seth_yeah
Juli 2005 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen4
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Rezensionen6
Bewertung von seth_yeah
Bergman made another movie about how hard it is to be an artist. You know what, though? Screw the artists. It's a difficult life for everyone.
This movie exploits natural landscapes by introducing them as gorgeous, indistinguishable from human beings, then minimalizing them by focusing only on its human character's psychological drama. Although I really like most of his movies, Bergman seems like the kind of guy who would wander off into the woods and, rather than notice the woods, would think only about himself. This art show should be of interest to film students however.
The mountains and the bubbles in water accidentally captured in this motion picture are more fascinating than its anthropocentric purpose!
This movie exploits natural landscapes by introducing them as gorgeous, indistinguishable from human beings, then minimalizing them by focusing only on its human character's psychological drama. Although I really like most of his movies, Bergman seems like the kind of guy who would wander off into the woods and, rather than notice the woods, would think only about himself. This art show should be of interest to film students however.
The mountains and the bubbles in water accidentally captured in this motion picture are more fascinating than its anthropocentric purpose!
I just rented it on the strength of some online reviews, and because it did look & sound creepy. Misleadingly, it seems that some people give it more credit than it deserves, taking into account its small budget and placing it in some "genre" that allows for it to be bad, or something. That is a schooled take of the movie that is removed from the natural context of a regular viewer sitting down and wanting to see a good scary movie.
The legitimate gripes you'll hear about this one are the standard criticisms you'll hear of any bad film, coming from anyone-- the acting is bad, the characters are stupid, the script is awful, it doesn't make any sense, and if the scarecrows are so supernatural, then why do they use big knives to kill everyone? Kind of for keeping with the slasher-movie trend, I guess.
So much potential was wasted, in this movie. It's the kind of movie that you don't need a big budget to turn into a classic. These people are stranded in this creepy old house in the woods one night (for meaningless reasons), and these really scary-looking scarecrows are surrounding the place, for no reason. I like the fact that it never explains who put the scarecrows there, and why the scarecrows come to life, or who owns the place in the first place. It makes for good atmosphere. Really good premise. You're not even supposed to ask "why," which, for a horror film, is a good thing-- it means anything goes. However what could be a straight-forward and barebones horror story is weighed down by a tendency toward fast-paced action; wise-cracking criminals, guns and explosions, a crime subplot that drains the supernatural mood.
A group of criminals with no charisma or brains, who you remain typically indifferent to, are on the run and as they hide from the law, they find their selves in the backwoods, hunted down by these freaky scarecrows. These are not characters who you get to know, empathize with, or understand. They bicker unintelligently, swear a lot, shoot guns and recite corny lines. No one's really heroic, you don't know who to root for-- basically the scarecrows end up the most endearing characters, though it's not intended that way. It's just that- with each person the scarecrows kill, you know the movie is sooner to being finished. It's not really suspenseful, and other than the appearance of the scarecrows (which you kinda get used to), it's not really scary, unless you're young or watching it alone out in the country, late at night.
What really spoils it, seriously, very badly, is the terrible acting. You can't even overlook it. And the dialogue. Everyone is constantly talking, in their stupid voices, making stupid jokes all the time, saying stupid things. You can't get around it. If the movie had dropped at least half the dialogue, it could be viewable. And if it had lost, ideally, about 95% of the dialogue ('cause so much of the drama and conversations is so stupid and annoying and pointless) the film itself could be worth repeated watches with no other alterations. Unless you're into bad movies, and that's cool, too-- some people are.
The scarecrows are pretty frightening-looking. I live out in the country. If I saw a scarecrow like that, it would make me say yikes and run away. I think that, in this movie, the scarecrows have a dialogue going back and forth, sharing corny one-liners, but you can't tell if they're talking or if the main characters are the ones talking, because they all sound the same and talk the same way, and they're just always talking. Maybe this movie would be better if you watched it with the volume all the way down.
Rating: Worse than fair, but not bad enough to be bad.
The legitimate gripes you'll hear about this one are the standard criticisms you'll hear of any bad film, coming from anyone-- the acting is bad, the characters are stupid, the script is awful, it doesn't make any sense, and if the scarecrows are so supernatural, then why do they use big knives to kill everyone? Kind of for keeping with the slasher-movie trend, I guess.
So much potential was wasted, in this movie. It's the kind of movie that you don't need a big budget to turn into a classic. These people are stranded in this creepy old house in the woods one night (for meaningless reasons), and these really scary-looking scarecrows are surrounding the place, for no reason. I like the fact that it never explains who put the scarecrows there, and why the scarecrows come to life, or who owns the place in the first place. It makes for good atmosphere. Really good premise. You're not even supposed to ask "why," which, for a horror film, is a good thing-- it means anything goes. However what could be a straight-forward and barebones horror story is weighed down by a tendency toward fast-paced action; wise-cracking criminals, guns and explosions, a crime subplot that drains the supernatural mood.
A group of criminals with no charisma or brains, who you remain typically indifferent to, are on the run and as they hide from the law, they find their selves in the backwoods, hunted down by these freaky scarecrows. These are not characters who you get to know, empathize with, or understand. They bicker unintelligently, swear a lot, shoot guns and recite corny lines. No one's really heroic, you don't know who to root for-- basically the scarecrows end up the most endearing characters, though it's not intended that way. It's just that- with each person the scarecrows kill, you know the movie is sooner to being finished. It's not really suspenseful, and other than the appearance of the scarecrows (which you kinda get used to), it's not really scary, unless you're young or watching it alone out in the country, late at night.
What really spoils it, seriously, very badly, is the terrible acting. You can't even overlook it. And the dialogue. Everyone is constantly talking, in their stupid voices, making stupid jokes all the time, saying stupid things. You can't get around it. If the movie had dropped at least half the dialogue, it could be viewable. And if it had lost, ideally, about 95% of the dialogue ('cause so much of the drama and conversations is so stupid and annoying and pointless) the film itself could be worth repeated watches with no other alterations. Unless you're into bad movies, and that's cool, too-- some people are.
The scarecrows are pretty frightening-looking. I live out in the country. If I saw a scarecrow like that, it would make me say yikes and run away. I think that, in this movie, the scarecrows have a dialogue going back and forth, sharing corny one-liners, but you can't tell if they're talking or if the main characters are the ones talking, because they all sound the same and talk the same way, and they're just always talking. Maybe this movie would be better if you watched it with the volume all the way down.
Rating: Worse than fair, but not bad enough to be bad.
Kürzlich durchgeführte Umfragen
45 Gesamtzahl der durchgeführten Umfragen
