Pour leur première escapade romantique, Gabby et Michael se rendent dans une cabane. La première nuit devient terrifiante lorsque Michael se glisse dans un autre personnage qui prétend être ... Tout lirePour leur première escapade romantique, Gabby et Michael se rendent dans une cabane. La première nuit devient terrifiante lorsque Michael se glisse dans un autre personnage qui prétend être Dieu, parlant à travers le corps de Michael.Pour leur première escapade romantique, Gabby et Michael se rendent dans une cabane. La première nuit devient terrifiante lorsque Michael se glisse dans un autre personnage qui prétend être Dieu, parlant à travers le corps de Michael.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 8 victoires et 7 nominations au total
Avis à la une
This is NOT a horror movie by any stretch of the imagination. It is a proselytizing piece of drivel filled with logical fallacies and flaws in reasoning. The god is not one from any religious text, totally made up by the screenwriter. The acting is terrible. And at 2+ hours it is 120 minutes too long.
Maybe that of Sid Vicious and Nancy Spungen, or
maybe that of Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, or
maybe that of Fred Allen and Portland Hoffa, or
maybe that of Joan and Christina Crawford, or
maybe that of Clark Gable and Carole Lombard, or
maybe that of Napoleon Bonaparte and Josephine, or
maybe that of Tutahnkamun and Ahnkesunamun, or
maybe that of Pygmalion and Galatea, (before Aphrodite interceded), or
maybe that of Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agripinilla the Younger?
No, Jim and Pam, I think. See, there was this rock n' roll god-poet-lizard-demon-genius, who went to college, and his romantic muse...and these three other guys who could actually write and play music quite well.
But in truth, 'tis a mystery best left to the Sphinx, Oliver Stone, and others whose heads are made out of rock.
XYZ
PS: Chuck Berry wrote many of Shakespeare's plays.
maybe that of Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, or
maybe that of Fred Allen and Portland Hoffa, or
maybe that of Joan and Christina Crawford, or
maybe that of Clark Gable and Carole Lombard, or
maybe that of Napoleon Bonaparte and Josephine, or
maybe that of Tutahnkamun and Ahnkesunamun, or
maybe that of Pygmalion and Galatea, (before Aphrodite interceded), or
maybe that of Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agripinilla the Younger?
No, Jim and Pam, I think. See, there was this rock n' roll god-poet-lizard-demon-genius, who went to college, and his romantic muse...and these three other guys who could actually write and play music quite well.
But in truth, 'tis a mystery best left to the Sphinx, Oliver Stone, and others whose heads are made out of rock.
XYZ
PS: Chuck Berry wrote many of Shakespeare's plays.
The whole film amounts to a two hour religious monologue. If you would enjoy spending the same time reading a turgid religious tract then go for it. Otherwise you'll find it a dreadful grind and complete waste of time.
Howdy. For the record, since the majority of reviews here are from members who have only ever done ONE review and then astonishingly decided this specific film is a "10." I am an IMDb Top Reviewer with 1700+ reviews, and not shilling for anyone. That said, to understand this film, take a look at THE MAN FROM EARTH 2007, also a low-budget indie with a very tiny cast, also a film which is 99% conversation --- which in a pinch could even pass for a stage play. THAT odd film (which is on my IMDb LIST of 150+ great films) is a delight, and became an instant cult classic. This is the same kind of film, a film intended to get under your skin simply by the brilliance of the writing alone. In its way-too-long 2 hour runtime, it succeeds only occasionally which, in this competitive and time sensitive world, just won't cut it. "A" for effort. But the end result is simply not tight enough.
I am a fan of films that are largly two people talking. The End Of The Tour, Southside With You, The Two Popes and Linklater's Before trilogy are all films I have really appreciated. I was hoping for something similar here, but didn't get it.
Broadly speaking given the premise I think there are three legitimate answers as to what's going on:
Scenario 1: He is a dangerously manipulative man (or possibly cult leader) who has lured his latest conquest to the middle of nowhere.
Scenario 2: He is a nice guy who is suffering from a severe psychotic break.
Scenario 3: He is God, or at least channelling God
What I was hoping for was a film where all three of those scenarios were equally valid and given equal weight in the discussions between these two individuals. It very quickly becomes apparent that instead what we are going to get is a LONG theology/philosophy seminar debating the existence of God. It also becomes apparent early that the film-makers have a goal they want to get to. Both the directors went to a college in Pennsylvania founded by an Evangelist and the male lead is the son of a famous Texan country singer. You can guess what side of the theology debate they come down on.
It's also amateurishly made. The score is an obtrusive mix of Carpenter-esque electronica and church organs, the sound mix in general is severely sub-par and edits within the same scene are often stilted and awkward. There are even some scenes where the framing is off. This didn't strike me as 'I'm going to break the rules for an artistic reason' it struck me as 'I don't know what the rules are'.
Essentially this is 2 hours of proselytising. It has some OK ideas and OK acting, but it doesn't need to be this long and it doesn't need to come so firmly down on a specific side.
Broadly speaking given the premise I think there are three legitimate answers as to what's going on:
Scenario 1: He is a dangerously manipulative man (or possibly cult leader) who has lured his latest conquest to the middle of nowhere.
Scenario 2: He is a nice guy who is suffering from a severe psychotic break.
Scenario 3: He is God, or at least channelling God
What I was hoping for was a film where all three of those scenarios were equally valid and given equal weight in the discussions between these two individuals. It very quickly becomes apparent that instead what we are going to get is a LONG theology/philosophy seminar debating the existence of God. It also becomes apparent early that the film-makers have a goal they want to get to. Both the directors went to a college in Pennsylvania founded by an Evangelist and the male lead is the son of a famous Texan country singer. You can guess what side of the theology debate they come down on.
It's also amateurishly made. The score is an obtrusive mix of Carpenter-esque electronica and church organs, the sound mix in general is severely sub-par and edits within the same scene are often stilted and awkward. There are even some scenes where the framing is off. This didn't strike me as 'I'm going to break the rules for an artistic reason' it struck me as 'I don't know what the rules are'.
Essentially this is 2 hours of proselytising. It has some OK ideas and OK acting, but it doesn't need to be this long and it doesn't need to come so firmly down on a specific side.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe 123 page script was shot in just 8 days.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Durée
- 2h 1min(121 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39:1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant