Alone (2002) Poster

(2002)

User Reviews

Add a Review
23 Reviews
Sort by:
4/10
Bad, tiring and unsatisfying
lucien-423 June 2002
Warning: 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.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
good cast wasted
cjamesm18 July 2005
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.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Don't flame...
Yiorgos Halkos22 February 2007
* 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.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Predictable yet decent enough film
chemical_boy1uk6 March 2003
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 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Clever but 'end'less
alan.hughes18 December 2002
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
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Best Avoided
mjw230515 January 2005
'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
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
do not watch this
citizenmatty22 March 2006
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 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Horror? No, just horrible.
DukeRaisin18 May 2002
Naive, as the lady says in this movie, that what I was when i got fooled by the cover of this little flick. Reminded me of movies like Scream and Final Destination. It's nothing like those movies.

First of all, it's English as in England, but they managed to squeeze in an American girl. Maybe for the trailer, what do I know? The camera-work most be done by some ex. MTV-director. At first there's a lot of odd, flashy screenplay, but eventually it disappears and become a regular English TV-style footage. We follow the killer trough his OR her eyes. The voice is a woman's, but people in the movie seems to think it's a he. Every time we're "inside" the psychopath's head, there's a lot of different shadow-voices talking and screaming, making us believe that this person had a ruff childhood.

The few killings are plain stupid and boring, but the second actually made me laugh a bit. You're still curious to find out more about the murderer, so you keep on watching. Suddenly it's over, finito, and you're not any wiser.

This is the worst I've seen in a very long time. Avoid it at any cost. My rating is a 1 out of 10. I'm angry as hell that I wasted an hour and a half of my life, on this horrible movie.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
oh no....
gerrypig1 January 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This is so bad... The makers might have been inspired by the best. But they have not learnt anything_! The editing and visuals of the movie reminds me of a mixture of the excellent movies: A requiem for a dream and "seven".. But just a lame version of it...

****Mini-spoiler****

"hey... lets loop this footage of the killer through the whole film so we kind of show that this pshyco kinda do the same thing every day...kinda??!!"

AARRGGHH!!! 1-10
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Awful
vmason28 February 2003
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.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Never watch it, i learnt the hard way!
nataliebannister9 June 2003
I advise anyone and everyone NEVER to watch this film. To be frank with all of you this film was the worst film i have ever had to watch, yes its even worse than Braindead!

It was possibly the most boring story line ever, and the editing and shots in this film were so poor, they resembled the work of a year 11 Media Student who thinks it cool to use shaky repetitive shots to make a film good. The whole film is shot using a blue filter, yes meaning that everything was blue, this was ineffective and annoying. I believe that a monkey could do a better job than the director of this film.

The acting (if you could call it acting) was shameful and i mean so shameful that i am embarrassed for the actors in this film. The monotone voices and badly written script could send anyone who suffers from insomnia straight to sleep.

The story couldn't have made less of an impact on me if it tried, come to think of if i have no idea what this film was about i spend most of the time watching this film crying at how bad it was. But to make it worse it wasn't even so bad it was laughable, which some films are take Crossroads for instance.

You may be asking, Why natalie didn't you just stop watching the film? Well i will tell you why! Because i paid £3 yes 3 whole pounds to rent this film out. And i felt so ripped off, so please don't buy this film! You will only feel that you have wasted your money, and you will be helping these dumb ass monkeys make money!

I hope you will bear this in mind. Thankyou for your time but really you should be thanking me because i have saved you the money and the time!
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Unsatisfying end !
errorist22 May 2002
This flick is definitely worth watching. It's not like the average thriller. Superb camerawork, good sober atmosphere. The end is a bit unsatisfying though, it leaves one behind with a lot of questions. But it's probably meant to be like this. 7 out of 10.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
A mere gesture in the vain of better flicks
tiborhuber30 July 2002
Plain put, Claydon produced a vaguely distorted remake of "Halloween' in the style one cannot eschew after watching the likes of "Seven' and "The Cell' till they left a drone in one's ears: he left out Brad Pit and Jennifer Lopez, but managed to get a fine sound-track and a superbly over the top Miriam Margolyes, who delivers a memorable study in grotesque realism.

The horror, however, coming in about three waves of identical pattern, gets pretty repetitive very soon and culminates in an anticlimax entirely out of sorts. Claydon might need to watch "Nightshift' and "When the Bough Breaks' to get a better grasp on plot-development or the urge to have a point before shooting. But I'm miffed anyway because I wanted to see a Korean thriller by Sung-Hong Kim and dreamily trudged to the wrong festival-theatre, therefore my judgement might be somewhat biased by self-loathing...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
No way near as bad as the reviews on here are making out
Marnie84 May 2008
Warning: 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.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Film with a difference, very good
mikeroo991 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I did not expect this when I put the DVD in to watch. I am not sure what I expected but I am really glad I rented it out, I felt like I had found a gem amongst all the Hollywood garbage you normally find in your local video store.

Good editing, great soundtrack and the view of the lead through her eyes.

The forced feeding scene is genuinely disturbing and i could not stop thinking about it for days afterwards, the way it was extended when you thought it was all over kept me awake that night! That to me, is good direction and acting, when you really feel for the character.

The way the director captured the sense of overwhelming control that Alex's obsessive-compulsive behaviour has over her seems very realistic also, like you are hearing her thought as well as seeing her actions.

I don't think too many people have seen this film because everyone I ask has never heard of it. From memory it was one of those films that the video store only had 1 or 2 copies of so that probably puts the masses off straight away.

I had to go and order it on DVD after I rented it out.. definitely not a film for everyones tastes though, although my girlfriend enjoyed it also.

Not the best film I have ever seen by far (some of plot and acting pretty poop )but worth watching and I didn't feel like I had wasted 90 minutes at the end. I must admit that I was slightly disappointed at the end of the film with the way it ended but that's life.

The lighting in this movie is not going to be to everyones tastes, a fair bit of strobe effects to go with that great soundtrack, could mess a few heads up.

I think the director will be one to watch in the future, apparently this was his first proper feature film which on reflection makes sense but if I met him he would get a handshake and a "well done".
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Nothing spectacular, but a solid thriller that makes you think.
elvaago1 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
***This review WILL contain spoilers***

Well, I for one liked this movie. British movies are just not cut out for people who drool over Hollywood crap like Troy and Harry Potter. They often expect the viewer to be able to think and to fill in the blanks, which I appreciate. Especially the ending is quite good.

Brief summary: Mental patient desperately seeks female companionship, but it usually goes wrong and he ends up killing them instead.

A duo of cops, one old and male, one young and female, try to find out what's going on and finally there's a showdown.

What I found interesting about this movie is that we never actually see the killer and more mysterious, even, we never even find out the gender until the very last second of the movie. I personally thought the killer was a guy, but in the last scene he suddenly has boobs? Is it female? Male transsexual? In any case, it's a very confused and abused individual.

Sure there's ripoffs from here to Tokio and back, most notably from Seven and Silence of the Lambs, but name me one movie that's been made in the past 20 years that isn't at least a partial ripoff of a book, other movie, TV show or what have you and I'll re-vote this movie lower. :-)

Worth watching, nothing spectacular, but solid thriller, is my opinion. 7 out of 10.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
To you, dear Miss Goose.
nb216 June 2006
Nicely shot and well acted, I enjoyed this movie. Yes, most seem to feel that the plot was weak, or weakly presented anyway. Certainly it is quite graphic and not always very original. Still, the actors were very good - this was an excellent group of professionals and their work to a certain extent transcends the material. Main thing, anyway, is that Claire Goose is in it so how could I dislike this movie? (Did I say that Miss Goose is beautiful and sexy as well as being extremely gifted as an actor? Had I mentioned that?)She's done some nicely well-judged acting during the last four years (in particular.) I feel she has chosen her roles shrewdly and I look forward to the day when we can say "Oh, I remember her when she was in "Waking The Dead" Now she's a big star" Coming soon, to a theatre near you. D.V.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Pretentious crap.
gwendollwyn1 May 2003
I really started out watching this movie with an open mind, hoping I'd found some undiscovered jewel in the land of suspension. Well, I have to say that it contained some originality, but in the end it ended up being one of the worst movies I've ever seen. A 2 out of 10, trying to be nice.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
disappointing!
Jens7 February 2003
While the cover art of the DVD lures you into the illusion that this is a "Scream" style horror flick (the cover is almost identical), the first thing to say about this movie is that it is so quintessential english, it could have been shot on the set of "Eastenders". Don't get me wrong, their are a lot of great movies coming from England, but their attempts of making a good thriller or horror film are often quite deplorable. The quality of the sound is surprisingly good, compared to shabby camera work, which is probably the reason for the tag line "Hear the fear". Miriam Margolyes is usually one of my favorite actresses, but here her OTT approach to her role is not in tune with the rest cast. Imagine Mr. Bean showing up in a "Halloween" movie! After we watch the psychotic killer do some of his very predictable deeds, the movie ends abruptly, not revealing the killer's identity, leaving us in doubt about the fate of his last victim and not giving us any clues about his motives. So why bother watching it all?
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Weak movie
DJelusive19 January 2003
Warning: 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.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Yet more common or garden fayre
Mike Cooke4 September 2002
A run of the mill slasher/Halloween type flick that goes through the motions with a few exceptions. The audio/ visuals in this movie are at times stunning and worth a view if only for this. This, along with 'strange' editing leaves you waiting for the next 'strange' event. For you oldies out there try to spot ex-YES keyboard player Rick Wakeman in the movie. WARNING:- This movie contains strobe lighting of around 10 cycles/sec. It does warn of this on the video case but the writing is very small so beware. I gave it a 6/10 for its innovations.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Waste of time
smbruyn25 May 2002
Though this movie appears to be a good watch at first sight, I warn you that eventually you'll be disappointed. Camera is decent, image nice in places, speed is ok, dialogue is rather bad but the main thing is the story sucks. Sorry guys, better luck next time (hopefully).
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Very Good Movie !!!
fantasycloud11 May 2002
I watched this movie and i can say it is very good...Camera work is well done and the music is great. It is definitely worth to watch. I am not gonna tell you anymore , just watch for yourself. I must have this movie in my collection :)
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews