NOTE IMDb
5,4/10
4,3 k
MA NOTE
Un auteur reclus sort de sa cachette lorsqu'il commence à recevoir des lettres interminables d'un fan obsessionnel. S'ensuit un dangereux labyrinthe dans lequel il cherche la personne qui se... Tout lireUn auteur reclus sort de sa cachette lorsqu'il commence à recevoir des lettres interminables d'un fan obsessionnel. S'ensuit un dangereux labyrinthe dans lequel il cherche la personne qui se cache derrière ces messages.Un auteur reclus sort de sa cachette lorsqu'il commence à recevoir des lettres interminables d'un fan obsessionnel. S'ensuit un dangereux labyrinthe dans lequel il cherche la personne qui se cache derrière ces messages.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 nominations au total
Rachel Slavick
- GNN Reporter
- (as Rachel Slavik)
Joel Abadal
- Young Dwight Tufford
- (as Chandler Worre)
Avis à la une
Guy Pearce should easily win a best actor award for this. He gives it his all.
All the actors do. Maybe the director's strength is his ability to get good acting out of his actors?
He shot this wrong. There wasn't any gore or observed threat. The movie has real guts for a solid creepy horror movie but it pulled it's punch. This was more of a slap and not a hard one.
It would have been much shorter too. One seasoned producer would have made a major difference in this movie.
But Guy Pearce makes it work still. He's that good in this. The other actors try but he stands out. David Lynch should work with him.
Watch this without expectations of greatness.
All the actors do. Maybe the director's strength is his ability to get good acting out of his actors?
He shot this wrong. There wasn't any gore or observed threat. The movie has real guts for a solid creepy horror movie but it pulled it's punch. This was more of a slap and not a hard one.
It would have been much shorter too. One seasoned producer would have made a major difference in this movie.
But Guy Pearce makes it work still. He's that good in this. The other actors try but he stands out. David Lynch should work with him.
Watch this without expectations of greatness.
I don't quite know why this didn't work, but it wasn't gripping, the story was messy and was clunky. The acting was really good and I love the idea, but disappointing sadly. Some interesting twist, so not a complete flop, and whoever wrote it was clearly intellectual, just a bit of a dullard, or maybe that was the director? Had to tell.
Not as scary as I was hoping, as the advert made it look awesome. Maybe there weren't enough characters in the film? Sorry I can't quite put my finger on what the issue is here, but there we go.
I'd love to read some other reviews of this, so get posting! .....
Not as scary as I was hoping, as the advert made it look awesome. Maybe there weren't enough characters in the film? Sorry I can't quite put my finger on what the issue is here, but there we go.
I'd love to read some other reviews of this, so get posting! .....
The Infernal Machine is a real shame as I do think there's a good film to be had in the core idea, but the film just feels like a real mess.
There are too many plot threads going on that don't blend together or connect very well. I think a lot of the character motivation is a bit convoluted which doesn't help either. The result is that this film feels very leggy and drags on quite a bit. This would be somewhat forgivable but the ending is quite bland.
Still, there are some positives. Guy Pearce gives a convincing lead performance and he anchors the film nicely. The middle act is also pretty pacey and exciting, just a shame it is sandwiched between two lethargic acts.
Overall a disappointing tale, but not without a few redeeming features. Worth a watch if you do enjoy a mystery thriller, but don't expect to be blown away.
There are too many plot threads going on that don't blend together or connect very well. I think a lot of the character motivation is a bit convoluted which doesn't help either. The result is that this film feels very leggy and drags on quite a bit. This would be somewhat forgivable but the ending is quite bland.
Still, there are some positives. Guy Pearce gives a convincing lead performance and he anchors the film nicely. The middle act is also pretty pacey and exciting, just a shame it is sandwiched between two lethargic acts.
Overall a disappointing tale, but not without a few redeeming features. Worth a watch if you do enjoy a mystery thriller, but don't expect to be blown away.
I went into this with mixed feelings because Guy Pearce is a most accomplished actor and I love watching him. However, Alice Eve as co star said instantly 'B movie'.
So I was confused as to what was going to happen.
Sorry, I can't hold it in any longer. I hated this film!
It should have been a great story but the director tried to make it into surreal and high brow art. A lofty ambition, but it failed.
I was constantly left wondering what on earth was going on, who people were., what part did they play in the overall story, what has happened so far that makes sense?
The penultimate scene is almost painful as like the rest of the film, the dialogue is verbose but without much meaning. I could barely hear properly what was being said anyway.
But the ending left us still not knowing what large chunks of the film were about. It seemed to be endless unconnected scenes with drawn out meaningless dialogue and no real story at all until the final minutes. That for me is not great story telling, and it doesn't make a great movie.
It got a paltry 3 from me.
So I was confused as to what was going to happen.
Sorry, I can't hold it in any longer. I hated this film!
It should have been a great story but the director tried to make it into surreal and high brow art. A lofty ambition, but it failed.
I was constantly left wondering what on earth was going on, who people were., what part did they play in the overall story, what has happened so far that makes sense?
The penultimate scene is almost painful as like the rest of the film, the dialogue is verbose but without much meaning. I could barely hear properly what was being said anyway.
But the ending left us still not knowing what large chunks of the film were about. It seemed to be endless unconnected scenes with drawn out meaningless dialogue and no real story at all until the final minutes. That for me is not great story telling, and it doesn't make a great movie.
It got a paltry 3 from me.
I was in for an alternate Secret Window, or something like it. This was even more contrived, and somehow snagged Guy Pearce and that guy from Lost who is usually alright. How? No idea. This script is just plain old not good.
A reclusive author of a book that supposedly revealed secrets to a man who became an active shooter and was sent to prison, is stalked, many years later, which subsequently unravels a thread bare plot about secrets kept by said author, and having to face new obstacles related to the secrets revealed.
Except... it is so contrived all the time because, well for one, he was a teacher of a writing class that hinged on a principle of writing that is so prosaic that it is only helpful for commercial fiction, basically. Which becomes quite ironic because it's a story that is about writing, specifically the conceit that when a person is understood well enough they can become as a character is situated in a story by the author. But there's no due diligence at all, the conceit is just offered and things spiral out from nonsense that isn't even attempted to be explained away, culminating in an even even more massively contrived finale than the inciting incident for this supposed arc.
It just doesn't work. I'm not sure it tries that hard to work, to be honest. All around it feels like a weak effort. Certainly none of the actors best performance. A throwaway effort on all fronts.
A reclusive author of a book that supposedly revealed secrets to a man who became an active shooter and was sent to prison, is stalked, many years later, which subsequently unravels a thread bare plot about secrets kept by said author, and having to face new obstacles related to the secrets revealed.
Except... it is so contrived all the time because, well for one, he was a teacher of a writing class that hinged on a principle of writing that is so prosaic that it is only helpful for commercial fiction, basically. Which becomes quite ironic because it's a story that is about writing, specifically the conceit that when a person is understood well enough they can become as a character is situated in a story by the author. But there's no due diligence at all, the conceit is just offered and things spiral out from nonsense that isn't even attempted to be explained away, culminating in an even even more massively contrived finale than the inciting incident for this supposed arc.
It just doesn't work. I'm not sure it tries that hard to work, to be honest. All around it feels like a weak effort. Certainly none of the actors best performance. A throwaway effort on all fronts.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe name of the town "Almas Perdidas" meaning Lost Souls.
- GaffesWhen confronting Tuffurd, Cogburn slams a pistol cartridge against a piece of furniture, and it fires. Slamming a bullet against a smooth surface would not work, unless there were a protruding nail or other sharp point to depress the pistol primer.
- Citations
Bruce Cogburn: Who's sending the fucking messages?
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Infernal Machine?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 37 002 $US
- Durée1 heure 51 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39:1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What was the official certification given to The Infernal Machine (2022) in Germany?
Répondre