21 DAYS is a straight-up copy of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, set in your normal suburban home haunted by spirits unknown. A trio of characters decide to set up various cameras to capture any phenomena that occurs, and the story takes place over three weeks (go figure). That's all there is to it. The video quality is perhaps too bright and high quality, robbing the movie of atmosphere, and the acting is quite unconvincing which robs the film of its realism. In the end, the scares are diluted and the sense of familiarity that pervades the film makes it a chore to sit through.

Wow...yet another disappointment and another missed opportunity for what could have been a good movie, if the characters were even remotely likable...if you could feel even a small amount of sympathy for them.

Immature kids who want to be ghost hunters and end up biting off more than they can chew.

Why is it, everyone, in particular the females, gotta scream and act like nuts?

You wanted to see something, you wanted something to happen...it did and then you whine and cry about it and lose your marbles because it wasn't Caspar the Friendly Ghost.

All of the characters, when confronted by the spooks they so wanted to experience, acted like 12 year old girls and a summer camp slumber party, telling ghost stories and get the willies.

Far too dark toward the end, I could barely tell what was happening and if the ghosts were supposed to be scary, that was an epic failure of massive proportions.

Not even good for a few jumps.

Avoid...

The title said it all. The lead was obnoxious, the supporting cast was terrible, it followed every possible cliche, the dialogue was the hottest of garbages, and 5 year old special needs kid could have written a more coherent storyline having a molly seizure. Instead of watching this movie, just go kneel in front of the nearest toilet and bash your head in between the rim and the seat for 90 minutes.

It's incredible to me that people keep putting up money to make films that have been made 100 times over the past 15 years since the Blair Witch Project. The originality and extremely low budget and high grossing revenue of that film has spawned so many pieces of crap that people keep pumping these films out like link sausages.

The plot and style of 21 days is no different then any other film of its kind....it seems, anyone with a camera and a slightly different take on hauntings and morbid curiosity to debunk ghost stories has a plot and with a few bucks, make a film. Unfortunately, we, the horror genre fan has to sit through an average of 80-90 minutes of the same Drek!

We keep on getting suckered into watching films that have no originality or narrative value and we find the same story told over and over again just dressed up differently.

Acting mediocre, lighting horrible, originality....none!

I think I'll use my hand held and get my buddy who is a sound expert and works as a freelancer and find an old barn and write a script in a day and try and make a million dollars.

Please, someone, make a good found footage or self shot horror film worth watching. I paid nothing to see this film and still feel I was ripped off!

Flat out crap!!

This is a little bit of the paranormal activity MARKED ONES film as well as that movie itself and GRAVE ENCOUNTERS. I gave the filmmaker credit for creating a backstory for the film so that it is a complete story instead of some jump scares and then the camera drops.

I know many filmmakers make their start in the found footage genre since it's relatively cheap to film in. So, if you're going to do a FF, then make the effort to make it different. In this case, the film succeeds. Locked in a haunted house for 21 days with cameras everywhere, how does an object move from the barn to the house? Creepy...but ultimately, why? Just the spirits/demons playing tricks and if so, on us or the characters? Nothing is really made of this event other than "WTF?" If it kept occurring, with more dangerous items being transported, it would have added a nice twist. Other than that, we get the doors closing, furniture jumping about, etc. All good stuff, always creepy, but we've seen it before.

The problem with ALL found footage is the last ten minutes. People screaming and cross talking over themselves. It's always a mess and this is no different. The good this is there is a coda that explains a bit more so your last image isn't a dropped camera.

There are some terrific ideas here that I wish had been explored more--they were different and could have taken the film in a different direction. But I liked it and enjoyed my time with it!

If it wasn't for the three pretty young faces filling the screen, there would be nothing salvagable at all about this film. Terrible over-acting, along with shoddy dialogue and a propensity for profanity from the main character seem to the be the only strengths to this piece.

It feels like the producers were aiming for a Blair Witch meets Paranormal Activity product, but in the end they fell woefully short of either benchmark. There were quite literally no scares, and nothing at all to make you feel any sort of compassion for the characters.

The sole redeeming quality of this film was the inclusion of Whitney Rose Pynn, who at least brought some real emotion to the story.

But as has been stated in other reviews, as is the case with all of these found-footage films, in the end the whole mess degenerates into a cacophony of shaking images, screaming voices layered over one another, and nothing you can really see to tell you what is actually happening.

High time for the found footage craze to be over. This should be the nail in that coffin.

I couldn't even watch 21 mins of this movie, the main actors "filmmakers" were a little too overly aggressive and lacking in common sense within the first 15 mins.

** Kind of a spoiler but not really ...

** First Scene: They aggressively seek out a woman and son who were haunted, they run on to her property screaming her name and yelling questions at her. She freaks out and yells at them and they have the nerve to say "what the hell was that?"

So sad, I had such high hopes.

I was really quite impressed with this movie. I always go into these B horror movies with low expectations so maybe that helps. It really was quite creepy at times. I found every one of the peranormal state movies were absolutely awful. Similar premise but I'd take this movie any day of the week over those. If you like horror movies and have 90 minutes to kill I recommend you give it a go.

Save your time and watch better found footage movies like Grave Encounters, Cloverfield and Diary of the Dead.

None of the characters are particularly well-developed or sympathetic, but Jacob is intolerable. I kept praying he would go mute like the house's past tenants.

There is paranormal activity on the monitors immediately that is seemingly overlooked by the film makers. This film takes slow building to the next level, to the point of being completely innefectual. Add in oddly timed shrieks, wimpering and stiffly-acted yelling, and the only emotion this film provokes is annoyance.

Hard pass from this loyal horror fan.

If you're looking for anything particularly original from "21 Days" don't waste your time. There really isn't much original. It's a haunted house story. The house has apparently had several owners over the century plus since it's been built. None of them have remained in the house for more than 21 days - and some have ended up dead after leaving. So three young film-makers decide to take up residence in the house, to last the 21 days while documenting their experiences. So, yes, it's also a found footage sort of movie, although it's not all found footage. But there's not really much to this. There are the traditional "things that go bump in the night" sort of events, but really nothing much frightening happens until the last 15 minutes or so. It's a little bit creepy at times, but no more than that. The cast was entirely unknown (to me at least.) I do't think I've ever seen any of the three leads in anything until this. They were all right. Nothing more.

There were some bizarre things about this movie. It opens with the three interviewing a local town historian about the house. I wondered how the local town historian had actual family photographs of the people who had lived in the house - including the most recent family. That in itself seemed a bit weird. And with the house in foreclosure why would the bank allow these kids to do this? And why would they be allowed to literally barricade themselves inside the house so that no one or nothing could get in or out. Sure it works as a plot device - but wouldn't even the local town authorities have some objections to that based on a fire code or something?

Like most movies featuring found footage, there's no real resolution to this. Just a lingering mystery. But because it's a very ho hum movie that doesn't really set itself apart within either genre (haunted house or found footage) it won't be memorable enough for the mystery to remain with you for very long.

Use it as a time waster - but it's no more than that. (4/10)

seems like a very low budget film,most of the actors was OK, but the scene where the guy screams like a girl was funny.. i am horror/creepy movie addict, always waiting for the next conjuring,sinister,paranormal activity,the nightmare type of clip. so i hope this year can show us a new topic/plot guaranteed to bring paranoia and nightmares.

Why this film can get many award when i feel it not wort it. this film just an ordinary film if compare with other film??

This was a fun, serviceable horror movie. it breaks no new ground, doesn't experiment much with anything new or innovative, but I cannot say much bad about it in any other regard. it's the sort of thing to enjoy after exhausting your supply of other horror movies