davendes
A rejoint le mai 2005
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges2
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis11
Note de davendes
Thomas Tryon's "The Other" has been long been championed by cult film fans as a neglected/forgotten gem of subtle 70's horror. Yes, there is a definite feel of craftsmanship and creepiness to the movie, but these virtues are easily eclipsed by the films large weaknesses.
This 1935-based tale of 12 year-old twin boys(1 good/1 bad-supposedly),their evil, mysterious secrets and the effects of such on their family does have a good foundation. The 30's New England country is really brought to life visually. You can almost feel the smothering summer heat and cool crispness of the local swimming hole. Add to that an excellent supporting cast and a stunner of a musical score from Jerry Goldsmith and things should turn out pretty satisfying.
But- They don't. There are an abundance of problems that crush the movie's basic setting.
First off, we have to deal with the Perry twins, played by real twins Martin & Chris Udvarnoky. It's easy to see why neither of them made another appearance. Since the plot completely revolves around them, their performances need to be strong. They're just not up for the task, and their puffy-lipped, hyper "acting" proves not only quite irritating, but also serves to actually push the viewer away from wanting to invest emotions into the story.
Next up is the pacing. The whole thing moves along like a turtle with weights on its legs trying to climb a molasses covered hill. It's a dialogue laden trudge that seems to happen onto moving forward rather than seeking it.
Finally, there is the story itself. It's simply weak. It tries to bolster itself through loads of red herrings and unanswered questions, but when the key "secret" is apparent almost immediately, these mysteries prove to be nothing more than poor attempts to hide underdeveloped storytelling. Even the conclusion of the flick disappoints; it's grim, uneasy nature and lack of a much-needed sense of justice ends the proceedings on a sour note.
Like many others, I was a pre-teen in the 70's who loved the late-night horror films/shows that dominated the era. In fact, I probably enjoy them now more than ever, pursuing and adding them to my collection at every possible opportunity. So, when I say "The Other" is a misfire not worth watching, it's with disappointment, not malice.
This 1935-based tale of 12 year-old twin boys(1 good/1 bad-supposedly),their evil, mysterious secrets and the effects of such on their family does have a good foundation. The 30's New England country is really brought to life visually. You can almost feel the smothering summer heat and cool crispness of the local swimming hole. Add to that an excellent supporting cast and a stunner of a musical score from Jerry Goldsmith and things should turn out pretty satisfying.
But- They don't. There are an abundance of problems that crush the movie's basic setting.
First off, we have to deal with the Perry twins, played by real twins Martin & Chris Udvarnoky. It's easy to see why neither of them made another appearance. Since the plot completely revolves around them, their performances need to be strong. They're just not up for the task, and their puffy-lipped, hyper "acting" proves not only quite irritating, but also serves to actually push the viewer away from wanting to invest emotions into the story.
Next up is the pacing. The whole thing moves along like a turtle with weights on its legs trying to climb a molasses covered hill. It's a dialogue laden trudge that seems to happen onto moving forward rather than seeking it.
Finally, there is the story itself. It's simply weak. It tries to bolster itself through loads of red herrings and unanswered questions, but when the key "secret" is apparent almost immediately, these mysteries prove to be nothing more than poor attempts to hide underdeveloped storytelling. Even the conclusion of the flick disappoints; it's grim, uneasy nature and lack of a much-needed sense of justice ends the proceedings on a sour note.
Like many others, I was a pre-teen in the 70's who loved the late-night horror films/shows that dominated the era. In fact, I probably enjoy them now more than ever, pursuing and adding them to my collection at every possible opportunity. So, when I say "The Other" is a misfire not worth watching, it's with disappointment, not malice.
A quick glance at the premise of this film would seem to indicate just another dumb '80's inbred/backwood slash-fest; the type where sex equals death and the actors are all annoying stereotypes you actually want to die. However, "JBD" delivers considerably more.
Rather than focus on bare flesh and gore (though there is a little of each- no sex however), the flick focuses on delivering impending dread/mounting tension amidst a lovely scenic backdrop. These feelings are further heightened by a cast of realistically likable characters and antagonists that are more amoral than cardboard definitions of evil. Oh yeah- George Kennedy is here too and when is that not a good thing?
If you liked "Wrong Turn", then watch this to see where much of its' methodology came from.
Rather than focus on bare flesh and gore (though there is a little of each- no sex however), the flick focuses on delivering impending dread/mounting tension amidst a lovely scenic backdrop. These feelings are further heightened by a cast of realistically likable characters and antagonists that are more amoral than cardboard definitions of evil. Oh yeah- George Kennedy is here too and when is that not a good thing?
If you liked "Wrong Turn", then watch this to see where much of its' methodology came from.
If you went by posters and TV ads, "It's Alive" would appear to be one of two things: Either a 50's-style monster romp or a chilling slab of dread served up in the usual gritty 70's vein. It's not either; in fact, it's not much of anything.
As promised (one of the few kept by advertising), there is indeed a murderous mutant tike on the loose and he's a nasty lookin' little critter. Well, I think he is at least, because he rarely shows up during the movie. Ultra-brief glimpses every 20 or so minutes and a shamefully low body count keep the "horror" at an absolute minimum.
OK, so if it's not really a scary film, just what exactly is it? Unfortunately, it's proves to be little more than a snail-paced melodrama that tries to deal with a ridiculous overload of "socially relevant" topics such as parenting and its natural bonds, the effects of pollution and drugs, corporate deceit/government cover-ups, loss of family values and the desensitized nature of modern society to name a few. As you might have surmised, this turns the film into total mess by merely broaching these issues in a rapid-fire, circular succession but never delving in properly or offering any explanations. Matters are certainly not helped by a dull backing cast and having the two main characters (the parents of said monster) coming across with jittery, bug-eyed hokeyness (dad) and incessant whiny babbling (mom).
I am usually against the idea of remakes, but in the case of this movie, it makes perfect sense. Give the killer toddler some serious screen time and ample victims while wholly dumping all the supposed "deeper" aspects and there might be some enjoyment to be had, unlike what is presented in the very skippable original.
As promised (one of the few kept by advertising), there is indeed a murderous mutant tike on the loose and he's a nasty lookin' little critter. Well, I think he is at least, because he rarely shows up during the movie. Ultra-brief glimpses every 20 or so minutes and a shamefully low body count keep the "horror" at an absolute minimum.
OK, so if it's not really a scary film, just what exactly is it? Unfortunately, it's proves to be little more than a snail-paced melodrama that tries to deal with a ridiculous overload of "socially relevant" topics such as parenting and its natural bonds, the effects of pollution and drugs, corporate deceit/government cover-ups, loss of family values and the desensitized nature of modern society to name a few. As you might have surmised, this turns the film into total mess by merely broaching these issues in a rapid-fire, circular succession but never delving in properly or offering any explanations. Matters are certainly not helped by a dull backing cast and having the two main characters (the parents of said monster) coming across with jittery, bug-eyed hokeyness (dad) and incessant whiny babbling (mom).
I am usually against the idea of remakes, but in the case of this movie, it makes perfect sense. Give the killer toddler some serious screen time and ample victims while wholly dumping all the supposed "deeper" aspects and there might be some enjoyment to be had, unlike what is presented in the very skippable original.