IMDb > No One Can Hear You (2001) > IMDb user reviews

IMDb user comments for
No One Can Hear You (2001) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 8 reviews in total 

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
What for?, 9 August 2004
2/10
Author: talber from Krakow, Poland

Why would anyone waste perfectly good film for something this bad is beyond me. The only reason I watched this movie through is that I was unable to leave my bed at the time. The acting's horrible, but that's not the problem. The music's lousy, but that is also not the problem. The problem is this: there isn't one original scene, one original idea, one comprehensible line of dialogue or one believable character in the whole messy 90 minutes of it. To quote my beloved "Singin' in the rain" - DID SOMEBODY ACTUALLY GET PAID FOR WRITING THIS? The movie is an incomprehensible mess, a hastily stuck together bunch of clichés. Don't bother. In fact, discourage others from watching. You'll be doing them a favour.

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Wow!(and not in a good way), 27 November 2004
Author: mirandadawn31 from Anchorage Alaska

This movie had me laughing the whole time. Unfortunately, it's not suppose to be a comedy. Craig Parker did a wonderful job as the overeager Deputy Henley but the rest of the movie isn't worth seeing. I would compare it to a bad "Lifetime" movie, but worse. I don't know why it's considered a thriller because I would not be thrilled to have to see this movie again. It takes every cheesy cliché from every other thriller movie and uses them over and over again. None of the actors were American so I don't see why it needed to be set in America just so they could all murder the accent. Sometimes they even forgot which side of the road to drive on. It's just... the list of bad things about this movie could go on forever.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Oh, man . . ., 7 November 2003
Author: Aislinn_Malmeril

This movie was pretty bad, but not as bad as "Motel Hell" or "Teen Alien". I think this movie's saving grace was Craig Parker. He manages to pull off a decent American accent (for the most part, anyway), which is better than his other Kiwi costars. Bit of trivia: the director is one of the producers on "Mercy Peak".

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Would You Want Your Daughter To Marry A Slasher?, 8 November 2007
3/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York

First one family is murdered than another and both have a teen beauty queen in each family. Sheriff Barry Corbin is looking towards the young male population of his town as potential killers. However radio news reporter Kelly McGillis has her own ideas. She recalls a very similar slasher case in a neighboring town several years ago and tries to interest Corbin. Of course he's rather obtuse. Guess who's right on the subject.

She's got reason for concern as her daughter Kate Elliott was good friends with the other two murdered girls. We're given an interesting trio of suspects. Backpacker Kieran Hutchison, the James Dean wannabe Daniel Gillies, and somewhat nerdy kid Tom Huntington. There's also a really dumb deputy in the mix in Craig Parker.

I never as a rule expect much from these films and I'm not disappointed. The cast goes through the motions and collects their paychecks.

Hey Elliott could have wound up married to the wrong one.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
One of the worst slasher movies ever., 17 April 2003
Author: Fei_Lo from Los Angeles

The acting of the the two female victims and the main lead are excruciatingly bad, Are they even American?! Mixed in with some blatant overacting and a bland script this movie is a real turkey. Avoid.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Great entertainment value, 4 July 2002
6/10
Author: funkylad from Antwerpen, Belgium

Although the movie has some over the top performances, plot holes and inconsistencies, it still manages to keep you entertained for 90 minutes. The story is sometimes a bit of a cliche, but that doesn't mean you can't still enjoy the story.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Thriller with suspense and good acting, 27 June 2002
6/10
Author: Peter Derkx from Culemborg, Netherlands

I would have given this movie a 7, but for the last minute. For 90 minutes it is an average good thriller with good acting and moments of suspense. Good to watch. The last minute spoils the thought of this movie for me. Now it is barely a 6.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Amazing feat!, 22 April 2006
1/10
Author: Carlos Martinez Escalona from Mexico

Maybe one of the worst things ever done! If you could read the script just once, you'd realise it's absolutely nonsense. But, as far a movie can go, I now use it with my students to show them ALL the things you shouldn't do! And that's pretty difficult. So, just let me add this: camera angles, lighting, plot, music, acting and directorial skills are nonexistent. What about that? It's a class in itself and I doubt anyone will ever make anything as bad... ever!

Think about TV and film production. How much money did they spend in lighting this film... a lot! just because they wanted it to happen at night. But... night? It just comes and goes no matter the time of day!

It's amazing how much money you can spend and how badly your product will come out. What I can't believe is that it made it to a DVD release. Who paid for this? If I was the writer or director or producer, I'd never dare to risk my neck!

Was the above comment useful to you?

Add another review

Related Links

Ratings External reviews Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history