IMDb रेटिंग
4.1/10
2.7 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA couple are given a camera and a set of instructions which they must follow or else someone will die.A couple are given a camera and a set of instructions which they must follow or else someone will die.A couple are given a camera and a set of instructions which they must follow or else someone will die.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
The middle class Emmy (Audrey Marie Anderson) receives a video camera at home and her husband Tom (Todd Stashwick) starts filming. They believe they won a prize from the mall. The college student Beth (Alexandra Lydon) is alone and bored in the empty campus and also receives a camera. Out of the blue, they are instructed to film and not call the police; otherwise they will die. Meanwhile the unemployed Leonard (Barak Hardley) that lives with his mother receives a clown outfit and make-up and instructions to receive ten thousand dollars. After moments of tension, their lives are tragically entwined. Who is the stranger behind the prank?
"Mockingbird" is among the most annoying and stupid movies with shaky camera. The story is not scary but irritating; the plot is not believable; and the conclusion is silly and unrealistic. Only the classical music score saves in this awful movie. My vote is two.
Title (Brazil): "Perseguidos Pela Morte" ("Chased by Death")
"Mockingbird" is among the most annoying and stupid movies with shaky camera. The story is not scary but irritating; the plot is not believable; and the conclusion is silly and unrealistic. Only the classical music score saves in this awful movie. My vote is two.
Title (Brazil): "Perseguidos Pela Morte" ("Chased by Death")
Bryan Bertino needs to put his ego aside and go back to film school to learn how to make a watchable movie. Since this comes across as a movie a novice film school student might make, here are some hints for him:
* The shaky camera technique used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It worked for "Blair Witch Project", but has never worked since. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. It's also obvious that not all the shots are done with the cameras the characters are given. It is a very sloppy use of the "found footage" technique, which has already gotten old, and should be abandoned by any capable writer or director.
* The lighting flashing from dark to bright used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. That's especially true since there is no realistic reason for the relatively constant rapid changes from darkness to light in large parts of the film.
* Having all the characters react in unrealistic ways does not become more believable by covering them up with shaky camera movements and flashing lights.
* Long, drawn out shots that add nothing to the plot drag a movie down. Using them this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. But I guess he had to turn what could have been a possibly decent short film into an hour and 22 minutes feature somehow.
* A movie needs to have some context, some cohesiveness that draws the viewer in. That is completely lacking here, all the way through. I don't look for realism or a complete lack of plot holes (and there are plenty here) in a B horror movie, but I would like some logic in its progression. There is none here.
The above makes any experienced viewer lose interest before the 1-hour mark. I only stuck it out because the movie is thankfully short.
Then there is the final scene, which is drawn out painfully long (again, probably to pad the movie), and ends with a ridiculous payoff. The inexplicable makeup and utter lack of believability that the characters that pulled off this "prank" could have done so further ruins what is already a very bad movie. I even "get" the ending, which I guess was supposed to surprise me. But no. It only added to how badly written and executed the film was.
How Bertino managed to get a major studio to back this mess with somewhat good production values and a large crew is a mystery. The fact that it went directly to disk (ones that are being sold dirt cheap) is not a mystery. It is disappointing, though, that a film like this gets to disk while so many older and recent much better movies never do.
I am amazed at the few positive reviews I see here for this mess. Since the one guy misspells "style" in his title, it makes me think that only young viewers that haven't seen very many horror movies, or movies in general, could enjoy this.
* The shaky camera technique used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It worked for "Blair Witch Project", but has never worked since. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. It's also obvious that not all the shots are done with the cameras the characters are given. It is a very sloppy use of the "found footage" technique, which has already gotten old, and should be abandoned by any capable writer or director.
* The lighting flashing from dark to bright used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. That's especially true since there is no realistic reason for the relatively constant rapid changes from darkness to light in large parts of the film.
* Having all the characters react in unrealistic ways does not become more believable by covering them up with shaky camera movements and flashing lights.
* Long, drawn out shots that add nothing to the plot drag a movie down. Using them this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. But I guess he had to turn what could have been a possibly decent short film into an hour and 22 minutes feature somehow.
* A movie needs to have some context, some cohesiveness that draws the viewer in. That is completely lacking here, all the way through. I don't look for realism or a complete lack of plot holes (and there are plenty here) in a B horror movie, but I would like some logic in its progression. There is none here.
The above makes any experienced viewer lose interest before the 1-hour mark. I only stuck it out because the movie is thankfully short.
Then there is the final scene, which is drawn out painfully long (again, probably to pad the movie), and ends with a ridiculous payoff. The inexplicable makeup and utter lack of believability that the characters that pulled off this "prank" could have done so further ruins what is already a very bad movie. I even "get" the ending, which I guess was supposed to surprise me. But no. It only added to how badly written and executed the film was.
How Bertino managed to get a major studio to back this mess with somewhat good production values and a large crew is a mystery. The fact that it went directly to disk (ones that are being sold dirt cheap) is not a mystery. It is disappointing, though, that a film like this gets to disk while so many older and recent much better movies never do.
I am amazed at the few positive reviews I see here for this mess. Since the one guy misspells "style" in his title, it makes me think that only young viewers that haven't seen very many horror movies, or movies in general, could enjoy this.
My favorite thing about this is the clown; I'm barely a fan of found-footage films. I originally saw this years ago when it came out in 2014 on a streaming service and even then I didn't mind it, it's definitely disturbing! Bryan Bertino has much better films like The Strangers and The Monster - both are spectacular in my opinion. Also found-footage types are really hard to enjoy in most cases but I recommend this, if not anything in the VHS series is great.
What a mess from the director of The Strangers. Keep filming or someone will die, the film actually has an interesting plot and concept but sadly turns into a mess with its ridiculous ending and an insult to the audience The SCARE here is similar to The Strangers and some of the scenes are quite effective and intense in delivering that but don't go in expecting any GORES here. The film starts out pretty interesting and engaging but gets more tiring as it goes and ends with a hugely unsatisfied and stupid twist. Overall, this is one of those found footage films that fails to deliver its premise and enough thrills or scares and is ultimately just a waste of time. >>C-<<
Who pays for movies like this that's what I kept asking myself being bored with this film it literally goes no where boring movie damn shame for Blum house
क्या आपको पता है
- गूफ़Although he ostensibly shaved his head before applying the clown makeup, it is evident in several close-ups that Leonard is actually wearing a bald cap.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Mockingbird?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Ölümcül Kayıt
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 21 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.78 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें