source: Johnny Frank Garrett's Last Word

Creepy, feeling of dread through out the film that keeps the viewer watching. Simon Rumley is an excellent director I have seen most of his films and love them. The low rating is not warranted and is likely from individuals who enjoy movies starring the Rock or other popcorn fluff movies. Good writing and direction , all cast members do a fine job. I hope to see more from Mr. Rumley.. I encourage you to check out his Red White & Blue, Fashionista, The living and the dead. All well made films about the dark underbelly.. this film certainly deserves a higher rating.

Look its not the best movie. It not really horror I would say. It has some in it but more drama thriller. I liked the overall story the acting was fine just could have been done better. They should of added more stuff and took some unnecessary scenes out. But still worth a watch if u need to kill some time.

I went school with ALL the Garretts...even hung around with one of the sisters from time to time.... Johnny was a lil slow BUT would NEVER hurt a fly...thats y we were all shocked when this happened...his siblings were more pron to committing a crim than Johnny...he was always a sweet HELPFUL person...up to this day i dont thi b j he did it...he was slow but a sweet boy..and he was only a few yrs older than me..the totally put the wrong person to death!,......,........THIS IS HOW I K EW JOHNNY AND HIS FAMILY AND IF ANY OF YALL WILL WATCH THE LAST WORDS OF HIM BF DYING.. .. U WOULD UNDERSTAND BUT I KNOW FROM GROWING UP WITH HIM AND HIS FAMILY...and i know there r ppl who say this kind of things...but realize he was home when it happened.

The acting was great .The story was good and made perfect sense...I don't know why people are saying it was confusing, maybe state what was confusing and the people who understood the movie can explain it to you. Idk what everyone's.problem is. It's a good movie!

From the acting to directing to the editing to the writing- all absolutely terrible. I think a high school class could have made a better movie. Don't waste your time.

I liked the story and yes, I don't know the history behind it so I just went with it. I am still going through it, the issue I have is some of the minor actors. I think the lead actors are strong, but the other ones are just bad. Like in the jury room. Like they grabbed a bunch of extras from holding and gave them lines. Good for the actors bad for the film. Here is where I think they could have done better.

Really fizzed out after that. Was lackluster and boring. I didn't really find much that got me into it. 3/10

The premise is good. A man wrongly sentenced to die for a crime he didn't commit, comes back for revenge.. The trailer looked promising, unfortunately if you have watched the trailer then there's no reason to watch the film.. Its very long winded, nothing really happens for along time, its almost as if they just said "that'll do". It tries to be complicated but it isn't. Tho the movie drags on, the music is annoying, the cast are good but their accents change thru out the film and that's annoying.. I give 3 starts because the first half hour is good, after that tho it all becomes very boring. Its not a film I'd watch again. A real waste of what could have been a good horror script.

This is a campfire ghost story with delusions of being a film. Even the line of text we are given in the end has the feeling of "hanging from the door handle was a BLOODY HOOK!" The choices in color saturation felt contrived. The filmmaker might as well have put captions in "this is a hallucination... this part is supposed to be scary." There were some odd, amateurish editing choices (such as phone calls where the view jumped back and forth between the main character and a side character, such as a secretary we will never see again, when a voice heard on the other end of the line would have been less distracting and just as useful). Most of the characters manage to be both overwrought and entirely two-dimensional. Many of them were just thrown in oddly for no apparent purpose other than to beef up the time. Basically, as I said, it's a campfire tale. Someone tried to flesh it out enough to fill the time required for a movie, but most of it was not only unnecessary, it was distracting. Ultimately, the question for this film isn't whether it was good or bad, but "why?"