The camera work is impressive in some areas, capturing unique perspectives, but that's not the problem with this film. The problems, actually, are what follows.
Where did all these reviews plastered on the poster come from? Are you kidding me? Who needs dialogue when you have long (to the point of awkward) actors and actresses staring off into nothing? We didn't need a plot, because: REASONS Nothing really made sense in this film, outside the fact that the lead antagonist was clearly insane.
The "violence" and "brutality" of this movie was very boring and simple. No real structure to the action, so it's selling itself as a boring trip.
If you want to see what a slow burning thriller should be like, watch A History of Violence. This film seems to attempt that kind of portrayal of a vigilante, but really, it's a failure of a horror film, shot in a way to show the perspectives of both cat and mouse, and boy are they both dull.
I gave it a 2 for the camera work being impressive, like I said, but I'd rather regurgitate a full grown cat than watch this again.
Where did all these reviews plastered on the poster come from? Are you kidding me? Who needs dialogue when you have long (to the point of awkward) actors and actresses staring off into nothing? We didn't need a plot, because: REASONS Nothing really made sense in this film, outside the fact that the lead antagonist was clearly insane.
The "violence" and "brutality" of this movie was very boring and simple. No real structure to the action, so it's selling itself as a boring trip.
If you want to see what a slow burning thriller should be like, watch A History of Violence. This film seems to attempt that kind of portrayal of a vigilante, but really, it's a failure of a horror film, shot in a way to show the perspectives of both cat and mouse, and boy are they both dull.
I gave it a 2 for the camera work being impressive, like I said, but I'd rather regurgitate a full grown cat than watch this again.