And as such, it reaches a kind of brilliance.
At no time do you get a sense of anyone else, other than the tiny cast, populating what is clearly a tiny derelict set ,representing the bustling Alcatraz of 1937/42.
There are only 2 sweeping external views of Alcatraz, one by air, one by sea. In one, you get a glimpse of one of the modern passenger ferries that go and fro. In both, the place is clearly , as it is in the indoor sets, derelict.
It's almost an unsettling effect of how deserted the place is from start to finish, and how all we get to see are 2 tiny empty corridors (one with a pair of fold away chairs in) and 2 tiny offices.
I would say this is best reviewed as a 5th form movie project. Clearly the director is studying the arts, and has been told to study a Shakespeare play, which is the only possible explanation for the shallow, poorly executed references to hamlet that keep cropping up.
Anyone who has reviewed this higher than 2 stars is clearly related to the director or on the payroll.
The only thing that is in any way disconcerting about the whole movie is that the "ghost" is called Ed Wutz, pronounced more like "woods" which makes me wonder whether there is a small chance that it may actually be a deliberate pitch at being the worst film ever made in defiance of the true master of the genre, rather than an accidental train wreck of a "movie".
और दिखाएं 
