अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंThe film tells the story of a journalist couple who invite a man and woman into their idyllic village home, but what begins with an informal interview descends into a nightmarish fight for s... सभी पढ़ेंThe film tells the story of a journalist couple who invite a man and woman into their idyllic village home, but what begins with an informal interview descends into a nightmarish fight for survival.The film tells the story of a journalist couple who invite a man and woman into their idyllic village home, but what begins with an informal interview descends into a nightmarish fight for survival.
- पुरस्कार
- 3 जीत और कुल 4 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This movie does more through what it does not show or tell than many movies do through spoonfeeding and gratuitous FX. I especially enjoyed how the film teased you with the promise of a "reveal" then withheld it and let the viewer try to understand what was "caught." This film is for those who like to use their imaginations. A "lo-if" film reminiscent of The Invitation or The Sound of Your Voice.
I'm all for imagination, and a bit of ambiguity, I love movies that range over the scale of ambiguity within acceptable "egghead cinema buff" limits. We can be tedious in our superiority complex I know. I've had a lot of fun digesting the 1000's of movies over a lifetime required to gain that title AND the patience and tolerance for that range of cinema orphans many of us hold dear in our collections. Be it B-Movie or Low Budget tolerance and being able to see the treasure in the cheaper box, or be it the high toned ambiguity of movies that range the gambit of Agnes Of God or Under The Skin, or such other movies where not everything is explained to a finite conclusion BUT, there is a limit, I don't mind being asked to interpret that surrealistic painting for my own vision of what it is, and accepting the different view of another viewer, but when both of us are standing before a canvas with 2 red dots spaced 8 inches apart and a yellow dot in the left corner and asked to tell the artist what they see....well. I could do that at home and you've brought nothing worth my time to this conversation if you know what I mean.
This movie is that canvas, a beautiful atmospheric canvas, with some red dot characters and a premise that falls short of providing enough information to interpret. There's a word that comes to mind, PRETENTIOUS, near insultingly so. If I could say one thing to the director's face, it would be, you think WAY too much of yourself and what you THINK is a clever display of your "high brow" intellect, is actually but an expose of your own shortcomings. You can come up with a premise, intriguing and even capable of holding one's attention, but lack the COMPLETE vision and ability to follow through.
This movie, unlike the MANY who play with ambiguity and intrigue, that satisfy and delight while still leaving things open to interpretation, this is a real big gun with the wrong ammo, and the misfire is a big as said gun. The ART of those kinds of films is their ability to give you enough puzzle pieces to form a picture, even if those pieces are shaped in a way that different viewers can put together different pictures in the end. Let use Agnes Of God as a prime example, was it a virgin conception?, WAS it God, Was it Stigmata, was it a field hand, what was that song she sang at the end? MY answer may be different than yours BUT the pieces of that mystery are ALL there for ALL of those answers to be possibly correct and legit explained as such. I cannot tell you anything but PURE conjecture about this movie though, there is NOTHING to back up what I just randomly decide, and put forth as "the answers". It honestly is the only movie I've ever seen out of 1000s that I legit can say, "Well, I will just say it was this" but I have ZERO legit points in the film to back that up aside from just my own conjecture that this is what this thing meant. It was beyond disappointing considering the acting, cinematography, atmosphere, and premise.. I don't think I've ever seen such a waste of all those things to end with nothing but 2 hours of wasted time (90 minutes to watch it, and 30 minutes to sit and wonder why in the world they would embarrass themselves intentionally that way in their own self-delusion that they were being high brow and "Artsy". It just really made them (Director, screenwriter, producer) look silly. Watch this ONLY if you wish to see (For some reason) the perfect way to both ruin a potential masterpiece and embarrass yourself with misguided pretention at the same time.
This movie is that canvas, a beautiful atmospheric canvas, with some red dot characters and a premise that falls short of providing enough information to interpret. There's a word that comes to mind, PRETENTIOUS, near insultingly so. If I could say one thing to the director's face, it would be, you think WAY too much of yourself and what you THINK is a clever display of your "high brow" intellect, is actually but an expose of your own shortcomings. You can come up with a premise, intriguing and even capable of holding one's attention, but lack the COMPLETE vision and ability to follow through.
This movie, unlike the MANY who play with ambiguity and intrigue, that satisfy and delight while still leaving things open to interpretation, this is a real big gun with the wrong ammo, and the misfire is a big as said gun. The ART of those kinds of films is their ability to give you enough puzzle pieces to form a picture, even if those pieces are shaped in a way that different viewers can put together different pictures in the end. Let use Agnes Of God as a prime example, was it a virgin conception?, WAS it God, Was it Stigmata, was it a field hand, what was that song she sang at the end? MY answer may be different than yours BUT the pieces of that mystery are ALL there for ALL of those answers to be possibly correct and legit explained as such. I cannot tell you anything but PURE conjecture about this movie though, there is NOTHING to back up what I just randomly decide, and put forth as "the answers". It honestly is the only movie I've ever seen out of 1000s that I legit can say, "Well, I will just say it was this" but I have ZERO legit points in the film to back that up aside from just my own conjecture that this is what this thing meant. It was beyond disappointing considering the acting, cinematography, atmosphere, and premise.. I don't think I've ever seen such a waste of all those things to end with nothing but 2 hours of wasted time (90 minutes to watch it, and 30 minutes to sit and wonder why in the world they would embarrass themselves intentionally that way in their own self-delusion that they were being high brow and "Artsy". It just really made them (Director, screenwriter, producer) look silly. Watch this ONLY if you wish to see (For some reason) the perfect way to both ruin a potential masterpiece and embarrass yourself with misguided pretention at the same time.
I love sci fi and monster movies. I don't know what I just watched. Plodding, slow, pointless, far too long.
No slow burn, no thriller, stilted, obtuse, and disappointing.
Don't waste your time, I did it for you!
No slow burn, no thriller, stilted, obtuse, and disappointing.
Don't waste your time, I did it for you!
This movie was quite a surprise. A little frustrating at the end, but good otherwise. A lot of tension throughout and it keeps you guessing as to who, what, when, and where.
It will keep your attention throughout.
Set in 1972 Andrew & Julie are a couple of would be investigative journalists who are starting to work on an expose of a new army base on the nearby moor.
'Must be nukes' they tell their editor.
Then a couple of strange Jehovah's Witnesses with a problem with postmen hove into view. They claim they are from the Moor and have some questions so the pair invite them in for tea thinking they are officials of some kind.
The strange couple introduce themselves as Mr & Mrs Blair. Everybody sits down. The Blair's rather oddly and tea is served. Mrs Blair complains it is hot. Andrew points out Mrs Blair's shoelace is undone. Mr Blair says she will get around to it shortly.
Then the questions begin and are strange at first and get stranger as they progress. When Andrew gets annoyed Mrs Blair suddenly screams maniacally and attacks him. Mr Blair explains 'she has killed and you would not be the first today'. The interview goes downhill from there.
Mr Blair seems to want something they have but they don't know what it is.
April Pearson & Cian Barry, who I am not familiar with, play the Blair's really well and give a new insight into creepy. Especially April who steals the show. It's as if we are in Strangers territory but its even weirder than that.
It's a pretty well done mostly indoor mystery drama with some good acting from the 4 leads.
What's it about? Check it out as it is worth an hour and a half of your time. It's not a horror as such but is well acted and a decent story. I gave it 5 but added a 1+ as it was an attempt to do something new with a tired genre. I guess with a bigger budget it could have been something a bit special.
On the downside there is one glaring omission that will have you spitting feathers. But decent effort all the same.
Then a couple of strange Jehovah's Witnesses with a problem with postmen hove into view. They claim they are from the Moor and have some questions so the pair invite them in for tea thinking they are officials of some kind.
The strange couple introduce themselves as Mr & Mrs Blair. Everybody sits down. The Blair's rather oddly and tea is served. Mrs Blair complains it is hot. Andrew points out Mrs Blair's shoelace is undone. Mr Blair says she will get around to it shortly.
Then the questions begin and are strange at first and get stranger as they progress. When Andrew gets annoyed Mrs Blair suddenly screams maniacally and attacks him. Mr Blair explains 'she has killed and you would not be the first today'. The interview goes downhill from there.
Mr Blair seems to want something they have but they don't know what it is.
April Pearson & Cian Barry, who I am not familiar with, play the Blair's really well and give a new insight into creepy. Especially April who steals the show. It's as if we are in Strangers territory but its even weirder than that.
It's a pretty well done mostly indoor mystery drama with some good acting from the 4 leads.
What's it about? Check it out as it is worth an hour and a half of your time. It's not a horror as such but is well acted and a decent story. I gave it 5 but added a 1+ as it was an attempt to do something new with a tired genre. I guess with a bigger budget it could have been something a bit special.
On the downside there is one glaring omission that will have you spitting feathers. But decent effort all the same.
क्या आपको पता है
- गूफ़The 'Eternal Beau' tea set used in the beginning didn't start being produced until 1981 by The Johnson Brothers-it became the best selling pattern of crockery ever.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Caught?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 26 मि(86 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39:1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें