Dois garotos estavam brincando na floresta, quando descobrem uma instalação militar e acidentalmente libertam um fantasma da Segunda Guerra Mundial, que acredita que os soldados nazistas est... Ler tudoDois garotos estavam brincando na floresta, quando descobrem uma instalação militar e acidentalmente libertam um fantasma da Segunda Guerra Mundial, que acredita que os soldados nazistas estão por toda parte.Dois garotos estavam brincando na floresta, quando descobrem uma instalação militar e acidentalmente libertam um fantasma da Segunda Guerra Mundial, que acredita que os soldados nazistas estão por toda parte.
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória no total
Charlie Mann
- Archie
- (as Charles Mann)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
I would love to be able to give this film a ten because the premise is actually really smart, but it gets let down by not having the resources to deliver the scale and quality of effects needed to do the idea justice. It starts as a slasher film but quickly hints at supernatural undertones and neatly meshes the slasher/creature genres until the twist. No spoilers but John Rhys-Davies (who is as always superb here - "Nobody tosses a dwarf!") provides a chilling monologue that grounds the story in the true history of WWII, delivered in a way that is emotive, thought provoking and entirely unusual in this type of movie! I was utterly hooked from the first ten minutes, which are basically non-stop action, but the WWII hook really grabbed me and had me on the edge of my seat for the last act (basically an advance to battle which would've benefitted from a lot more troops!) I was still thinking about the story the next day and looked a few of the facts up on Google to check if stuff mentioned in the film really happened. Really recommend checking this out as long as you can look past its budget restrictions. Would love to see this concept remade with more money.
Suspense, thrills, excitement, not in this film. I am sorry to say this is one of the worst films I've ever seen. The script was unbelievable, in the sense it was not remotely plausible and just shockingly bad. Despite having some good actors involved it appears they couldn't manage to breathe any life into this dreary film. The failure to develop any characters to any meaningful level meant there was no attachment to any of them. This lead to a lack of any feeing of suspense or any interest at all in their fate. It was a struggle to watch this film. I wasn't squirming with fear of a supernatural psychopath but of a fear it would never end. A good premise but very poorly executed.
When I sat down to watch "Aux" (aka "Soldier of War"), I had expected more of a zombiesque movie. However, that was not the case, and I was in for a less than mediocre foray into the horror genre.
The storyline in "Aux" was just so stupid that it was hard to buy into it, especially since 70 years of decomposition would have left the British undead soldier in a far, far worse state than he was. And it was just a ludicrous plot actually.
Not even John Rhys-Davies could manage to lift this movie up from the mediocre gutter. And he wasn't really all that big a part of the movie actually, which was a shame, because he could have brought so much more enjoyment to the movie.
This entire movie just felt like an ambitious low budget project. I am sure that the heart and spirit was in the right place of writers John Adams and Peter Adams, but translated to the screen, the storyline and plot just didn't really take off.
I managed to sit through this entire movie, hoping that it would pick up and become more interesting. It just never happened. So with it watched, I am sure that it will be obliterated from memory within a short time, because it left absolutely no memorable impression.
This is not the type of movie that you'' watch more than once, provided that you even watch it the first time.
The storyline in "Aux" was just so stupid that it was hard to buy into it, especially since 70 years of decomposition would have left the British undead soldier in a far, far worse state than he was. And it was just a ludicrous plot actually.
Not even John Rhys-Davies could manage to lift this movie up from the mediocre gutter. And he wasn't really all that big a part of the movie actually, which was a shame, because he could have brought so much more enjoyment to the movie.
This entire movie just felt like an ambitious low budget project. I am sure that the heart and spirit was in the right place of writers John Adams and Peter Adams, but translated to the screen, the storyline and plot just didn't really take off.
I managed to sit through this entire movie, hoping that it would pick up and become more interesting. It just never happened. So with it watched, I am sure that it will be obliterated from memory within a short time, because it left absolutely no memorable impression.
This is not the type of movie that you'' watch more than once, provided that you even watch it the first time.
The concept for 'Aux' was a sort of interesting one, if in the danger of being silly. The cover and advertising was quite advertising. And although John Rhys Davies has been in his fair share of bad projects, he also has been in his fair share of good stuff too and he is a reliable actor and my main reason for seeing it.
'Aux' for me was not a bad film, much better than has been said already (and certainly don't have bias against low-budget British films, there are bad ones definitely but not all) and does have its pros. It is far from great and has a lot of big problems that outweigh the pros, but there are far worse films out there that are much more cheaply made, worse acted, less atmosphere, more intelligence insulting and made with much less effort.
Best thing about 'Aux' is Davies, cast against type and giving a haunted performance that is different from the usual authority figure or characters with a blustery nature. Actually generally found the adult cast better than average.
Production values could have been worse, it at least looks coherent and there is slickness and atmosphere. Parts do compel and unsettle, though they don't come consistently, the car crash and bunker scene particularly as well as the gruesomeness of the killings.
However, 'Aux' does get off to a weak start. It is rather dull, inexperience does show in the acting and the dialogue is particularly off in a script that feels awkward and underwritten. While the production values as said above could have been worse, it can feel on the confined and too compact side even if the bleak look does fit the concept. Effects are somewhat ropy.
Story does pick up a little after the shaky start, but does lack generally creepiness, tension and suspense, let down by a pace that needed a tighten and too much talk. A few parts, like the out of place picnic scene, come over as unintentionally funny and while 'Aux' does try to provide a reason for the killings it was for me not an original or compelling one, and some of it veers towards being too silly. The direction is uneven and other than Davies' character the characters are flimsily developed.
Overall, not particularly good but could have been much worse. 4/10 Bethany Cox
'Aux' for me was not a bad film, much better than has been said already (and certainly don't have bias against low-budget British films, there are bad ones definitely but not all) and does have its pros. It is far from great and has a lot of big problems that outweigh the pros, but there are far worse films out there that are much more cheaply made, worse acted, less atmosphere, more intelligence insulting and made with much less effort.
Best thing about 'Aux' is Davies, cast against type and giving a haunted performance that is different from the usual authority figure or characters with a blustery nature. Actually generally found the adult cast better than average.
Production values could have been worse, it at least looks coherent and there is slickness and atmosphere. Parts do compel and unsettle, though they don't come consistently, the car crash and bunker scene particularly as well as the gruesomeness of the killings.
However, 'Aux' does get off to a weak start. It is rather dull, inexperience does show in the acting and the dialogue is particularly off in a script that feels awkward and underwritten. While the production values as said above could have been worse, it can feel on the confined and too compact side even if the bleak look does fit the concept. Effects are somewhat ropy.
Story does pick up a little after the shaky start, but does lack generally creepiness, tension and suspense, let down by a pace that needed a tighten and too much talk. A few parts, like the out of place picnic scene, come over as unintentionally funny and while 'Aux' does try to provide a reason for the killings it was for me not an original or compelling one, and some of it veers towards being too silly. The direction is uneven and other than Davies' character the characters are flimsily developed.
Overall, not particularly good but could have been much worse. 4/10 Bethany Cox
Nothing to redeem this catastrophe. The reason why extremely-low-budget British films are generally avoided and laughed at.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Aux?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 725
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 23 min(83 min)
- Cor
- Proporção
- 2.39:1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente