IMDb > Joshua (2007) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Joshua More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 8 of 9: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
Index 86 reviews in total 

12 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

I want my 106 minutes back

Author: cyberdan-1 from United States
2 August 2008

The acting is mechanical. There are no believable relationships in the entire film. Vera Farmiga is the only one in the entire project that seems to put any effort into it. It was kind of like watching a play with a single cast member on stage with a dozen cardboard stand-ups.

Do not even begin to compare Jacob Kogan with Haley Joel Osment, it's insulting. THIS FILM IS NOT A "BIZARRE SIXTH SENSE" type film. It's just bizarre. And by bizarre, I mean it's not worth watching.

Really really bad audio. I suggest Mr. Ratliff use more than one solitary boom mic for the entire film. Oh, and sound recording software more advanced than say, windows sound recorder.

Dropped story lines. Unexplained plot elements. Abrupt meaningless ending. 6.0 of 10? The movie does not even live up to it's own tag line. are you kidding me? I give it a 2. (one on each hand; guess which one.)

Mr. Ratliff appears to have adopted the mantra of every amateur filmmaker in Europe:

1) If I just leave things out, it automatically becomes mysterious 2) the moviegoer will be forced to fill in the missing pieces 3) relieving me as a writer and director the burden of having any talent 4) use the tried-and-fail method of the abrupt and ambiguous ending so everyone thinks that all the foregoing shortcomings were intentional

Of course Sundance liked this one, because this is typical faux snob fare. Pretend that something ridiculous is actually meaningful, and everyone thinks you see something deeper than there actually is, and hopefully that will make you look sophisticated while everyone else becomes insecure because they don't understand as much as apparently you do. Furrow your brows and try to look slightly saddened, to add to the effect. If your vacuity catches up to you, just explain that you were "lost in thought" and shamble hurriedly away.

No. There is no deeper, profound meaning here. Just a poorly written, poorly directed script that fails in every aspect. Don't let Sundance or the Eurotrash snobliks fool you.

SKIP THIS ONE and re-watch the original Exorcist, which is infinitely better, and which Ratliff would do well to watch 666 times in a row before he tries anything 'scary' again.

I apologize for ranting, but I am seriously irritated that the cable channel guide gave this one 3/5 stars, so I wasted an hour and forty minutes waiting for it to earn even one star. I really want my 106 minutes back.

Finally thought of something positive about this film. After seeing what kind of miserable trash actually gets produced, I'm inspired to write scripts now, because I know I write far better material than this.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Smart and creepy

Author: McGonigle from bean world, massachusetts
31 January 2007

This is a smart psychological horror film. An upscale NYC couple bring home their new baby and their older child -- a nine-year-old boy prodigy -- starts acting extremely creepy as suspicious accidents and odd behavior increase. Director George Ratliff creeps you out without any significant blood or gore, making this movie a lot more like Rosemary's Baby than, say, The Omen. With a smart script and great performances by everyone, including Sam Rockwell, Vera Farmiga and the kid playing Joshua, the only downside to this movie is a rushed "and-then-it-ends" anti-climax that I found unsatisfying. Still, this is worth a look if you like scary movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

What a FAILURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Author: cpugeek03 from United States
15 November 2008

Just awful! I sat through this horrid piece of crap expecting to see, what? Another "Omen?" This movie is such a joke. The only shining part is the acting from Vera Farmiga. She was fabulous.

How do you finance crap like this? Personally, I wish IMDb would give negative ratings for movies because there isn't a rating low enough for this lump of crap (oh, did I mention this movie is crap?)

I'm not going into detail or spoil the movie, those things have been written many times, but will someone PLEASE tell me how uncle Ned is brought into realm of Jacob wanting to be with him? I wish I could write a few expletives for the terrible plot! I could just puke!

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 15 people found the following review useful:


Author: Lauren G from United States
9 February 2008

This was probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It didn't even come to theaters anywhere near, so that is an idea of how bad it was. Extremely slow, doesn't get interesting or even have a point until about half way through. I literally fast forwarded through the entire thing. I was very disappointed. I expected this to be like the Omen, but it was nothing like it. I was very confused about the plot the entire time. The boy is sweet and innocent half of the movie. Him turning on his parents doesn't even make sense. It also had terrible acting. I would not recommend this to anyone, I felt like I had wasted an entire hour.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Only intelligent people should watch this ONE

Author: mindcat from South Carolina
18 June 2008

At first this film was so subtle I thought I knew where it was going. There is little reason for the less than 130 IQ viewer to watch this flick because you will not like it at all.

This is a story about yuppie and bitchy parents who are confused and out witted by a genius son, who although weird, knows exactly how to get what he wants.

There is some blood, maybe some murders and maybe some dead animals along the way. That's the diversion.

I could not like Joshua's father with all his garden variety and shallow ways he related with his genius son. The clues were, he never called the boy by his real name, Joshua. Always, sport, buddy, partner.. Joshua knows he really isn't with the parents he wants, the ones that he believes could give him what he wants. So, slowly the pot boils with subtle incident after incident.

I think the moral here to the yuppies, is notice your child and provide what he wants.

By the way the Mom is said Jewish and dad Christian, she becomes so enraged when Joshua says he wants Jesus. Yet, inconsistent, since they also say, it would have been Joshua's choice.

Lots of very nice acting here and excellent performances. This is scary in an intellectual and ironic sense. That's why the people who gave it poor ratings, have IQs on par.

I enjoyed it and would watch it gain.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

This is one of the worst "movies" ever made!!

Author: sammy_girl_78
8 January 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I don't understand the people that say this movie is good and Intelligent Horror Film ? I find it very ridiculous actually! There is no blood and gore in this movie .. and thank god for that, because this would have a very bad movie catastrophic! The thing i find most ridiculous in this is the story! I don't think there is anything wrong with the directors work at all but the story is weak and almost comically bad!

We are lead to believe that the boy fells no love or anything for his parents.... well hmmm why did he start acting all Damien-like when the new baby came ?? He felt betrayed and invisible, but most of all unloved! just look in the beginning of the movie when they all sit together and admire the baby they acted like the boy wasn't really there! the only one that acknowledge his presences in the room was his uncle!

And the way his parents talked about him... its appalling!!

The boy got even more messed up after watching the home-videos that his dad made of him and his mum when he was a baby ... they made it look like he was the spawn of Satan or something !! the mother was all f*cked up in that !!

And i think the acting in this was a little bit weak !! maybe if the actor that played Joshua have tried a bit harder it would have been a better movie !

The actress the is the mother is a very bad actress i think not believable at all!

The best actor in this movie is the actor that plays the dad ...just because he is the most believable and good actor.

I think if you wanna see a good movie about bad or evil kids just watch the omen or something like that ..... and stay well away from this movie because its not worth wasting your time on.

And if it was possible i would give this "movie" an even lower mark/point/grade.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Don't waste your money

Author: D S from United States
8 January 2008

Do not go waste your time and money on this movie. The story line was a good idea, but just not good enough. Horrible horrible movie. You will just want to kill that kid Joshua during the movie. The ending could have been much better!!!! I think if the ending were better, I would like it more. I just felt like I wanted to kill that stupid kid. Joshua was a good character though, but the parents should have known and should have done something about it. I know that is not the point to a movie, everyone is always dumb, otherwise these movies wouldn't exist. But, this was just horrible. The kid was so obvious. I don't really know what else to say, this is taking enough of my time up, just wanted to warn the rest of you before you waste your $$. I would say, only watch it if it is free and you are very bored and want to be left angry.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

another low from USA

Author: woytan from Australia
3 May 2008

So it is like this: 2006 sees "VITUS" from Switzland rubbing close with Oscar (which i don't think it should) but of course; "we can't be behind" or "we do better" and we have (USA) made movie "JOSHUA". Right..... Is this true that an American audience's intellectual status is no longer where it was years back and now-a-days it can swallow just about any rubbish with joy? Compare the two movies and although there is by no means suggestion that "VITUS" is a perfect movie....I can not get over surprise that this sweet, candy rubbish (Joshua)can still sell. Well, It seems it can. It is actually a suicidal mission for any director to take up on a movie with children as actors.... I have not seen yet a child playing as the child is in real life. The statutory trick is to make the kid as silent as possible and smear him/her with all sorts of camera close ups... the trick is to pick up a face "suitable" for the movie theme....and the money just pours to the office box........It is that easy! :-)

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

total waste of your life worst movie ever

Author: nosferato from United Kingdom
30 December 2007

well for me to go out of my way to comment on this movie should tell you something about it. i can only comment about the first 33 minutes as it was a choice of kicking the TV to death or turning the movie off. it was the worst movie i have seen in a long time, the music made me want to stick i hot poker in my ears, and the kid.. Jesus Christ i could of slapped the little pr*@k.there was nothing and i mean nothing to keep me watching the wife .. what a total bi@*h. if you have to waste some of your time i would suggest you buy a dog and take it out of a walk or failing that take a long bath .. you'll feel better for it i promise you .

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

An anti-gay adaptation of a HELL HOUSE vignette?

Author: Bob Z from Brooklyn, NY
20 July 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

JOSHUA is an effectively strange film, until it falls apart in the third act where it is offensively insinuated that the titular character is a young homosexual whose evil deeds have all been an effort to live an openly gay life with his gay uncle.

When I saw the director's previous effort was HELL HOUSE (a brilliant and creepy documentary), I began to wonder if this movie is simply an adaptation of a narrow minded evangelical cautionary tale on the evils of Godless parenting in the Big Apple.

We have Sam Blackwell playing the Wall-Street power-broker who has turned his back on a rural Born-Again upbringing to marry a "Big Fat Jew" (as Farmiga's character puts it.) The family lives in an opulent ROSEMARY'S BABY style uptown apartment with their 9 year old son, Joshua, who is fastidiously well-groomed, anal-retentive, and loves nothing more than tickling the ivories with his Broadway-loving gay uncle (who never appears in a scene without a martini.) Joshua even mentions to his Dad early in the film that he hates playing soccer -- and baseball too!

Rockwell's mother comes to help with the family's newest addition - a relentlessly screaming infant girl who drives Farmiga into a severe (at times melodramatic) postpartum depression. Of course, Mom-In-Law is born-again, and in the scope of HELL-HOUSE-like vignettes, is the family's last hope for redemption. After taking Joshua to church, Grandma announces that Joshua has accepted Christ into his evil life and is met with an anti-Christian tongue lashing that would have made Julia Surgarbaker proud.

After driving his mom to the brink of insanity, Joshua goes on to kill poor Grandma - and incites his father to beating him in public. This was Joshua's master plan as a young homosexual. In the final scene we see Joshua once again tickling the ivories with his gay uncle (and new guardian) saying , "We were always meant to be together." Joshua then sings a Castrati-pitched love song to his new dad.

The big question is why the writers choose to link Joshua's satanic tendencies (the spawn of a city-dwelling agnostic couple) with a thinly veiled coming out story? They have some hefty explaining to do on the DVD. This has gotta be booth #42 in the HELL HOUSE hay ride, right?

Meanwhile, I'd like to propose the sequel to this film: A musical comedy set 6 years in the future where happy and well adjusted Joshua and sister are living a life of wacky antics with their gay uncle. Josh struggles to balance the demands of his first boyfriend while preparing to audition for the lead role in the revival of SPRING AWAKENING.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 8 of 9: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history