Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsAwards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotesDid You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsReviews & Ratings for
Alone More at IMDbPro »
| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] ![[Next]](http://i.media-imdb.com/f86.gif){kind=small} |
| Index | 23 reviews in total |
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
good cast wasted, 18 July 2005
Author:
cjamesm from United Kingdom
There is a nice idea at the back of this film, and the director has
assembled a talented cast.
Unfortunately the novelty of the approach wears thin and the idea -
that we see only through the eyes of the killer- becomes incredibly
iritating by the end of the film.
Aditonally the "twist" is predictable after about 5 minutes.
This is a shame as the actors are very talented and could undoubtedly
have made a decent fist of the role given half a chance.What a wasted
opportunity!
Technical details are excellent and the editing and sound design are
superb.Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the movie.
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Bad, tiring and unsatisfying, 23 June 2002
Author:
(lucien@scooby.xs4all.nl) from Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Summary: Uninteresting mysterie doesn't get solved with boring and tiring
as
main keywords. Wonder why the videorental acquired so many of this movie?
Maybe they only read the back of the videocover just as I
did?
*spoiler alert*
Music 5/10: I don't remember the music, so it wasn't disturbing nor
entertaining. Music is probably a big word.
Video 4/10: Most of the time it was dark, in several scenes the movie was
cut in videoclip style. But with what purpose? Found it just tiring. One
could barely see what was going on. Or were they trying to hide that simply
nothing was happening?
Story 3/10: Experienced cop with new rookie solving murders/abuse from
disturbed person. Movie starts with fatality caused by victim pushed from
stairs by murderer. 2nd fatality is caused by choking/allergic reaction
when
murderer force-feeds victim. 3rd victim survives 2 attacks. She knows the
killer but can't tell the police because she's suffering from amnesia. 4th
victim gets strangled The dialogues between the 2 policeofficers are not
worked out. Not sure of the purpose of these characters. They attend at the
crimescenes - yet don't discover/ investigate anything. After 70 long
minutes they come up with the plan to announce that the 3rd victim lives so
they can catch the killer when he tries to get rid of her. I observed a
sort
of action scene here with 2 times 1 person running through a deserted
hospital at night. They did this because the script told them to do so not
because they were desperately trying to achieve something. An average
busstop will give a more interesting scenery.
Anyway, plan fails. Police doesn't catch killer. Killer doesn't kill victim
3.
Killer arrives home, takes a shower.
--And that's it!!!-- Very unsatisfying. Flashbacks indicate the killer had
a
bad childhood. (forced to eat, sexually abused?, etc...) The voice of the
killer appears female, her hands in one scene male. Through the showercabin
one sees a body that appears female, yet can be a rebuild too. Very very
cheap.
5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Don't flame..., 22 February 2007
Author:
Yiorgos Halkos from Patra, Greece
* NO SPOILERS AHEAD *
In general: "Alone" is a movie you won't remember after a month or so,
but that doesn't make it an awful movie..
After watching the whole movie, I got the same feeling I had with the
"9th gate": The movie needed 10 more minutes of plot unraveling, to
explain/conclude some things. It seemed as if the producer run out of
funds and had to finish the film in a hurry.
That left apart, the movie contains some very nicely done camera tricks
(first person perspective, memory flashbacks etc), an interesting -yet
not that genuine- background of Alex (the main character), and some
nice acting.
Concluding: The camera tricks are not groundbreaking, as the ones in
"Matrix". The plot is not even close to "Seven". No Oscar was nominated
for acting in this film. Compared to some 5-star films, "Alone" is not
much to look at. It surely is not one of the best films I've seen, but
not a bad film either. 6/10 for me: slightly above average. Worth
watching it on TV or renting it for 1,5 euros, but nothing more.
4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Clever but 'end'less, 18 December 2002
Author:
alan.hughes from Greenock, Scotland
This is technically well made - in terms of audio-visuals. But, despite
clear craftsmanship in this, area the film is let down in the end by a
severe plot deficit. After tantalising the viewer as the to gender and
identity of the perpetrator the film decides not to bother with this. SO
one
is left with a sense of annoyance.
Pity
2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Predictable yet decent enough film, 6 March 2003
Author:
Ben Jones (chemical_boy1uk@yahoo.co.uk) from Manchester, England
I have to begin by saying that this was probably one of the least original serial killer films i've seen in a while. You can pick your cliche from many films before it, be it the killers childhood problems to the tough, seen it all before detective. That said this is still a decent film with some very nice touches by the director. The point of view perspective of the serial killer is not a new idea, yet is very well used, and there are some genuinely creepy moments throughout. Unfortunately the ending is pretty predictable but is still very well handled by the director. On the whole a watchable film.
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
do not watch this, 22 March 2006
Author:
citizenmatty from United Kingdom
this movie sucks. i mean really awful. it's so bad a little part of you
dies when you watch it.the director is ambitious and handled his low
budget fairly well, but overall it made me vomit (not just because of
the force-feeding scene either.) this 2 hour or so long festival of
festering turd is the worst contribution to the arts i have ever seen.
Benito Mussolini's had a better taste in art than any self-loathing
dunderhead moronic enough to subject themselves to this. the world
would be a better place if every copy of this film was destroyed.you
would be much better off at home in your old-master themed study, in
your Dickensian dressing-gown, smoking a pipe and burying yourself into
some Shakespeare.
Goodnight, and God Bless
4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Awful, 28 February 2003
Author:
vmason from Ireland
In my opinion this film is one of the worst I've ever seen.
It was weird. As I would never watch a film without seeing the end I
persevered to the end in the hope that it would have some
answers, however, the ending is worse than the whole film put
together.
It was extremely amateur and doesn't deserve to be on video or
even TV. The sound and camera effects were silly and did nothing
for the film neither.
I'd give it 1/10 and that's being generous.
5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Best Avoided, 15 January 2005
Author:
mjw2305 from England
'Creepy, Psychological Thrills'
'Cranks up the Tension'
'Explosive'
These comments are printed proudly on the sleeve of the DVD. Believe
them at your peril. You could certainly spend the 89Mins I spent
watching this doing something more worthwhile. It doesn't even manage
to be creepy by accident.
I Implore you, avoid this film
If you like a good psychological thriller/serial killer movie try
SEVEN, SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, BONE COLLECTOR, FALLEN. Anything but this
2/10
Weak movie, 19 January 2003
Author:
Lars Jacobsen from Oslo
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS***
Well, what tries to be an interesting portrayt of a disturbed mind, fails
incredibly. The producers tries to make the killer seem twisted using
MTV-type effects, rather than playing with our minds. The acting is pretty
good, but the plot, and espacially the end, is rather dull. And the icing
on
the cake is at the end, when its supposed to surprise us that the killer
is
female, while infact it really didnt. Also, women CAN kill, so its reather
silly.
If you're after a scare, rent "dumbo" instead of.
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
No way near as bad as the reviews on here are making out, 4 May 2008
Author:
Marnie8 from South Africa
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I wasn't going to write a review about this, but having scanned down the list and seen what a bashing the film has been given I had to say something! I thought it was very creepy. Everything that you see is through the killer's eyes - you see their daily routine and hear their thoughts. Plus one of the killing scenes was really disturbing (but some people who have put comments up on here thought it funny?! No...) OK so the result meant that the camera was a bit all over the place and made people feel sick, but I didn't have this problem at all. The ending could have been more developed though, I needed to know more - but still very worth seeing - and I would want to see something else that this director has done more recently.
| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] |
Related Links
| Plot summary | Ratings | Awards |
| External reviews | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |
Copyright © 1990-2012
IMDb.com, Inc.
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
An 
company.