Most of this movie is good. Unsettling even. But, the end of the movie (without going into details that might ruin it for those who haven't seen it) made me laugh out loud at its ridiculousness. After I stopped laughing, I was mad that I had spent 3 dollars on this movie. I'm not a movie-maker, or a script-writer, but I think that your average person could have written a better (at least more unsettling) ending than they did. The silliness isn't even limited to the script. The camera movements at the end left me with a couple questions. Who, for instance, is filming if the narrator isn't holding the camera (as was the case during the rest of the movie)? It still looks like a hand-held shot which leaves me asking who is this other person helping the narrator film? I'm sure the filmmakers wanted the perspective to be switched to "outside observer" instead of seeing events through the narrator's documentary lens, but then, shouldn't they have used a still shot or at least a mounted camera to avoid the viewer thinking that someone else is hand-holding the camera? It left me a bit confused, but mostly disappointed that the filmmakers seemed to rap this film up at the end without really taking time to make the ending as unsettling as the first 3/4 of it.