Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

gohurdler1 "In the Loop" was a pretty god awful show for many reasons. One reason was the interactive part of the show via the web. This was primarily useful if you were in a market that was actually airing the show live, if not, you would have to try and get up earlier or at a different time to try to interact with the show, which is lame if you can't actually watch it at the same time.Secondly the program's hosts were another reason this show tanked. Bill Rancic, apparently winning a reality show means that you are a superb actor/TV host and that you should have your own show. Sorry Mr. Rancic, but that phony TV jerk smile didn't fly on this show. He exuded the aholeness of a human resources rep telling you that it's nothing personal but you are fired. This show was primarily geared towards women, so I have no idea why they had stiff Rancic co-hosting. Kim Coles gave the appearance of having ADHD while being a co-host. She was just a tad annoying because of that. She didn't seem to act like a host but more like a fan who somehow got on stage by mistake to ask questions. Ereka Vetrini, should I even go there? Again being on a reality show doesn't mean that you are talented enough to be an actor in a movie or a TV show host. Vetrini seemed like the overshadowed little sister on this program because of the stronger and louder personalities of Rancic and Coles. The hosts were just not compelling enough to tune into.Another reason that this show tanked was that it was geared towards women and not both sexes. Seriously why even have a male host if you are going to just deal with women's issues? Oh, and it was located in Chicago, which seems irrational because most of the talent that can be booked as guests are either in Los Angeles or New York. I recall Rancic or one of the other hosts frequently being in LA to do interviews with celebrities vs. being actually on set of "In the Loop." "In the Loop's" predecessor show "iVillage Live" originated in Orlando Florida. Seriously didn't NBC learn from their first mistake with the location problem? "iVillage Live" was actually worse than "In the Loop with iVillage."