Intrusos

Ah, the twist! The "surprise ending", the "shocker", or lack there of. There is an art to surprising people at the end of the movie that is the lifeblood of films like this. This one, unfortunately, is dry. They do a good job of setting up the scenes, making you thoroughly confused before explaining everything. If you can make it that long, which you might not be able to, it is a boring show and the pay off is somewhat weak.

Now, the acting is top notch, Clive Owens does an very good job of playing father, and the supporting cast really commits to this movie. That said, it isn't enough to carry the film through the normal jumps and grabs while you just sit there saying, 'get on with it!'

Two children from two different countries are seemingly haunted by the same ghostly apparition. As the actions of this malevolent force begin to intrude more and more on their lives both desperately try to be rid of it once and for all.

The best thing about this movie is that it plays on fears and experiences that we have all had in our childhoods, the monster in the closet, the beast under the bed. Waking up in the night and hearing spooky sounds. It's these parts of the movie that are most effective in the scare stakes. Each time one of the children is cautiously peering over their bed sheets you know exactly how they are feeling.

Clive Owen as the father of the English girl is great. Playing the everyman role of the father fearing for his little girls safety is something he seems to take in his stride. The relationship between the father and daughter is very believable and helps towards the tension created later in the movie.

The other family's story a young boy and his single mother, I found distracted slightly from this story. Not that it's not interesting, it's just that I found the other story more interesting. The two do eventually collide and although you may see the twist coming before it's actually revealed it's still quite satisfying.

The feel and some of the imagery of Intruders brought to mind the 80's movie "paperhouse" which is a film I like and recommend if you enjoyed this movie.

The one real problem I had with the movie was the poor CG effects on the ghostly creature haunting the young boy and his mother. It seemed strange that they went with CG for one thread of the story and a much more convincing and creepier physical version for the other thread.

I did enjoy this film but I felt that it drifted a few times during the mid section. It's definitely one I could watch again.

Well, OK, let me first start by saying the movie is not "bad".

If you want to go watch an OK to somewhat decent movie, this one is for you, but if your aspirations are any higher you should look for elsewhere.

The movie starts slow but surely it states it's points pretty quickly. An invisible invader haunts 2 different kids from different places, a little kid and a not so little girl. The movie flow nice with the script but the actual "fright" scenes are not very much so, in fact, I didn't experience any scare whatsoever through the movie, and this comes from a guy who after watching The Mothman Prophecies had to sleep with the lights on and had goosebumps for the whole duration.

Sadly, this one, for a scare-suspense movie, does the complete opposite, it's plain and quite hollow. We never really find the motive of the attacks, and the motives are vague to say the least.

The main problem with this one is that the "bad guy" is not scary and the scary scenes don't work, that's it and it's enough for a movie of this genre to fail.

If we take out this one little problem, the rest of the movie is OK, good acting and some good twists at the end, but, the main flaws are too big. Number one, lack of good scares, lack of sense of danger, bad timing and for the most important part, a lack of purpose for the attacks.

To add insult to injury, there are scenes so clichéd that bend on ridicule, I can't, for the life of me picture a scary movie where the parents LEAVE the children in the same bed where a monster just attacked them. The first time this happens, well, it's OK, it's movies you know, common sense don't apply, the fifth time it's ridiculous, I would sleep with my kids the first time this happens, does anyone there takes notices of this huge mistakes in common sense?

Recommended only for a casual viewing if you don't have anything more worth watching, if you want real suspense go watch Mothman Prophecies.

A supernatural creature terrorizes a child, and the adults in that child's life either dismiss the child's fears as nightmarish, or assume the child has some sort of psychosis. This plot line has been done so many times that it's amazing that adults in present-day movies don't second guess themselves more often.

"Intruders" has a bit more of a clever twist to this tired horror movie story line in that the terrorized child, 12-year-old Mia (Ella Purnell), at least has an ally in her father John (Clive Owen), who has actually seen the being trying to harm his daughter.

The being, known to Mia as Hollowman, wears a dark hood and cloak that moves mysteriously in the air like something out of "The Matrix" (1999). The mysterious spirit has the shape of a man, but its face is completely obscured by its hood, making it look a lot like Bruce Willis in the underrated "Invincible" (2000).

The unwelcome visitor does not speak, but Mia somehow knows it does not have a face, and is willing to steal one from a child. Also, despite the plurality of the movie's title, there is only one intruder: this one.

Mia is apparently not the only child haunted by this creature. A much younger Spanish boy named Juan (Izan Corchero) also receives visits from it. The film intersects between the nightly terrors of Mia and Juan, and it makes you wonder what the connection is between these two children. Why did this spirit choose to haunt these two children in two different European countries (Great Britain and Spain), when there are millions of other children in this world whose face (or faces) he could steal? The way these two children's stories intersect is revealed late in the film in a twist I honestly did not see coming. Because it was so clever, I can't ruin it for you, the reader, either.

Unfortunately, it being a horror movie and a suspense thriller, the moments that were supposed to be shocking, and scary, weren't either. The film made the fatal mistake of making the music, which gradually got louder as a scary moment or a "gotcha!" part was approaching, ruin the overall suspense. By the time the mysterious hooded person appeared from out of the dark closet, the score felt more like a great opening act for a weak headliner.

The shock value of this film, or lack thereof, is even more unfortunate when you consider the superb cinematography and great acting from just about everyone involved. Clive Owen rarely fails to disappoint, and fortunately plays a parent who actually believes his petrified daughter.

I especially liked Ella Purnell, who is the kind of child actress who guys in their 20's look at and say, "In five years, she's going to be really hot!" Besides being strikingly beautiful, Purnell looks genuinely scared during the scenes with the creature in the hood, and she is very convincing as Owen's daughter in other less-intense scenes.

I also thought every scene with Corchero, as Juan, and his mother Luisa (Pilar Lopez de Ayala), scary or not, was done incredibly well. They played in good contrast to scenes involving John and Mia. Whereas John believes his daughter's problems are more than nightmares, Luisa believes her son, but uses words of comfort almost in vain. She tries to tell her boy it's only a bad dream, when she's really trying to convince herself. It's a fascinating paradox.

Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo is best known to American audiences as the writer & director of "28 Weeks Later" (2007), the well-received sequel to Danny Boyle's acclaimed "28 Days Later" (2003). He definitely knows his horror films, which is why it's so disappointing that "Intruders" didn't live up to his previous effort. While great acting and a dark, eerie atmosphere strengthened this movie, it wasn't enough to scare me.

Putting it another way, I consider a great horror film one where my hands are covering my entire face except one eye, and two of my fingers are on standby to affix over that eye should a scary moment present itself. With "Intruders", throughout the scary parts, my hands remained at my sides.

This film seems to have a very low key marketing and I haven't even seen many critics reviews for it despite it already opening.

I found this to be a pretty decent supernatural bogeyman type thriller with some intriguing psychological twists and turns. The scares are sparsely spread but are effective when they do come. The storyline is quite compelling and is told in two completely separate strands whose only apparent connection is the bogeyman. It had me very engaged and a very creepy atmosphere is maintained.

The performance from all the actors including the children were good, nothing outstanding, just played to realistic levels. There isn't a lot of emotional weight to the characters but I cared about the child protagonists, who are victimised by the "Freddie Nightmare" style dream monster.

The last act is a good one but unfortunately, it was sloppily executed. The finale should have been more dynamic with a bigger impact on its revelations. Given the storyline, its a missed opportunity for the director. Also, there is a big chance you might see some twists coming due to the film's narrative giving too many clues, again a bit sloppy. I did see the revelations coming to an extent but there was still a twist that I didn't expect. I do like the story, its a satisfying one but the execution could have been much better which is a pity. Still the journey was an intriguing one, at times scary and definitely worth a watch.