Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Disappointing, even with low expectations.
I'm not a fan of Adrien Brody or Sarah Polley, and the trailer looked a little silly, but all the positive reviews sparked my interest. It was actually worse than I thought it would be.
the good? um, i guess the creature was kinda fun in its adult female stage.
the bad? geez, where do i start. none of the characters in this movie really work. i think they should have gotten different actors for everyone besides dren. i didn't buy clive and elsa being these groundbreaking incredibly intelligent scientists. elsa makes sooo many stupid decisions, one after another, it's incredibly frustrating and you just roll your eyes like oh cmon.
cgcgcg. i can't take it anymore! America hasn't made a good horror movie in 20 years and ya know 1 reason why? bad cgi. my god, with someone like knb fx working on your movie, throw out the digital guy and let them work their magic. it's so painful to look at that crap. it has no weight, no tangibility. Maybe this movie would have been better if it was made in 1987. It had potential but just made all the wrong moves. predictable and laughably bad, but mostly just bad.
Not bad, but worth watching for Esther alone.
*SPOILERS!* my whole review contains spoilers so don't read if you haven't seen it yet.
The movie starts out like your typical dark psychological thriller, including the painfully cheap scare tactics of a squeaky medicine cabinet that isn't scary. I just hate when directors think it's a good idea to do that, because it's such a cop-out cliché from real fear.
The bird kill was actually extremely well done. I went step-by-step on the DVD and it just looks so real. Bravo.
The biggest fault for me is the unbelievability. Scene after scene of evil little girl actions and everyone is just sooo oblivious it gets very frustrating- Especially the dad, get a clue! Whom, also, is obviously gay. I read up on it and it seems he's married to Maggie Gyllenhaal with a child but still, that doesn't mean he's hetero and his speech and movement are real giveaways. I am certainly not saying that there is a problem with being gay, but the character calls for a straight family man and so in that way I felt it was distracting since most of time his homosexuality just seems so incredibly obvious. Anyway, after the nun from the orphanage is killed, that should have been a dead giveaway that OK, something is NOT RIGHT. but still the evil continues and obliviousness ensues. As for her death, the CG blood was a little distracting and there could have been more fury, so overall not too exciting. The grandma, a bitchy woman who only appears in a couple scenes, also really could have benefited from a creative death scene.
When the mom finds dad in a puddle of his own blood, (nice stabbing death) she seems very underwhelmed. Your loving husband has just been murdered and you only sit by his side for a moment to grieve and then take off never to return. That's just unnatural. She showed more emotion in all of her other dramatic scenes and this was the most dramatic of all! The real saving grace in this movie is Isabelle Fuhrman who plays Esther. I don't think they could have gotten anyone better. Perfect casting. She is so manipulative and believably evil. The twist at the end is original and very clever and it WORKS! After seeing her brush off her make-up and change her clothes, you really believe she is a 33-year old psycho dwarf! She really makes the movie worth watching.
The ending was a disappointment. Mom delivers that cliché one-liner, which actually may have worked if it wasn't pronounced as loudly and with such dramatic pause. That just made it so cheesy. And this is followed by a CG neck break which just makes me groan in disappointment. Why is that even needed? It would have been much better to have the mom kick her real hard in the face and have her neck slam backwards and watch her bloody face slowly submerge into the water below.
The movie isn't bad, but it really could have benefited from a trim of 30 minutes and a few re-writes. 2 hours isn't needed, an hour and a half would have sufficed just fine.
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
The cast of Twilight meets Freddy Krueger
So we all heard the negative reviews before the movie even came out, and now it's out and there's even more negative reviews than before. I'm not one to conform to the majority vote,I try to keep an open mind and give my unbiased opinion, even though I did in fact have low expectations, not just from word of mouth but from the previews themselves.
I have to say the majority got it right. It's like a good example of how not to make a good movie.There was just nothing to be excited about. Some stuff happened, in a very mediocre way. The dialogue. was. monotone. with. woeful. expression.
Every other minute is a quick cheap scare. The sound goes quiet, then a large BOO to make you jump. That's the filmmaker saying I don't really know how to scare people so I'm going to have a loud noise every minute to make you jump and think that what you saw is in fact scary.
I'm actually most surprised that I really missed Robert Englund. I was honestly actually looking forward to a new Freddy since the character has become so comical. I was looking forward to bringing him back into the realm of Horror. Not that Jackie did a bad job, I just feel he wasn't really given a chance to do a good one. And all I could think was man, I miss Robert. Sometimes you don't realize how good someone is until someone else takes their place.
I swear the kids looked like a less attractive Twilight cast, and just as flat and two-dimensional. The whole movie was just dull. I was hoping there would be at least SOMETHING, but it was just a whole lot of nothing.
Hobbs End (2002)
thank you for your review lizzie, i wish i would have read it before watching that awful film. although i did fast forward through the last half since i was so bored with nonsense conversation. nice cover art, bad movie.