Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAfter renting a cursed VHS tape of a horror anthology nobody has ever heard of, four horror lovers are sucked into the tape and forced to live out each segment alone.After renting a cursed VHS tape of a horror anthology nobody has ever heard of, four horror lovers are sucked into the tape and forced to live out each segment alone.After renting a cursed VHS tape of a horror anthology nobody has ever heard of, four horror lovers are sucked into the tape and forced to live out each segment alone.
Photos
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesDue to a miscue during the "Dingus of Death" segment, Korey Jordan (who was playing the monster) broke a glass that flew over actor Ryan Grooms' head while he was blowing smoke for the smoke effect off camera. The glass miraculously missed Grooms and impaled the wall behind him. In the following scene after that, Jordan injured his knee tossing Grooms over the table. It was just the start of a grueling shoot that didn't end until 4 a.m. and saw a few minor injuries on set. The scene was also shot with director Chuck Conry having laryngitis and an upper respiratory infection.
Commentaire en vedette
Fleeting value overwhelmed by weak craft & bad ideas
Very indie and very low-budget, the movie bears the appearance in its very image quality of having been shot on home video just like the characters glibly remark about some of the titles they've accordingly watched. This is reflected in the production design and art direction - or lack thereof, as filmmaker Chuck Conry seems to have made 'Door 1 of the 5 doors to hell' in around his hometown, and the abodes of his friends. I can forgive this astoundingly bare-faced presentation, just as I can forgive the acting of a cast consisting of non-professionals; they make an earnest effort, with mixed results. This very much looks and feels like something my friends and I might have made on a lark in college.
Similarly, I can forgive the violence, blood, gore, effects, and otherwise visuals that are at large unmistakably beholden to the same lack of resources, experience, or know-how. Some instances come off better than others (such as the gore at the beginning of the second segment), but take for example a moment in the first segment in which the protagonist suggests they need to be untied - except as we viewers see it, their bounds already appear to be so loose that they just fall off. Less forgivable are often juvenile and boorish attempts at humor, and hackneyed dialogue, including homophobic slurs and other such nonsense; even if Conry were simply aiming to ape the stylings of low-grade horror flicks of years past, the inclusions are tawdry if not also unnecessary.
The sound design is deeply imbalanced, ranging from dialogue so soft one can barely hear it, and sound effects so blaring they hurt the ears. The writing of each scene echoes the faults of the dialogue and the acting - while the execution of each scene reeks of stilted inauthenticity that not even the low budget can excuse. Plot development and narrative writing in each segment is sometimes altogether sloppy and almost incoherent.
In fairness, 'Door 1' demonstrates a measure of cheeky self-awareness that I admire. The narrative in each segment is recognizably imitative, but that doesn't mean they can't be fun, and they're (mostly) modestly well-written in the broad strokes. The overall concept is full of promise and ripe for entertainment. Despite all the many, many weaknesses and shortcomings of the production, there are glimmers of a good time to be had here at one point or another.
Unfortunately, whatever enjoyment the anthology has to offer, and sincere effort, cannot counterbalance its many problems. I can overlook flaws stemming from inexperience and lack of resources, but outright incapability is another matter entirely. This is to say nothing of moments that are pure poppycock - not fun, not funny, just aggravatingly obnoxious. Case in point, the third segment is one of the worst things I've ever watched, and it alone knocks several points off whatever imaginary numerical score one might assign to movies for easy assessment or comparison. After that, as the last segment begins, I've just altogether checked out.
For all the best aspects of what this tried to be, I'd love to say that I like it more than I do. In light of its worst elements, however, I think this sadly sits right around the bottom of the barrel. Sure, I've seen worse movies, and this isn't 100% bereft of value. It's close enough, however, that by the time it comes to a close, those glimmers of a good time are forgotten.
Take my advice: You don't need to open 'Door 1 of the 5 doors to hell.'
Similarly, I can forgive the violence, blood, gore, effects, and otherwise visuals that are at large unmistakably beholden to the same lack of resources, experience, or know-how. Some instances come off better than others (such as the gore at the beginning of the second segment), but take for example a moment in the first segment in which the protagonist suggests they need to be untied - except as we viewers see it, their bounds already appear to be so loose that they just fall off. Less forgivable are often juvenile and boorish attempts at humor, and hackneyed dialogue, including homophobic slurs and other such nonsense; even if Conry were simply aiming to ape the stylings of low-grade horror flicks of years past, the inclusions are tawdry if not also unnecessary.
The sound design is deeply imbalanced, ranging from dialogue so soft one can barely hear it, and sound effects so blaring they hurt the ears. The writing of each scene echoes the faults of the dialogue and the acting - while the execution of each scene reeks of stilted inauthenticity that not even the low budget can excuse. Plot development and narrative writing in each segment is sometimes altogether sloppy and almost incoherent.
In fairness, 'Door 1' demonstrates a measure of cheeky self-awareness that I admire. The narrative in each segment is recognizably imitative, but that doesn't mean they can't be fun, and they're (mostly) modestly well-written in the broad strokes. The overall concept is full of promise and ripe for entertainment. Despite all the many, many weaknesses and shortcomings of the production, there are glimmers of a good time to be had here at one point or another.
Unfortunately, whatever enjoyment the anthology has to offer, and sincere effort, cannot counterbalance its many problems. I can overlook flaws stemming from inexperience and lack of resources, but outright incapability is another matter entirely. This is to say nothing of moments that are pure poppycock - not fun, not funny, just aggravatingly obnoxious. Case in point, the third segment is one of the worst things I've ever watched, and it alone knocks several points off whatever imaginary numerical score one might assign to movies for easy assessment or comparison. After that, as the last segment begins, I've just altogether checked out.
For all the best aspects of what this tried to be, I'd love to say that I like it more than I do. In light of its worst elements, however, I think this sadly sits right around the bottom of the barrel. Sure, I've seen worse movies, and this isn't 100% bereft of value. It's close enough, however, that by the time it comes to a close, those glimmers of a good time are forgotten.
Take my advice: You don't need to open 'Door 1 of the 5 doors to hell.'
utile•11
- I_Ailurophile
- 24 sept. 2022
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Lieux de tournage
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 700 $ US (estimation)
- Durée1 heure 20 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Door 1 of the 5 Doors to Hell (2017) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre