Reviews

I can only assume this is getting good reviews because people adore Mia Goth and can't get enough of her playing crazy people, because, as a film, this just does not work. It's not scary, lacks tension, is badly structured and poorly paced, and is in DIRE need of an editor. It feels both too long and too short, like it ends at the end of the second act. It's barely even a film - just a bunch of acting and a thin, half-arsed script, with some pretentious and undeveloped Wizard Of Oz stylings thrown in. Scenes drag on forever, way past the point of terminal boredom, just so that Goth can show off her acting. I've never felt so much impatience and fidgeting in a cinema. The ending is supposed to be disturbing, but it just ends up being comical.

To put this into perspective, I thought 'X' was ok, slightly above -average but nothing special. I thought House Of The Devil was a minor classic, and I thought The Sacrament was quite effective and tense. Mia Goth is a good actor, but she always seems to play the same part. 'Pearl' just feels like an actor's indulgence.

I'm not even sure what kind of film this is supposed to be. I think it see itself as a socially-conscious horror movie, or perhaps a modern 'Repulsion'. It reminded me of something from the eighties, like a tv show for kids or teenagers. Or some kind of retraining film for knuckle-dragging misogynists. It talks down to you like you are an imbecile that needs educating about toxic masculinity and sexism. It bashes you over the head. Every character is a cartoonish cliched cardboard cut-out. Every scene is familiar and predictable. It's so ham-fisted and witless.

It copies lighting schemes from Mario Bava's giallo films, like you're going to be impressed by how clever this is. It's 2023, Edgar, even Grandma knows who Dario Argento is.

Technically, some of the camera work and effects with reflections are clever and impressive. The actors are all talented. But without a decent script or story, it's wasted. It's all flash, no substance.

I enjoyed Edgar Wright's 'Cornetto Trilogy' - basically all the films he did with Simon Pegg- but it seems every film since then gets worse and worse. This is even worse than Baby Driver, which I at least managed to watch till the end.

Unwatchable.

I don't mind big dumb popcorn films about sharks when they're done right (I like Deep Blue Sea and Piranha 3d a lot), and Jason Statham is always good value, but this was just a pile of steaming rubbish.

The first hour and a half is bland and boring, though it picks up a little in the last half hour when the tone completely changes to pure silliness, becoming an Hollywood executive's idea of 'crazy'. The VFX are mediocre and the creature designs are uninspired. The script is just terrible, and most of the characters have no character. The parts that are funny are only funny because they're embarrassingly bad. You laugh at it, not with it.

I assume the dialogue is as bad as it is because it's calculated to occupy the common middle ground between Chinese and American child audiences. Utterly witless, when it could have been knowingly dumb and funny.

How anyone can make a film about a giant shark without any gore AT ALL beggars belief. I guess the problem is that this film has to get past the brutal censorship of the Chinese Government, and at the same time appeal to as many people as humanly possible. In that exciting artistic environment, an almost unwatchable film has been churned out.

Finally, as a fan of director Ben Wheatley's Kill List, Sightseers and A Field In England, I'm saddened to see the decline of a once-exciting talent. His last decent film was High Rise 8 years ago, and since then his output has gone down the drain, culminating in this crud. What a sell out. Surely he must have read the script before he agreed to this? I can only assume his early films were special because of his collaborators.

A scatological and scattershot satire of the rich and privileged, with good acting and cinematography. Entertaining and very funny in places, but also quite hit and miss. It's disjointed, and a bit of a mess (in more ways than one!) and I found the ending to be disappointing, but overall I enjoyed it and would recommend to those who can handle a little vomit and silliness mixed in with their social satire.

Those who complain that it's not subtle enough are missing the point- it's SO obviously not even trying to be subtle. Parts are like Monty Python. You want subtle, watch one of the director's earlier films. It's silly to criticise things for them not being what you want them to be, you criticise them based on what they're trying to do, and whether they succeed in doing that. And this mostly does succeed in its aims.

I was cautious about going to see this, after all the rave critic reviews, and the amount of really negative audience reviews on here. After watching it (in a mostly empty cinema), I suspect that the people who don't like it wouldn't have liked The Blair Witch Project when that came out either. If you're expecting Blumhouse-style jump scares and CGI monsters look elsewhere. It doesn't pander to the audience at all, and takes no prisoners. But, if you've got an open mind, patience, and imagination, this is quite the unique horror experience. I think it needs to be seen on a big screen and with a good soundsystem to get the most out of it, as the sound design plays a BIG part in this film, possibly more than any other film I can think of. It's all about suggestion and barely-seen horror. After all, it's what you can't see that is truly scary.

In some ways, this is the ultimate Lovecraftian cosmic art/horror film. Parts of it are truly nightmarish. An amazing achievement, especially considering the meagre budget of $15,000. It just proves that all it takes is imagination (plus a lot of skill and the ability to think outside the box).

I've got a high tolerance for bad horror films, but this one took the (soggy) biscuit. I had to give up 20 mins before the end, as I just couldn't take the ineptitude anymore.

The acting from the main male actor is some of the worst I've ever seen/heard. Is the guy actually an actor? The actors mouths are obscured by diving masks for 90% of the film, so I imagine the (shockingly terrible) dialogue was recorded afterwards, in a comfortable recording studio, with time to get it right, so there's really not much excuse for it being THIS bad. It's flat, all the inflections are off. Was the director asleep?

And...I'm used to characters doing dumb things in horror films..but there are limits! This was just silly. And not scary.

3 stars for the interesting concept, and the few minutes where we/they first see the house, which is visually fairly interesting. The rest is garbage.

I'm up to episode 5, but don't think I'll go any further. As one of the competitors says before they decide to leave - 'this isn't the show I signed up for'.

It's either fake and mostly staged (which it certainly feels like), or it's real and pretty unethical on the part of the producers.

Why? Because they thought it might make good tv to invite a few 'criminal sociopaths' (as one of the competitors perfectly describes them) along for the ride. So you have around 3 groups of people who seem like decent enough folk, just trying to survive in the freezing wilderness....and another group of people who are absolutely awful. Bullying the other teams, stealing their gear etc. People who would surely be in and and out of prison in the 'real world'. The neighbours from hell. Don't tell me the producers didn't know they'd act like this.

Or they're all amateur actors, and it's staged. Some of the 'performances' are certainly hammy enough, and there's some awfully convenient 'coincidences' and unlikely occurrences. In which case, why waste your time?

Boring, overlong, and predictable rip-off of It Follows, with none of that film's artistry. I found the main character to be dull and one-note, and I didn't care what happened to her. I had to wait two long hours for it to end in exactly the way I knew it would.

It's filmed in a drab and flat visual style. There's unintentional comedic moments that are supposed to be shocking/scary. Too many jump-scares that don't make you jump. I've seen pretty much everything here many times before.

Not content with ripping off the concept of It Follows, the filmmakers actually rip-off the look of the most memorable iteration of the It Follows villain. Shameless.

On the positive side, the sound design is quite effective in places, and there was one good scene of about 5 seconds.

A lonely misfit living in a ramshackle cottage in drab rural Wales invents a very unlikely robot companion. I found the beginning to be a little shaky, but it soon warmed up and became a fairly charming and entertaining low budget quirky comedy. And the robot has to be seen to be believed.

It's very British, gently funny, and verging on twee. I'd give it a 6.5 if IMDB would allow it. It's very family friendly, though kids might be puzzled. I thought it was 'quite good', but lacked an edge and originality in the unfurling of the plot, which was quite by-the-numbers.

I had a few small grumbles about it - the idea is that it's supposed to be a documentary, but I have no idea why a documentary crew was filming the hero in the first place, and the concept seems to come and go. Doesn't really spoil it, but it was a little odd.

A small, hungry, group of Stone Age hipsters are hunted through a harsh landscape (the wilds of Scotland) by an unseen, seemingly supernatural, presence. More of a low-key indie survival thriller than an actual horror film, which I think it is being marketed as. In fact, if you go in expecting a horror film, you may be quite disappointed (or even want your money back). Despite the occasional bloody scene, it's a little like a horror film that's been made by and for people who don't really like horror films, but want a bit of that 'Saint Maud' action.

Grumbling about lack of 'horror' aside, the performances are fine, the cinematography, sound and costumes are excellent, and it's impressive that it was made for a low budget, out in the cold and rain, under covid restrictions. It's a good-looking, atmospheric film. If someone you knew had made it, you'd be very impressed. But compared to films that share a similar plot, like Predator, The Ritual, Valhalla Rising, Deliverance...well, it just can't compete. It lacks the tension, suspense, thrills, catharsis, tight script, and great characterisation. It's just not that engaging. That said, if you enjoy slightly arty low-budget UK indie films, you might find something to enjoy here.

The VFX, design, cinematography, mood, music and overall style of this film are all top-notch. Some of the scenes are brilliant. Unfortunately, the most important and basic thing - the STORY - is a total mess. It feels like a 4 hour film that has had many important scenes cut out, and a lot of scenes that really should have been edited out left in. It's strange, because there is a decent film here trying to get out. A few reshoots and a brutal edit would have fixed it. Maybe no one at the studio dared to state the obvious.

Minor characters wander in to the film and then disappear, but not before you've had all their backstory. The film meanders off into narrative dead ends, just so it can beat you over the head with it's none-too-original subtext. The main characters motivations are unclear, as are the stakes. Why are they even putting themselves in such danger, and not just walking away? The big emotional ending does not land, because you can't even figure out what the characters are feeling. The relationship between the siblings is not set up carefully. You can't connect on an emotional level. You don't feel anything, apart from 'Hey, that's a cool effect'. The internal rules of the film change to suit the plot. Gimmicky tributes to other, better, films are not enough to plug the leaks.

It's a wannabe blockbuster with pretensions of depth.

So, basically, the same problems that plagued every other Jordan Peele project except for 'Get Out'. At least it's better than 'Us', which made no sense at all.

I haven't read the comics, so going into this cold I found it to be fairly good, but nothing to write home about. Just about engaging enough to keep me watching the whole series, but not much more. I doubt I'll remember much about it in a month or two.

It reminded me of some of the more sappy modern Dr. Who's, but with a bigger budget. I think it's aimed at Young Adults, as there's a LOT here that will makes an actual adult's eyes roll. It's quite corny and gormless in places.

I didn't have a problem with changing the characters to make it more diverse, as I didn't know them in the first place, but oh boy, does this show want you to know how diverse it is! Almost like it's talking down to you.

All in all, I found it be an ok, competently -made timewaster, but I don't think I'll bother with the next series.

Sprawling, overlong, a little tedious, and very orange. A must-see if you like orange movies, but otherwise it's not very memorable. I watched it last night, and it's already receding FAST. I seem to remember the first half hour making me think it was gonna be good, but then it started to become a bit of a bore.

The plot is at the same time very simple and needlessly complicated, like a very drawn out police procedural. Something about Batman and pals looking for a rat. Lots of lines like "Who's the rat?" "Are you the rat?" "Is Jimmy Da fink da rat?". But it's hard to care who the rat is, or why he's the rat. It's like a gangster film, crossed with a bloodless 'Seven'. The Penguin is now basically Jack Ruby. The Riddler is the killer from Zodiac.

Batman is still moody, grim and growly, but his ears are slightly more pointy. There are car chases and fights that are very tastefully filmed and sound professional, but have no emotional weight, and it's too fast to see what's happening. Technically and on a surface level it's all to a high professional standard, but it's hard to find a compelling artistic reason for this to exist. It's product. It's got the usual bit at the end setting up a sequel. There's nothing here you haven't seen before many, many times.

The one thing I will give it credit for is the parallels in the script between the current political situation in America, with Trump and the attempted coup etc. Otherwise, I wouldn't recommend.

It's rare to see a movie go from 'very good' to 'spectacularly bad' so quickly, and with such jarring suddenness. It's like the studio had a great director make the first hour and a half of a film, and then replaced him with a complete amateur. Jordan Peele sets up a great mystery and concept in the first 2 acts, and then messes it right up when he tries to make sense of it all and explain it in the third act. I thought it was some kind of post-modern joke when the antagonist stood in front of a blackboard near the end, and proceeded to explain the plot and concept to the protagonist. And the twist at the very end is the sort of thing M Night Shyamalan would reject as being way too nonsensical and insultingly stupid.

This script needed about 4 more drafts and a ton of polishing, it's so poorly thought-through and badly crafted. Surprising after Get Out, which was a fine film. Were the studio and producers asleep at the wheel? Have they heard of doing their job and giving notes? Or were they afraid to challenge Peele after the success of Get Out? How anybody can call this deeply unsatisfying mess a 'good film' blows my mind.

A tough one to rate, as, while I think it's about as good as a film adaptation of the book is likely to get, it still does not really work as a film. Even with splitting the story into two parts, there's just not enough time available to get to know the characters and care about them in any way.

The characters in this version are also kind of flat and a little dull, as opposed to the larger-than-life characters of the Lynch version. The actors did a good job with what they had to work with, but only Josh Brolin and particularly Javier Bardem really stood out for me, due to their natural charisma.

That said, as a purely sensory experience, it's stunning. The designs, costumes, sets, VFX and music are excellent. Just don't expect to engage your emotions.

Not the brutal piece of extreme cinema I was expecting from reading all the exaggerated reviews. I was expecting something as harrowing as Funny Games or Martyrs but this is more daft, gonzo and juvenile than disturbing (not that there's anything wrong with being juvenile). It tries very hard to be shocking, but it's not realistic or well-made enough to truly disturb. In fact I'd say it's more like a black comedy horror or gross-out satire.

The gore is plentiful, well done and very OTT, but nothing you haven't seen before. The story is very basic and the characters are cardboard cut-outs. You don't care about them, so you don't care what happens to them. Cinematography is flat and visually uninteresting. Has a few fun moments that make it just about worth watching to the end, and I did laugh once or twice, but really this is just a very average film.

A darkly fun mix of Gaspar Noe, Donald Cammell's 'Demon Seed', Tetsuo, Cronenberg, and Beau Travail. From reading the reviews, I was expecting something very disturbing, like Antichrist or Funny Games, but thankfully this was not that kind of film. It has its moments, but really it's no more gruesome than most horror films. In fact it's kind of silly in a ludicrous way, and oddly touching, which I enjoyed. It's not a downer, and is actually pretty funny in places.

I found it to be entertaining and engaging, even though it seems they are making up the plot as it goes along. It looks and sounds fantastic, and the performances are outstanding. A pretty good film. Watch it on a big screen with a decent soundsystem.

I watched this after seeing after seeing a few reviews saying it was an overlooked gem, a potential cult film, and that it was unfairly buried by Disney.

Unfortunately, despite one or two interesting sequences (which aren't really worth watching the whole 2 and a half hour movie for), I found it be a bit of an overlong mess. I can see why it was barely promoted.

The ending was kind of confusing - I think I mostly understood it, but to be honest I wasn't invested enough to spend the time to really figure it out. It's just kind of so-so, kind of okayish, and definitely not an undiscovered cult film.

On the plus side, the acting was fine, and the film looked good. The first 20 minute section was the most successful part, along with a scene later that reminded me of the John Cusack film 'Cell'. I found the concept to be a hodge-podge of ideas from other films crammed together. A fair effort, but I can't recommend it.

I love this forgotten gem of a film - so atmospheric and haunting. Sure, it's maybe not even a 'good' film in most people's definition of the term - it's low budget and a little rough around the edges, but it has a strange, uncanny quality that's hard to put your finger on, and that few films have. Magic caught in the film grain. If you're on the right wavelength, and have some imagination, there's really nothing else around like it.

I'd agree with the other reviewer who calls it 'The Greatest Horror Western Ever Made' (and I'd put the fantastic 'Bone Tomahawk' in second place).

Tragically, the only version that is available is of such incredibly bad quality - missing 20 minutes, censored swearing, 4:3 aspect instead of the 2.35:1 cinemascope it was filmed in, and truly HORRIBLE image quality. In fact, I'd say it's fair to call this a 'lost' film.

Where, oh where, is the uncut widescreen blu ray?

On the surface this film seems to be ok and above average. Good acting, direction, cinematography, sound design, and a couple of fairly original and creepy special effects. It's not particularly scary, but it's ok.

But dig under the shiny surface and it's a mess. The plot is pure nonsense and gets more ludicrous and illogical as it goes along, then the wheels come off completely at the end, and you're left scratching your head and wondering if the filmmakers think you're an idiot. Most critics seemed to love it, so maybe they're right. It's like they just filmed the first draft of the script. Maybe they were in a rush, I don't know. Perhaps they thought they could wing it, then fix it in the edit.

The main problem for me is that the filmmakers took a metaphor for 'loss' and 'the nothingness of death', and then tried to make it work realistically. Then they tie themselves into knots of illogical and unrealistic character motivation, hard-to-believe 3rd act info dumps, and breaking the rules of their own ill-defined mythology. It's a shame as it seems to offer and intriguing, clever, and original mystery, but then when it finally shows its hand it's all a bit embarrassing. It only works as a metaphor.

This felt like Wan was trying to make a trashy 'Basket Case' type film, but he didn't have the wits or smarts, and just ended up with a genuinely terrible film that is bad in all the wrong ways. You don't laugh with it, you laugh at it, for being so lunkheaded.

The first hour and a half is completely tedious and mind-numbing. The film is almost saved by the last 20 minutes, when it goes crazy - but unfortunately not crazy enough. What a Hollywood studio might consider 'crazy'. A bit too slick, and not really shocking or demented enough.

Very stylish and well-directed, yet lacks a fully thought-through script. The 3rd act is a poorly-written mess that feels unfinished.

The film feels like 20 minutes have been hacked out in the editing room, in a failed attempt to salvage it.

Basically the film is beautiful-looking car, but it's got a broken engine. It just doesn't work in the most basic way.

A shame, because many individual scenes work really well. The cinematography and directing on the kill scenes are excellent and imaginative. The director is clearly very talented visually. Perhaps less so with actors, as the main female character is dull and a bit boring. The film is also not particularly scary, often relying on very loud sound design to attempt to generate some chills.

In the end, I felt that this film's problem was that it tied itself into knots trying to do too many things at once - be a sharp and witty social commentary, explain and update the (already barely coherent) Candyman backstory, satirise the art-world, set up a franchise etc. When it would have been much better off just trying to make a quality film with a decent story, made for the right reasons. Forget the cash grabs, fan-service, and franchises.

So, in the end, not a patch on the dreamlike wonder of the first film. And of course this one just lacked the menace and presence of Tony Todd.

If you squint, it sort of looks and sounds like a real film. But it's just more Netflix 'product' to vaguely watch while you check out your Instagram. It's all glossy surface. It's a competently-made tube of processed cheese. A product made by algorithms and corporate board-meetings. It's what the people want.

'The Harder They Fall' is what a robot thinks a film looks like. It's a tacky pop video with walking cliches instead of characters, story beats that have been done a million times before, on-the-nose music that spells out the subtext for you, a god-awful script that flops around like a dying fish, and some snazzy camera-work and slow-motion fighting to fool the easily impressed.

At the end they even have the gall to set it up for a sequel. They're thinking franchise. Please God, no.

Saw this at the London Film Festival premiere last night. It's a well-made and engaging low-budget crime film, with excellent acting and music. Neil Maskell and David Hayman give dependably good performances. It's very much along the lines of Dead Man's Shoes and Kill List, although lacking the flair, originality and imagination of those classics. Hard geezer seeks revenge, with over-the-top violence and nasty, humourless working-class gangsters. A grim and dour tone. Some nicely choreographed stabbings and gunshots. It's nothing new, but it does it satisfactorily and holds your attention.

It's a great shame then that the film is almost fatally marred by a bizarre and poorly thought-through conclusion that had to make me wonder why not a single person on the team of this production said 'um, hang on a minute, are we really going with this ending..?'.

It's just wrong for the tone of the film.

I can see what they were aiming for, as it's been done before in one of the best crime films ever made, but here they mess it up by not setting it up correctly, and in the process almost wreck a perfectly workable film.

All in all, despite this flaw, this is worth a watch, as it is undeniably entertaining.

Saw this at the cinema last night, and while I found it to be good-looking and well-made, with an interesting setting, it was still nothing new or special. I've seen everything in this film before. Nowhere near on the same level as The Wailing, which this shares many elements with.

The screaming and running around and people acting possessed in the last act becomes tedious after a while, as there's barely any emotional involvement with the characters. I simply did not care about any of the characters who made it to the last act.

Not often I'd say this about a horror film, but this would have been improved by actually being subtler, and leaving out some of the mayhem. And an edit - this is much too long at 130mins.