NiteAnjel
Iscritto in data set 2002
Ti diamo il benvenuto nel nuovo profilo
I nostri aggiornamenti sono ancora in fase di sviluppo. Sebbene la versione precedente del profilo non sia più accessibile, stiamo lavorando attivamente ai miglioramenti e alcune delle funzionalità mancanti torneranno presto! Non perderti il loro ritorno. Nel frattempo, l’analisi delle valutazioni è ancora disponibile sulle nostre app iOS e Android, che si trovano nella pagina del profilo. Per visualizzare la tua distribuzione delle valutazioni per anno e genere, fai riferimento alla nostra nuova Guida di aiuto.
Distintivi3
Per sapere come ottenere i badge, vai a pagina di aiuto per i badge.
Recensioni11
Valutazione di NiteAnjel
I went into this movie with an open mind. I love the original and thought that maybe the new Hollywood can capture what might have been lost back in 1979. And how I was crushed when I found out I had been let down hard.
The whole pace of the movie is very off-beat. Hard to follow in some places and others drags too much. This time around they seem to rely on the "jump out and scare you" routine. Every so often there's an image or some blood. OK, I did like the finger thing. That kind of freaked me out. But in this day and age of movies, it's been way overdone. Scale it back to bare essentials and you've got something. I think what made the original so creepy is what they DIDN'T show you. They left it in your head and that's what kept you up later that night at home...3 weeks later. But in this one, they leave nothing to the imagination going all out on the gore and violence.
As for the participation by the actors...well...OK. I like Reynolds, but he cannot hold a candle to Brolin. Just something about James Brolin made that movie. Reynolds looked as if he was trying to channel his predecessor instead of making the role his own. It felt very forced. All in all, if you want to scare your girlfriend, by all means see it. But if you want true cinematic horror, see the original and be done with it.
The whole pace of the movie is very off-beat. Hard to follow in some places and others drags too much. This time around they seem to rely on the "jump out and scare you" routine. Every so often there's an image or some blood. OK, I did like the finger thing. That kind of freaked me out. But in this day and age of movies, it's been way overdone. Scale it back to bare essentials and you've got something. I think what made the original so creepy is what they DIDN'T show you. They left it in your head and that's what kept you up later that night at home...3 weeks later. But in this one, they leave nothing to the imagination going all out on the gore and violence.
As for the participation by the actors...well...OK. I like Reynolds, but he cannot hold a candle to Brolin. Just something about James Brolin made that movie. Reynolds looked as if he was trying to channel his predecessor instead of making the role his own. It felt very forced. All in all, if you want to scare your girlfriend, by all means see it. But if you want true cinematic horror, see the original and be done with it.
Did trainee supervisor Harris (Val Kilmer) really send this band of prospective FBI profilers to a small island to be sliced, diced and ultimately done away with by a sadistic killer? That's of course one of the possibilities the crack team have to work out when all of a sudden they find themselves one-by-one falling victim to a series of carefully laid traps.
With most serial killer films, especially those who happen to snag a star or two, it's usually pretty easy to predict who's going to be the killer, who's going to be the hero, and what essentially is going to go down for every minute of the film. However, Renny Harlin's "Mindhunters" robs, shreds and rids you of 'The dummies guide to making a serial killer movie' booklet and instead heads back into the annals for something genuinely original, surprising and kind of exciting.
Films along the same story have been done before - the box flop "D-Tox" and the acclaimed "Identity" being just two recent examples but never has an ensemble thriller that probably wants no more than to be a consideration come Saturday matinée been such a surprising revelation. The twists are never-ending, the pacing is surprisingly good, but that music was annoying.
From it's smart opening sequence (that'll trick the audience...a little) to its constantly unraveling secret stratagem, Harlan's movie is ultimately outed as an excellent addition to the genre. Leave those now-customary 'I bet I know who it is' thoughts at the door.
With most serial killer films, especially those who happen to snag a star or two, it's usually pretty easy to predict who's going to be the killer, who's going to be the hero, and what essentially is going to go down for every minute of the film. However, Renny Harlin's "Mindhunters" robs, shreds and rids you of 'The dummies guide to making a serial killer movie' booklet and instead heads back into the annals for something genuinely original, surprising and kind of exciting.
Films along the same story have been done before - the box flop "D-Tox" and the acclaimed "Identity" being just two recent examples but never has an ensemble thriller that probably wants no more than to be a consideration come Saturday matinée been such a surprising revelation. The twists are never-ending, the pacing is surprisingly good, but that music was annoying.
From it's smart opening sequence (that'll trick the audience...a little) to its constantly unraveling secret stratagem, Harlan's movie is ultimately outed as an excellent addition to the genre. Leave those now-customary 'I bet I know who it is' thoughts at the door.