable and lacked any suspenseful moments. In addition, the plot failed to make any sense. The way the characters were killed off gave no real reason to the question, why? Furthermore, where was the gore and guts, I thought this was a horror film? The cut off scenes proved to be insignificant and rather than keeping the viewer interested it left them tired and confused. The film was sloppy, irresponsible, and showed no balls.Though I thought this film was terrible I must mention aspects I liked. The portrayal of an asocial serial killer was mainly comparable with what would match a FBI profile. This is especially so with the killer's calling card as it was consistent in each murder. However, in real life the killer wouldn't target people he knew and would generally be more careful over all.