IMDb रेटिंग
6.0/10
38 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA forensic psychiatrist discovers that all but one of her patient's multiple personalities are murder victims. She will have to find out what's happening before her time is finished.A forensic psychiatrist discovers that all but one of her patient's multiple personalities are murder victims. She will have to find out what's happening before her time is finished.A forensic psychiatrist discovers that all but one of her patient's multiple personalities are murder victims. She will have to find out what's happening before her time is finished.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
Brian Anthony Wilson
- Virgil
- (as Brian A. Wilson)
Charles David Richards
- Holiday Inn Bar Keep
- (as Charles D. Richards)
Trenton Rupecht
- Young Monty
- (as Trenton Ruprecht)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I caught this film on Netflix the other night in the "recommended for me" section. It certainly looked promising: a taut psychological thriller with Julianne Moore as Dr. Cara Harding, a forensic psychologist trying to disprove a diagnosis of multiple personality disorder in mental patient David/Adam/Wesley (Jonathan Rhys Meyers).
But it quickly morphs from the cooly clinical and scientific to hillbilly voodoo and fundie religious hokum replete with a hot, steaming, incomprehensible -- some of it kind of fun in its incoherence -- compost heap of plot elements: the 1918 flu epidemic; skin rashes; chronic coughs yielding -- ughh -- dirt; slip-and-falls; spinal injuries; atheism; Catholicism; faith healers; vaccines; curses; snake venom potions; apparitions on video; and a suddenly discovered -- and quite laughable -- silent film, replete with +90 year old narrator. There's even a test for red-green color blindness.
And, like the antagonist, this film suffers from an identity crisis. Is it a psychological thriller? A slasher / stalker film? A medical mystery? A serial killer whodunnit? A witchcraft / occult movie? I enjoyed just trying to figure out what the producers had in mind. This is like a film made my committee (or someone with multiple personality disorder).
Saving grace: A good faith try at making the crazy script work by Moore. And an enthusiastically evil performance Meyers, though he needs to take an intensive "American accents" workshop. That southern twangy thing was the worst, and so not right for upper Apalachia.
But all-in-all, I actually like really bad, messy movies, especially those that try so hard. Maybe Netflix knows me afterall? Hence the six -- how appropriate -- stars rating.
But it quickly morphs from the cooly clinical and scientific to hillbilly voodoo and fundie religious hokum replete with a hot, steaming, incomprehensible -- some of it kind of fun in its incoherence -- compost heap of plot elements: the 1918 flu epidemic; skin rashes; chronic coughs yielding -- ughh -- dirt; slip-and-falls; spinal injuries; atheism; Catholicism; faith healers; vaccines; curses; snake venom potions; apparitions on video; and a suddenly discovered -- and quite laughable -- silent film, replete with +90 year old narrator. There's even a test for red-green color blindness.
And, like the antagonist, this film suffers from an identity crisis. Is it a psychological thriller? A slasher / stalker film? A medical mystery? A serial killer whodunnit? A witchcraft / occult movie? I enjoyed just trying to figure out what the producers had in mind. This is like a film made my committee (or someone with multiple personality disorder).
Saving grace: A good faith try at making the crazy script work by Moore. And an enthusiastically evil performance Meyers, though he needs to take an intensive "American accents" workshop. That southern twangy thing was the worst, and so not right for upper Apalachia.
But all-in-all, I actually like really bad, messy movies, especially those that try so hard. Maybe Netflix knows me afterall? Hence the six -- how appropriate -- stars rating.
Måns Mårlind and Björn Stein's 'Shelter' is very much just another one of those horror movies that classifies itself as a 'supernatural thriller' in order to appear more classy and cool. The direction seems confused and even if the film is well shot, it's nothing outstanding. Clichés and plot holes are abundant in 'Shelter' (which is very much the case with most movies of this genre) and it has a disappointingly typical ending that tries to be haunting. It tries to be tricky by initially giving the impression of being a psychological thriller and then the writer throws in the occult to tell you that it's actually a horror film. Would fans of 'The Ring' like it (as the promos suggest)? Probably. Julianne Moore does a great job. I only watched 'Shelter' because she was in it. Her castmates are okay at best with the exception of Frances Conroy who stands out as a mother who lost three sons. Overall, 'Shelter' is a disappointing film that has absolutely nothing new to offer.
Supernatural isn't my cup of tea, but I will give points to Shelter for doing more than just keeping me in my seat. At times, it reminded me of Shyamalan's better days. Though very much a slow mover, Shelter is haunting and gripping, shot perfectly and never too superficial. Julianne Moore, is a compelling lead, and there is enough 'human' in the character to deserve some credit, and earn some sympathy from the viewer. Horror movies almost by nature, don't have a heart, but this is one of the few that has some.
The one problem with the movie, is that the plot is heavy. The first hour may seem a little disoriented, but the scenario brings everything together with enough coherency in the last act. The matter in which it does so however raises some questions that are left unanswered, and could qualify as plot holes.
As a straight to video release, one would not typically set high expectations. Shelter exceeded mine, It's not a film for an impatient viewer, but it's an appetizing ghost story if you are looking for one such film.
The one problem with the movie, is that the plot is heavy. The first hour may seem a little disoriented, but the scenario brings everything together with enough coherency in the last act. The matter in which it does so however raises some questions that are left unanswered, and could qualify as plot holes.
As a straight to video release, one would not typically set high expectations. Shelter exceeded mine, It's not a film for an impatient viewer, but it's an appetizing ghost story if you are looking for one such film.
6 SOULS has a compelling and unique storyline that nicely intermixes spiritual and psychological elements: There are some very original ideas here. It's well-produced and cinematized with realistic acting by all. It has the necessary focus but still leaves room for individual interpretation, the sort of film that you can watch multiple times, picking up new details and subtleties with each view. At times it seems pro-Christian, at times anti-Christian, or at least critical of the superstitious-fundamentalist brand of Christianity. Again, the religious elements are clear enough yet also vague enough.
The plot does drag and meander a good bit. There are also some of the usual tired old demon-tropes (people throwing up black goop, etc). Still,this film has a fairly solid mythos behind it and relies more on surprise and suspense than it does raw schlock. While nothing truly special, 6 SOULS is probably worth seeing if you like psychological/supernatural horror and have been disappointed by most other recent films in this genre.
The ending leaves room for an interesting sequel. . .7 SOULS?
The plot does drag and meander a good bit. There are also some of the usual tired old demon-tropes (people throwing up black goop, etc). Still,this film has a fairly solid mythos behind it and relies more on surprise and suspense than it does raw schlock. While nothing truly special, 6 SOULS is probably worth seeing if you like psychological/supernatural horror and have been disappointed by most other recent films in this genre.
The ending leaves room for an interesting sequel. . .7 SOULS?
There's some great acting in this movie and that helps most of the way through.
However it gets to a point where the acting isn't enough to make up for the story which stops making sense about 2 thirds in.
The amount of questions left unanswered and the sudden lack of sense coupled with plot holes stops this being a great movie and drops it into mediocrity.
Not recommended as it feels unfinished.
However it gets to a point where the acting isn't enough to make up for the story which stops making sense about 2 thirds in.
The amount of questions left unanswered and the sudden lack of sense coupled with plot holes stops this being a great movie and drops it into mediocrity.
Not recommended as it feels unfinished.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाMovie also goes by the title "Shelter". The "6 Souls" is the title for US release.
- गूफ़David says in his childhood home there are 10 windows; 11 if you count the star in the front door. When Dr. Harding drives to his childhood home, 12 windows are visible, and that is not counting however many there are on the unseen side of the house.
- भाव
Cara Harding: Just because you're older, doesn't mean you're right. It could just mean that you've been wrong for longer.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटGod is the first credited on "the producers wish to thank" part of closing credits.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Projector: Shelter (2013)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is 6 Souls?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Shelter
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $2,20,00,000(अनुमानित)
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $32,05,167
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 52 मि(112 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें