Pulse

I had just went to see a pre-screening of pulse last night, and I must say that it was not all that bad compared to recent horror films. The main problem with pulse is that in trying to be original it borrows from other films. I understand that this is an American version of a film from Japan. The film just reminded me of too many other films for me really to appreciate it. Once again this was a pre-screening and I am 100% sure that parts of the version I have seen will be changed. The other problem with pulse is that it is very hard to follow at times, and you are left to interpret the movie in your own way. The deaths are also very cheesy, and not really that creative. I am a huge horror fan and I was really interested to see this film because of the trailer that I very much enjoyed. The movie gets a boost in points for breaking away from the normal horror films we have been seeing as of late. Another thing that I had to pick at was the mediocre acting of the main star Kristen Bell. She just did not give a great performance...the rest of the cast with the exception of Ziagler give somewhat good performances. To continue on the scares were another part that bothered me..once again we see a pg13 movie relying on loud noises and crashes to make the audience jump...but on a brighter side there are a few scenes (the laundry room scene, and the car attack scene towards the end) that were actually pretty scary. One last thing the ending is not all that great, it is one of those things that you either love or hate...the audience at our screening mainly hated it, I will assume it will be changed come the release date. Overall "Pulse" is a decent horror film which is a step above the horror movies that I have seen as of late, just do not be surprised if you are left scratching your head after this film is over.

We went to see PULSE yesterday afternoon (got to the theater too late for DESCENT). I have not seen the original KAIRO for comparison. So, it's not the worst movie I've ever seen, and not the best. Yes, it was slow to start and get to the point. But IMO it had a creepy, dark atmosphere (god, if I lived there I'd want to commit suicide in any case), the visuals weren't bad, and it had a few good scares. Unfortunately, it also depended on VOLUME to enhance the scare. If you're more of a gore fan, then it's probably not the movie for you. The movie may not be worth the price of a ticket, but I think it's worth a rental. Eh, I'm just your average moviegoer and don't watch movies to analyze them to death. I even liked The Grudge. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

This remake from Japanese film begins when a hacker penetrates the computer of Josh(Jonathan Tucker) and spontaneously releases a weird virus, starting to happen rare things to the University residents. His ex-girlfriend, a psychology student named Matte(Kristen Bell) along with her friends(Christina Milian, Rick Gonzalez,Samm Levine) investigate a series of suicides linked to an Internet web cam which causes visitors an interacting with astonishing dead. Some of them watch crawling shadows on the wall and vision of dead people . Later Matte befriends a new boy(Ian Somerhalder), both facing spectres from beyond the grave when sinister deeds are going on.

This creepy movie contains ghostly images,chills, thrills and a completely eerie mood throughout.This supernatural horror film talks about people may become solitary, the loneliness in modern society, in spite of connecting wireless technology, cellphones and internet .Ghastly and astonishing frames about apocalyptic happenings with dark skies, deserted streets,creepy mood, similarly to classic films, such as 'Lifeforce and Quatermass and the pit'. Casting is quite good, along with young actors,Bell, Milian,Tucker,Somerhalder, appear distinguished veterans,as Brad Dourif, Zach Grenier and Ron Rifkin. Well written by Wes Craven and Kiyoshi Kurosawa, original author of Kairo(2001) and professionally directed by Jim Sonzero. Dark photography with muted colors generating a horror sensation by Mark Plummer. Haunting and incredibly eerie musical score by Elia Cmiral. Followed by an inferior sequel titled : ¨Pulse, after life¨(by Joel Soisson with Jamie Bamber, Giorgina Rylance).Rating : Acceptable and passable, this psychological horror tale will leave you stunned and squirm for intensely eerie events.

We just came home from seeing Pulse. Sorry friends, this is one film you won't be sorry you missed. Slow, boring, and lots of loose ends. No thrills, chills or characters you can care about. You are presented with a group of close friends -- yet no one seems concerned or even to notice that one of their buddies hasn't been around, anywhere, for a few days. No one seems to care when his fate is discovered. For some reason, all the college students seem to reside in apartments with black walls and leave food scattered all over the place to rot. I'm guessing the props dept had a lot of bugs around and wanted to use them up. Better to wait until this film shows up on cable at 3 am and you have nothing better to do before you watch this one.

It's a trend that should have ended with the first one.

This was boring and self-conscious with its artsy pretensions. I was looking all around at the scenery to see if I could tell where it was filmed rather than paying too much attention to the story. Still, I didn't miss anything.

I'm not surprised that this is from producer Wes Craven. It's full of his anti-technology hippie ideals, with plenty of nonsensical "movie science" that teens and pre-teens will take as fact.

Of course, all of the technology being slammed here as detrimental to our existence by removing in-person interactions, are being used fully by all those making this tripe, including Craven himself, and by the blank-minded ones who will love this and not even realize the irony that it comments on their technology addiction.

I'm also sick of all the grays, sickly-looking greens and putrid blues used in these type of films to present the civilized, yet oppressive, society, along with the grungy, unclean characters with pale faces and dark eyes under constant fluorescent lighting. Cities don't look like this, there is color and life all around, even in the poorest areas. This film's view is the misguided angst of rebellious teens with nothing to rebel against.

And then we are treated to Craven's simplistic Waltons-like ending that, once you go rural, you are colorful and clean. Here's a suggestion, Wes Craven, why don't you go rural and give up all your non-personal technology, so that we don't have to see any of your productions again?