CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.8/10
12 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Diez años después de un evento apocalíptico que mató a millones y dejó el mundo habitado por fantasmas, Bella Thorne recibe un mensaje amenazador desde más allá de la tumba.Diez años después de un evento apocalíptico que mató a millones y dejó el mundo habitado por fantasmas, Bella Thorne recibe un mensaje amenazador desde más allá de la tumba.Diez años después de un evento apocalíptico que mató a millones y dejó el mundo habitado por fantasmas, Bella Thorne recibe un mensaje amenazador desde más allá de la tumba.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
David Lawrence Brown
- Principal Pescatelli
- (as David Brown)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Really enjoyed this for the following reasons:
1) Mystery aspect, sci-fi aspect, horror aspect.
2) Told a story where I didn't think " man I have seen this plot a hundred times" I couldn't guess the ending right away. Didn't end with some lame or annoying conclusion.
3) The intrigue builds through out 4) Elements are dropped along the way that actually get used in the plot progress.
5) Has a dark feel to the environment, the characters and the main point.
Not sure about the negative reviews, I just think sometimes people enjoy cutting down something that they didn't invest the work to make. Or maybe they expected a Spielberg epic or a Transformers CGI fest.
Give it a try.
2) Told a story where I didn't think " man I have seen this plot a hundred times" I couldn't guess the ending right away. Didn't end with some lame or annoying conclusion.
3) The intrigue builds through out 4) Elements are dropped along the way that actually get used in the plot progress.
5) Has a dark feel to the environment, the characters and the main point.
Not sure about the negative reviews, I just think sometimes people enjoy cutting down something that they didn't invest the work to make. Or maybe they expected a Spielberg epic or a Transformers CGI fest.
Give it a try.
While not exactly being a fan of Bella Thorne (can't stand 'Shake It Up' for example), it was the concept that had me sold on watching 'I Still See You'. A concept that was among the cleverest and most imaginative, and one of the most ambitious, ones for any film seen recently and really had me intrigued. Even the advertising grabbed the attention and did hear good things about it, so the potential was certainly there and it was not exactly small.
'I Still See You' however could have done quite a lot more with this concept. It is not a bad film and it is not a complete waste of the potential it had, but there was a big deal of room for improvment and the potential is far from fullfilled. It also struck me after watching that the concept would have lended itself better to a mini-series and that it was too ambitious for a feature film. It really does annoy me somewhat when a film like 'I Still See You' has such an intriguing and ambitious concept, that could have been done very imaginatively, but executes it in a too ordinary, mundane and muddled way. Far from being one of the worst cases sure and there are flashes of greatness, but a concept as good as this deserved a much better film.
There are good things here in 'I Still See You'. It actually looks quite professional visually, the photography is slick, the moodiness of the lighting fits the atmosphere beautifully and the effects are surprisingly polished and like time and care went into constructing them (even if they weren't what one would call special). The moody atmosphere is reflected very effectively in the score, which doesn't overbear what's going on and doesn't sound cheap or inappropriate, the placement never questionable.
Direction is competent and the acting is well above average and while not award-worthy it's acceptable. Bella Thorne surprisingly carries 'I Still See You' more than capably, was expecting her to be too lightweight and out of place but she was neither. Dermot Mulroney is up to her level and their chemistry works. 'I Still See You' also started off very promisingly indeed, with the imagination, suspense and intrigue present.
So it is sad that the second half is nowhere near as good. 'I Still See You' comes rather mundane and one loses interest. The dialogue can be very cheesy, of the difficult to take seriously kind which jars when the film itself is quite serious. There are a lot of predictable moments and there are parts that are of pure stupidity.
Am now going to elaborate on my opinion of the concept lending itself better to a mini-series. There are too many ideas, all great but never given the chance to be fully explored, and the film tries to be too much all at once which creates a tonal muddle which really confuses the story. 'I Still See You' becomes convoluted and cluttered, and the mundane feeling comes from the pace slackening (think the makers realised how much they were trying to pack in and tried to slow down to accomodate) and the suspense and imagination becoming lost under the over-ambition. The characters never fully develop either and are basically flimsy cliches no matter how decently acted they are. Then there is the somewhat hasty ending which leaves too many unanswered questions and loose ends and leaves the viewer crying what in frustration, a twist is also attempted but it felt rushed and didn't ring true. All of this giving off the sense that the film is too short.
Overall, great idea with very average execution. 5/10 Bethany Cox
'I Still See You' however could have done quite a lot more with this concept. It is not a bad film and it is not a complete waste of the potential it had, but there was a big deal of room for improvment and the potential is far from fullfilled. It also struck me after watching that the concept would have lended itself better to a mini-series and that it was too ambitious for a feature film. It really does annoy me somewhat when a film like 'I Still See You' has such an intriguing and ambitious concept, that could have been done very imaginatively, but executes it in a too ordinary, mundane and muddled way. Far from being one of the worst cases sure and there are flashes of greatness, but a concept as good as this deserved a much better film.
There are good things here in 'I Still See You'. It actually looks quite professional visually, the photography is slick, the moodiness of the lighting fits the atmosphere beautifully and the effects are surprisingly polished and like time and care went into constructing them (even if they weren't what one would call special). The moody atmosphere is reflected very effectively in the score, which doesn't overbear what's going on and doesn't sound cheap or inappropriate, the placement never questionable.
Direction is competent and the acting is well above average and while not award-worthy it's acceptable. Bella Thorne surprisingly carries 'I Still See You' more than capably, was expecting her to be too lightweight and out of place but she was neither. Dermot Mulroney is up to her level and their chemistry works. 'I Still See You' also started off very promisingly indeed, with the imagination, suspense and intrigue present.
So it is sad that the second half is nowhere near as good. 'I Still See You' comes rather mundane and one loses interest. The dialogue can be very cheesy, of the difficult to take seriously kind which jars when the film itself is quite serious. There are a lot of predictable moments and there are parts that are of pure stupidity.
Am now going to elaborate on my opinion of the concept lending itself better to a mini-series. There are too many ideas, all great but never given the chance to be fully explored, and the film tries to be too much all at once which creates a tonal muddle which really confuses the story. 'I Still See You' becomes convoluted and cluttered, and the mundane feeling comes from the pace slackening (think the makers realised how much they were trying to pack in and tried to slow down to accomodate) and the suspense and imagination becoming lost under the over-ambition. The characters never fully develop either and are basically flimsy cliches no matter how decently acted they are. Then there is the somewhat hasty ending which leaves too many unanswered questions and loose ends and leaves the viewer crying what in frustration, a twist is also attempted but it felt rushed and didn't ring true. All of this giving off the sense that the film is too short.
Overall, great idea with very average execution. 5/10 Bethany Cox
I watched this at home on DVD from my local library. My wife chose to skip, not her kind of movie.
Bella Thorne is the main character, high schooler Veronica (Ronnie) Calder. Every morning at the breakfast table she witnesses exactly the same thing, her father sitting there, reading a newspaper, smiling and nodding to her, then his image dissolves and disappears. The title is a reference to this.
Some ten years earlier in the Chicago area an incident during experiments with a heavy particle accelerator causes a flash that killed hundreds, including Ronnie's dad, and their images return every day.
But that just sets the story up. The meat of it becomes the search for a person who may be a serial killer, and may be tracking Ronnie so that an "exchange" can be made to bring someone else back from the dead.
It is a pretty interesting take on the ghost theme and I enjoyed watching the movie, although I will not count it among my favorites.
Bella Thorne is the main character, high schooler Veronica (Ronnie) Calder. Every morning at the breakfast table she witnesses exactly the same thing, her father sitting there, reading a newspaper, smiling and nodding to her, then his image dissolves and disappears. The title is a reference to this.
Some ten years earlier in the Chicago area an incident during experiments with a heavy particle accelerator causes a flash that killed hundreds, including Ronnie's dad, and their images return every day.
But that just sets the story up. The meat of it becomes the search for a person who may be a serial killer, and may be tracking Ronnie so that an "exchange" can be made to bring someone else back from the dead.
It is a pretty interesting take on the ghost theme and I enjoyed watching the movie, although I will not count it among my favorites.
I totally understand if you already voted not useful. I can't always explain what I think or what goes on ... thought process and all that. I just type what comes to mind. Now I'm not suggesting the scriptwriter here had the same inclinations. Especially because this is based on a novel that I have not read yet (so no comparisons I can make to that).
Interesting premise, interesting story to say the least. Gets way cliche towards the end, so a bit of letdown. At least I felt that way. I would have gone higher rating, if it didn't try to just ... do the easy way out. But still for the very powerful beginning and a lot of visual and otherwise treats this serves you, I think one can watch this and be entertained (if you are into horror science fiction stuff).
Interesting premise, interesting story to say the least. Gets way cliche towards the end, so a bit of letdown. At least I felt that way. I would have gone higher rating, if it didn't try to just ... do the easy way out. But still for the very powerful beginning and a lot of visual and otherwise treats this serves you, I think one can watch this and be entertained (if you are into horror science fiction stuff).
I don't agree with the reviews that say that the script tries to pack too much in, I really don't get that criticism. It's fine. The problem that brought this movie down from a 7:00 to 6:00 for me is a disappointingly common plot development toward the end, such a cliche that it pulls the movie down from good to just fair. I haven't read the novel it's based on but I suspect the same thing happens there. If that's correct you can't blame the script for following the novel.
My own rule of thumb is that a 6 is a decently entertaining movie and a 7 is worth watching more than once. I probably will never watch this movie again but it was an entertaining way to spend 100 minutes.
My own rule of thumb is that a 6 is a decently entertaining movie and a 7 is worth watching more than once. I probably will never watch this movie again but it was an entertaining way to spend 100 minutes.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe film is based on the 2012 novel "Break My Heart 1,000 Times" by Daniel Waters.
- ErroresWhile Ronnie and Kirk are talking next to his car, the water tower in the background clearly says CARMAN. This is the town in Manitoba where some filming took place, though the movie's primary setting is fictional Jewel City, Illinois.
- Citas
Dr. Martin Steiner: The laws are lies, Miss Calder... bedtime stories for children to shut their eyes.
[chuckles]
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is I Still See You?Con tecnología de Alexa
- Is this a sequel to some movie ?
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- I Still See You
- Locaciones de filmación
- Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canadá(Abandoned Factory)
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 1,359
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 815
- 14 oct 2018
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 1,620,637
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 38 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the Japanese language plot outline for Ecos mortales (2018)?
Responda