NOTE IMDb
4,8/10
1,2 k
MA NOTE
Lorsque Kaitlyn, une infirmière des urgences, s'occupe d'une jeune femme qui a été poignardée, elle est accidentellement électrocutée par le défibrillateur. Presque immédiatement, elle comme... Tout lireLorsque Kaitlyn, une infirmière des urgences, s'occupe d'une jeune femme qui a été poignardée, elle est accidentellement électrocutée par le défibrillateur. Presque immédiatement, elle commence à avoir des souvenirs de la victime.Lorsque Kaitlyn, une infirmière des urgences, s'occupe d'une jeune femme qui a été poignardée, elle est accidentellement électrocutée par le défibrillateur. Presque immédiatement, elle commence à avoir des souvenirs de la victime.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
I arrived at the theater not knowing a thing about InSight. It was a new movie and I recognized a couple of the names in the cast, but hadn't seen any advertising for it, so I wasn't really sure what to expect.
The film lays out its premise fairly early on. A nurse that is caring for a dying E.R. patient is accidentally electrocuted and hears her say something that no one else in the room does before she passes out. She finds herself having visions of things she's never experienced and she thinks that they're somehow tied to the patient she tried to save. As she goes about trying to make sense of it all, she runs across the detective investigating the case. Between the two of them, they attempt to discern what really happened to the girl who died in the E.R.
It sounds like one of your typical thriller tropes: good-looking detective and good-looking victim work to solve crime and in the process, they get it on.
What makes InSight different from the typical B (or C, or D) movies that follow that formula is that it is actually good. Not only is the production value very high, but Natalie Zea (who plays the nurse) and Sean Patrick Flanery (the lead detective) actually spark off some flames during their on screen time. Their chemistry works and their scenes together are top-notch. Also turning in noteworthy performances are Angeline Rose-Troy as Allison, the victim of the crime, Adam Baldwin as Dr. Graham Barrett, and Juliet Landau as Dr. Lisa Rosan.
The strong cast helps kick the movie into high gear shortly after the basic setup is explained, and halfway through the movie you know they've done their job when you find yourself leaning forward in your seat and furrowing your brow as you try to pick apart the mystery. The writers throw some very interesting curve-balls at you, keeping the action fresh and eventually leading to a satisfying ending.
InSight is incredibly underrated and deserves more attention. It is a well-acted intelligent film that is perfect for a date night with a special someone.
The film lays out its premise fairly early on. A nurse that is caring for a dying E.R. patient is accidentally electrocuted and hears her say something that no one else in the room does before she passes out. She finds herself having visions of things she's never experienced and she thinks that they're somehow tied to the patient she tried to save. As she goes about trying to make sense of it all, she runs across the detective investigating the case. Between the two of them, they attempt to discern what really happened to the girl who died in the E.R.
It sounds like one of your typical thriller tropes: good-looking detective and good-looking victim work to solve crime and in the process, they get it on.
What makes InSight different from the typical B (or C, or D) movies that follow that formula is that it is actually good. Not only is the production value very high, but Natalie Zea (who plays the nurse) and Sean Patrick Flanery (the lead detective) actually spark off some flames during their on screen time. Their chemistry works and their scenes together are top-notch. Also turning in noteworthy performances are Angeline Rose-Troy as Allison, the victim of the crime, Adam Baldwin as Dr. Graham Barrett, and Juliet Landau as Dr. Lisa Rosan.
The strong cast helps kick the movie into high gear shortly after the basic setup is explained, and halfway through the movie you know they've done their job when you find yourself leaning forward in your seat and furrowing your brow as you try to pick apart the mystery. The writers throw some very interesting curve-balls at you, keeping the action fresh and eventually leading to a satisfying ending.
InSight is incredibly underrated and deserves more attention. It is a well-acted intelligent film that is perfect for a date night with a special someone.
This movie kept me guessing throughout the entire movie. This wasn't intended to be the easy, mass-marketed schlock where you can figure it all out and they spell the ending out for you in the end, in case you don't have a brain or any imagination. This is one you want to go back and watch again to see if you can catch any more clues. It's a dark story with a generous helping of hope, decent to good acting and I have always had a thing for Sean Patrick Flannery, so that never hurts in my book. My only real complaint is that the camera-work and lighting sometimes got a little too artsy for my tastes. Oh, that and it's tough to see Juliet Landau as anyone not evil/insane.
I rarely stop watching movies in the middle, but couldn't watch this for more than 20 minutes. It's absolutely awful.
Horrible acting. The main actress is not particularly likable. Most supporting actors are even worse.
Horrible dialog lines trying to shoehorn explanations of what's going on. Unfortunately can't judge the script, since I couldn't finish watching this.
Ridiculously bad production. Random s**t covering scenes as the camera moves. Color balance jumping from bright blue to bright yellow between the scenes. Sound quality in outdoor scenes is garbage.
Do not recommend.
Horrible acting. The main actress is not particularly likable. Most supporting actors are even worse.
Horrible dialog lines trying to shoehorn explanations of what's going on. Unfortunately can't judge the script, since I couldn't finish watching this.
Ridiculously bad production. Random s**t covering scenes as the camera moves. Color balance jumping from bright blue to bright yellow between the scenes. Sound quality in outdoor scenes is garbage.
Do not recommend.
The story/idea of this psychological thriller is fantastic. That said, the directors made a complete mess out of it. I understand it was a low budget movie, but they had a great story and could have utilized the direction of this movie much better. Acting was alright. however, It was slow and boring. I almost stopped watching it halfway through nevertheless somehow made it to the end. The ending gives you some "InSight". It leaves you with quite a few scenarios that might have happened. The overall movie did give me a bit of a cringe, dark and sad feeling. I was gonna give it a 1/10 then notched up another +4 for the ending.
"She spoke to me, I think she was trying to tell me who stabbed her." When ER nurse Kaitlyn (Zea) is helping to try and save a young stabbing victim's life she begins to talk to her. Kaitlyn then begins to see the victim's memories and tries find the person who stabbed the young girl. This is a hard movie to review. The idea is actually pretty neat, the acting isn't terrible but the big problem is that it keeps repeating itself over and over. It seems like a 20 minute segment that they keep re-writing. That said I actually kinda liked it and it kept me interested the whole time. The only way to describe this is that it is a movie based off the TV show "Medium". If you liked that show then this is a movie for you. The best part hands down though is the twist ending and like some movies the ending actually makes you like the movie more then you would have. Worth watching for the ending. Overall, a very OK movie with a neat twist at the end. I give it a B.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesShot in fifteen days.
- GaffesIn the opening scene, when nurse Kaitlyn hits the floor after the electrocution, she's no longer wearing the blue rubber glove on her right hand she had on just a split-second before.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is InSight?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Who Killed Allison Parks?
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 11 100 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 9 200 $US
- 4 sept. 2011
- Montant brut mondial
- 11 100 $US
- Durée1 heure 32 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant