उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

Sofia (Natalie Dormer) is a blind concert pianist in London. She agrees to play for the father of her upstairs neighbor Veronique (Emily Ratajkowski). Veronique falls to her death under suspicious circumstances. It's connected to her war criminal father from Bonsia. There are people after him and Sofia is hiding a secret herself.

It's not the first movie with a blind woman who witnessed a crime. This one takes on some convoluted twists. I question the logic of the big twist. The turns don't really surprise but rather exasperates. Natalie Dormer is a great actress but this doesn't really work. The twists need to be better supported. This movie needs some simplifying.

Sometimes when actors play a part in writing a movie that they know they will be acting in they spend too much time trying to give their character room to flourish and not enough time on making the rest of the film sustainable. I think that is a little bit of what happened here. Lead actress Natalie Dormer co-wrote the movie with her husband (who also directed the film) and it has to be said she turns in a very impressive performance as a blind woman. The rest of the movie though leaves a lot to be desired.

The biggest problem is has is that it's over-complicated. Many previous films have fallen into the trap of over-complication and it has almost always harmed them. Unless you are Christopher Nolan who seems to be able to simplify even the most complex of storylines, you really shouldn't try too hard in that respect. 'Ocean's Twelve' was a prime example of that. It got so complicated that it was no longer fun. 'In Darkness' is very similar. You're working so hard to keep up with everything that you're never actually able to just sit back and enjoy yourself.

The movie is made with some nice style and I liked the amount of ambition that went into it. It wasn't done on the cheap and nasty, that's for sure. Unfortunately though it just didn't really work for me. It tried to have some "knock your socks off" moments but none of them really landed and the end result was a pretty forgettable film.

Sort of hard to believe this film is rated a 5.8 on here right now. Though I would agree that it definitely is flawed, it also has many great aspects to it. It's a worthy effort and a worthy watch if you like smart thrillers. Mostly it is a smart thriller, but it eventually goes just a little too far to be a great film, but to me it was definitely good. I strongly dislike the major twist at the end, it was so unneeded and just flat out didn't fit the film. Otherwise though, it's quite interesting with some very unique aspects for an American film. 7/10

Ok,my english is not best,i watched this movie on German language,but when they talked Croatian-Serbian language (i'm from Croatia) i was sure they speak russian..then i reapeted that scene like 10 times to understand what they talk on my own language...Germans didnt translate this scene,that was their voices..nobody talks like that 😂 words are ok,but so bad how they say it 😂 i know is a verry dificult language,but if is not correct,better leave it ...

...it had made sense. The story was too convoluted. None of the three of us ever understood what Alex, Marc and Veronique had to do with any of it, nor why Radic hated Veronique. Plus, the sex scene was completely unnecessary and seemed to be there for Natalie Dormer to show off.

I love Natalie Dormer's classic beauty as it has an underlying strength to it. I loved her in Game of Thrones and The Tudors but she really gets the spotlight in this engaging thriller. The problem is the ending seems like is should have been the sequel. In Hockey, they saying goes "Play for 60 minutes", Anthony Byrne was up 5-0 going into the 3rd and lost 6-5 in overtime. By trying to make the ending too twisty, he loses all of the momentum he had so carefully and effectively constructed. This could have been a classic with a bit more modern action and more pathos in the back story especially towards the end. Anthony's TV background shows and not in a good way.

Natalie Dormer ("Game of Thrones") is fine as a blind pianist with a tortured past. The script she co-wrote with Director Anthony Byrne is thoughtful and delivers ample twists and turns. And the sound editing amplifying a sightless aural experience is first-rate on behalf of a talented team headed by veteran pro Harald Ansorge.

This established, I came way from "In Darkness" strangely less than satisfied. The pace never felt quite right. At least for me it didn't match the inherent volatility of the story being presented.

And I'm still in the dark as to why.

Dormer's earlier film The Forest was boring n lousy but in this film she gave a good performance. I liked this film's suspense n story. This movie will keep u glued till the end. The sex scene was necessary to establish the connection between the characters n the nudity to show off the tattoos.

Rock solid little thriller with a great Natalie Dormer playing a blind pianist. In Darkness does not play in the top league of the genre, nevertheless, it is an entertaining one delivering some suspense and twists.

Last note: I don't agree with all those critics regarding the complexity or comprehensibility of the story - 1st watching In Darkness, I got it, and I don't consider myself a genius (but I'm working on it).

No British thriller can be done without the most absurd, ham-handed and obvious conspiracy thrown in. I won't spoil the "twist" at the end other than to say it is childish.

Too many twists to an otherwise watchable movie. However, why oh why so many twists to the story???

Good but not outstanding.its plot is weak and not completely connected

I gave up on this when the blind protagonist, after a murder of her neighbor and someone prowling in her apartment, goes for a walk at night in a rough neighborhood alone. And that's only one example of a script that makes us out to be idiots. Just silly.

Just watched it. It really is a rather good film. Well acted, well written and with a couple of twists that you might not see coming. I'm a huge fan of Natalie Dormer and she's just terrific here. I don't want to say anymore because I don't want to post any spoilers, but if you fancy watching a tight and exciting UK thriller, I doubt you'll be disappointed. Give it a shot, eh?

This film is not about the gritty criminal London underworld. It is about an underworld but it has nothing in particular to do with London other than geography. It is about the guilt associtated with and the futility of revenge. In that respect it is a treatise on human emotions and, at last, a redemption. The plot may be far fetched at times but the themes are engaging and thought provoking. The acting is convincing. Sinister portrayals of sinister events are well played and I enjoyed the whole.

The acting was excellent but the plot was confusing from start to finish. Maybe some movie watchers don't mind if a movie doesn't make sense, as long as it keeps your interest, but I strongly object to a movie ending where I don't understand the answers to all my questions. I would not recommend this movie to anyone. I hung in there hoping it would all eventually make sense but it did not! Very disappointing!