IMDb > Entrance (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Entrance More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 23 reviews in total 

41 out of 65 people found the following review useful:

Very Pleasantly Surprised

Author: theshape31 from Planet Earth
7 May 2012

Go into 'Entrance' blindly.

Don't look up anything about this movie, not even a plot summary or trailer. I had no idea what kind of movie it was, so when it all came together in the end it was an unforgettable experience.

'Entrance' is a very creatively and craftily made no-budget movie. It is the best film of its kind that I've seen in years.

This is an incredible effort that I would recommend to anyone looking for something that is atypically effective and defies the norm.

The shot composition in 'Entrance' is outstanding, the directors certainly know how to frame a shot. The acting is superb, there was a great suspension of disbelief throughout that normally doesn't happen with such low budget efforts. These filmmakers have a bright future ahead of them, and I can't wait to see what they do next.

Great stuff all around, enjoy!

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 50 people found the following review useful:

Do not wast your time

Author: healthybuddhabar from Australia
8 July 2012

It's a chilling ending that's unfortunately undermined by several things 1 – it is so slow and takes 50 minute to get to some action 2 – It is so slow I had to go to bed half way through and watch the rest the next night 3 – Back yard acting 4 - Do not waste your time watching this movie 5 - This is an "ART MOVIE "only 6 - It is slow, really slow 7 - I was told by my partner that the ending was worth it. WRONG SO WRONG 8 - No point to wait until the end. Please save your valuable time – I hope you choose wise I signed up to IMDb to save you 90 minutes of pain (The only horror about this movie)There are so many good movies out there so DON'T watch this one – I could make a better one

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

It just wasn't worth the long wait for something to happen

Author: J. Davis ( from USA
7 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film follows this woman aimlessly going about her life, doing this and that, certainly nothing profound or exciting happening.

For the first sixty minutes this is like a bad romcom without the romance & comedy. It belongs in the drama section, although there wasn't really any drama either.

Then at her moving away party suddenly some stalker shows up & starts doing bad things off camera to her friends. It was less than 70 minutes of actual movie time and there was very little suspense,tension or horror. The long wait for something to happen just didn't pay off.

Honestly watching grass grow is a fine alternative to watching this. If you do choose to watch it you risk having the same senseless feeling that I had. This gets a 2/10

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 47 people found the following review useful:


Author: evenglow7 from Australia
15 May 2012

I was also disturbed by people reviewing this movie and saying how "bored" they were! Have we become so out of touch with the reality of things that so easily can and do occur in our now very sick society, that we rate films such as this only as "poor" or "great" "entertainment"? I feel that this film addressed that very phenomenon: the false sense of security that we all gain just in going about our daily lives, not really heeding little signs that perhaps we should be investigating a bit more, dismissing them as mere 'paranoia'. I found the non-intrusive ease, the quickness, and the possibility of such events happening to any one of us, despite living in the most densely populated cities today, quite upsetting. Not for women living on their own.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Tense, disconcerting and brilliant.

Author: JannaCherry
1 June 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am so glad that I was not put off by the overall rating on IMDb for this film and instead chose to go by a positive user review.

It is unfair that this film doesn't have more recognition, especially in the horror genre. The composition is masterful. Not one shot goes to waste. It creates an intimacy and an unbearable tension. I was also surprised by its refreshing understanding of the subtlety of fear. This is in no way 'boring'. It is quietly upsetting with terror seeping into the everyday; leading to a cold and matter-of- fact climax.

Also worth a second viewing, just to appreciate the forethought in every scene.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

If you're expecting anything at all, you'll probably hate this movie

Author: rooprect from New York City
27 November 2014

The first and only IMDb review I read for this movie said to go into it blindly, so I did without even reading the rest of the review. Going into it blindly is the best advice anyone could give. And if you read the rest of this review, don't worry I won't expose a thing. I won't even tell you what genre this film is (because as far as I can tell it isn't any genre).

I'll be honest and say I hated the first 12 minutes because it seemed indulgent & pointless. Also I'm not really a fan of hand-held camera work. But luckily I have a tolerance/attention span of exactly 13 minutes because that's when a story began to develop. And ultimately I realized even those "pointless" 12 minutes had a point. It sets up a very subtle yet pervasive metaphor, the soul of the whole movie.

Slowly, so slowly that you might not even notice (which I'm sure was the filmmakers' intent) the film starts to get under your skin. And although the only quantifiable storyline for the first 40 minutes is a girl and her dog, it's done so convincingly and, yes, suspensefully that I was hooked. And that, my friends, is all I will say about the plot because you shouldn't expect anything more.

Now a few notes about technique... The directors did something very interesting by never taking the camera off the lead actress throughout the whole movie, not once. Also the camera would sometimes run long, continuous shots without cuts. While this method may sacrifice momentum and some viewer interest, it adds tremendous realism, almost like a documentary feel. And we begin to connect with the heroine even though she doesn't say much. And of course the difficulty in staging the rest of the action while always keeping her in the shot must've been no easy task. The final 22 minutes is a very impressive achievement, all done in one continuous take with a lot going on, and I mean a whole lot.

People have called this film "experimental", but there's no experiment about it. This is a fully finished product with a great style, a novel approach, and certainly the most memorable ending I've seen in ages, ending on an image which I can't decide if it's chilling, hilarious or beautiful.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:


Author: susan-kelley from United States
8 February 2013

This movie follows an aimless young woman in LA. That would be fine for 20-30 minutes, and it's bearable for a while mainly because she's beautiful. It's not until the very last 10 or 15 minutes that something happens, terribly unexpected and frankly, quite disjointed. We kept waiting for something to happen, and by the time it did, my husband was fast asleep. Not that I blame him-- I was jealous. This movie is perfect to help you get to bed at night. Some people called this movie a "slow burn." I'd say it's NO burn, and then sudden burn. Others say we need too much stimulation that we call this boring. But the main character also felt that her life was boring. So why should we have to suffer through it, too? Wow, I honestly can't believe IMDb is forcing me to write more. There is more action in my review than there was in the entire movie. I registered on this site just so I could write this review and warn others away.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

Horrendous waste of time.

Author: broadchef from United States
13 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I would give this movie 0 stars if the option existed. I spent the first hour of this movie watching a sad lonely girl in the city go about her daily routine of doing absolutely nothing except going to work and occasionally playing with her dog. The last 15 minutes of the movie consisted of the sad girl walking around her house after being tied up and finding her friends either dead or left for dead. It was absolutely boring and I can honestly say that I don't believe I've ever felt this screwed out of two hours that I'll never get back. Aside from an occasional drop of foreshadowing and a truly tragic development of a relationship between a girl and her dog that eventually disappears (viewers are lead to believe the stalker that eventually kills the main character's friends took it) this movie is absolute crap. Typically, most "0-budget" films such as this at least maintain a thought provoking dialog or occasional spurts of humor to break up the monotony of simply following a girl for a couple weeks until some stalker kills all of her friends for the last 15 minutes. To top it all off: there's no resolution leading to an even more horrible sensation of emptiness and contempt for the writer/director/producer responsible for this 2 hour mess.

With all that being said, I'm tempted to believe the objective of this movie was specifically to frustrate the viewer to no end with its dead end plot and abrupt frayed ending.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

A unique twist of genres with a beginning, a middle, a little more middle...and an end

Author: jazzan83 from United States
1 March 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Not a movie for those with short attention spans. For some reason, quarter of the way through, I started fantasizing about Naomi Watts. I guess something about this reminded me of Mulholland Drive? Don't ask.

Maybe it was the "artistic" feel throughout the movie, or the experimental twist of genres, the almost found footage feel, who knows, but the fact that it's considered a thriller may be a bit confusing for some, unless of course you fast-forward to the ending. Now, while being slow and steady, doesn't make it a bad film, I just don't see it being for everyone. Especially not one I think most fans of typical thriller/slasher flicks are looking for.

It's mostly a look inside the main character and her daily life as a barista who seems relatively happy and normal until her beloved canine goes missing. Then paranoia kicks in, seemingly small, insignificant events happen and she has a going away party. Boom.

Problem I had with this was there were a lot of drawn out, continuous shots, which, although framed excellently considering all the movement with one camera, made it difficult to remain focused on the story. For example, when she's out putting up fliers for her missing dog, they took at least two or three separate scenes to shoot it when it could have been just as easy to do it in one and get back to the story. I also couldn't see how the title fit in, but that's a different matter.

Anyway, worth a view, just don't be expecting high anxiety, driven, tension; there are some good money shots for those blood-lusters out there though.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

I don't even know what to say.

Author: jinx_malone from United States
2 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There are a lot of shills on this board giving this high marks. That's one thing I can say. Are you all friends and family of the filmmakers?

To those of you discussing the masterful composition of shots: where? Shots go on for far too long to get them up to feature length, everything could and should have been trimmed drastically on both the head and tail ends.

This is essentially a student film. I say this, having been a film student myself and able to recognize the repetition, non-existent pacing and lack of plot that passes for a senior year project. The fact that it took four people to write this is shameful; I wouldn't have advertised the fact that even with four 'writers' working on this there's essentially nothing happening at all.

The lead is not a very good actress, she's not compelling to watch and her line delivery is pretty bad. There's a bit cribbed from Fatal Attraction where the lead switches a bedside lamp on and off post empty sexual encounter to symbolize her alienation, my response to this was a resounding 'who cares?'

Shot in and around Silverlake and Los Feliz, the only fun to be had is spotting your local landmarks. I'm sure there were lots of excited story discussions in just the right tone of voice so that the other diners knew they were making a film over glasses of red wine at--hmm. I'll take a guess and say it was at Alcove on Hillhurst, though Intelligentsia probably got hit hard too.

The 'shocking' ending doesn't make it any good, so don't count on it saving the day. It was probably conceived of as a short and should have stayed that way.

How do you rebar two people together? Another rip, this time from a Friday the 13th film, by the way, though I can't remember which one. And I don't know too many hipsters who keep an axe in or around their houses, either. Maybe the killer brought it with him to the party in the back of his Prius. Laughably bad.

P.S. It's a blue heeler, not a blue 'healer'. Did you want me to think your protagonist was stupid as well as utterly boring?

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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