AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
3,9/10
1 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaFamily man Tom has seen something he can't forget, a mysterious video with an ugly secret that soon spreads into his daily life and threatens to dismantle everything around him.Family man Tom has seen something he can't forget, a mysterious video with an ugly secret that soon spreads into his daily life and threatens to dismantle everything around him.Family man Tom has seen something he can't forget, a mysterious video with an ugly secret that soon spreads into his daily life and threatens to dismantle everything around him.
- Prêmios
- 5 vitórias e 2 indicações no total
Deborah J. Atuk
- Dog Owner
- (as Deborah Atuk)
Fernando Alicea
- Diner Regular
- (não creditado)
Roger Brenner
- Diner Regular
- (não creditado)
Agnes Brenson
- Diner Regular
- (não creditado)
Avaliações em destaque
"Gut" has a familiar feel to it. If you've seen "Thesis," "Videodrome," "A Serbian Film," The "August Underground" series,"8mm," or any of the other dozens of films covering this topic, this will feel like tread territory. "Snuff" films and their impact still represent a valid sub-genre, but "Gut" unfortunately brings little new to the table.
The story has many elements which will ring true to viewers: boring married life, soul-sucking work banality, an old friendship that has lost its zing, love of horror films; but while these parts make for identifiable characters, the film seems to wallow in them rather than rise above their baseness. It could be argued that the banal qualities are where the real horror lies, but the actors don't quite have the chops to sell it. The understated nature of the more violent parts of the film are well done and look believable, but this only echoes the feel that the film has fallen short. I certainly love understated films. "Beyond the Black Rainbow" was maddeningly open to interpretation, but left me feeling stunned and violated. While "Gut" definitely aimed for a similar jarring, I don't feel it quite succeeded.
The production presents a host of wins and losses as well. The film looks very good. Shot with a careful eye and a steady hand, the camera observes more than it dazzles, which makes for a calmer viewing experience. I was never annoyed by the editing, which is always a win when you're a long-time horror fan. The score has great and awful elements to it as well, as the hypnotic, delay and distortion-heavy, simple guitar ambiance is essentially a character itself. Almost endless, these guitar notes pluck in and out of the soundtrack without abandon, often interrupting quiet dialog or coming off as a practice recording. Additionally, the acting is wildly uneven. Several 3rd-tier characters' lines come off as forced, and the leads barely contain the film. For a movie consisting largely of dialog-free, music-driven scenes of people dealing with emotions quietly, I found this disappointing and surprising. The lines are often delivered with an unattached quality that never resonated with me. I could never forget that I was watching amateurs, and this was a detriment to the film's success. The sex scenes are frequent and relatively good, so there's that. I'm kind of over boobs and boning in horror, so it normally feels obligatory to me when it's there. That being said, the erotic displays in "Gut" are well-executed.
I hate critique. It never feels just. I didn't go through the laborious process of making a film, so where do I get off criticizing it?! Ha. I guess I'm writing this to warn the viewer what he/she is getting into. The trailer for this film is great, and completely won me over. But horror trailers (or trailers in general, for that matter) are often awesome, so I guess it comes with the territory. If you've never seen a film about Snuff, then you might like this more than I did. I suggest "Thesis," though.
The story has many elements which will ring true to viewers: boring married life, soul-sucking work banality, an old friendship that has lost its zing, love of horror films; but while these parts make for identifiable characters, the film seems to wallow in them rather than rise above their baseness. It could be argued that the banal qualities are where the real horror lies, but the actors don't quite have the chops to sell it. The understated nature of the more violent parts of the film are well done and look believable, but this only echoes the feel that the film has fallen short. I certainly love understated films. "Beyond the Black Rainbow" was maddeningly open to interpretation, but left me feeling stunned and violated. While "Gut" definitely aimed for a similar jarring, I don't feel it quite succeeded.
The production presents a host of wins and losses as well. The film looks very good. Shot with a careful eye and a steady hand, the camera observes more than it dazzles, which makes for a calmer viewing experience. I was never annoyed by the editing, which is always a win when you're a long-time horror fan. The score has great and awful elements to it as well, as the hypnotic, delay and distortion-heavy, simple guitar ambiance is essentially a character itself. Almost endless, these guitar notes pluck in and out of the soundtrack without abandon, often interrupting quiet dialog or coming off as a practice recording. Additionally, the acting is wildly uneven. Several 3rd-tier characters' lines come off as forced, and the leads barely contain the film. For a movie consisting largely of dialog-free, music-driven scenes of people dealing with emotions quietly, I found this disappointing and surprising. The lines are often delivered with an unattached quality that never resonated with me. I could never forget that I was watching amateurs, and this was a detriment to the film's success. The sex scenes are frequent and relatively good, so there's that. I'm kind of over boobs and boning in horror, so it normally feels obligatory to me when it's there. That being said, the erotic displays in "Gut" are well-executed.
I hate critique. It never feels just. I didn't go through the laborious process of making a film, so where do I get off criticizing it?! Ha. I guess I'm writing this to warn the viewer what he/she is getting into. The trailer for this film is great, and completely won me over. But horror trailers (or trailers in general, for that matter) are often awesome, so I guess it comes with the territory. If you've never seen a film about Snuff, then you might like this more than I did. I suggest "Thesis," though.
Anyone who is ever seen a horror movie before will figure out right away what it is they're about to sit through another hour of dreadfully dull 2-dimensional characterization and seen-it-a-million-times-before filmmaking to find out. This could've been a 20 minute short film, and still wouldn't have been a terribly interesting one at that. I'm not sure how this even so release, and I am positive that the glowing reviews are fakes by people connected with this film, because there is absolutely no way an objective human being Who was familiar with the horror genre at all could lavish praise on this. This film doesn't even try to be good. The filmmakers had one unoriginal idea, and they thought that all they had to do was put that idea on screen and that would take place of plot, narration, character development, Robert themes or any deeper meaning at all, not to mention that this is the single least gory "torture porn" film ever, with a total of maybe two minutes of exceptionally tame blood & guts, so it doesn't even work if that's what you're into. So instead, we get a feature length view of barely-developed characters walk a treadmill to a conclusion that we can see already from near the beginning of the movie. This film makes "Paranormal Activity" look as action-packed as a Michael Bay film, as well-crafted as Hitchcock, and as intellectually challenging as Tarkovsky.
Look, if a couple of high school kids up the block made this movie, I would congratulate them for doing a great job for a student film (although it wouldn't really be *that* great a job, even for students.) But as a film that got real attention and supposed awards and wound up on a major streaming site that I pay money for? No fargin' way.
Look, if a couple of high school kids up the block made this movie, I would congratulate them for doing a great job for a student film (although it wouldn't really be *that* great a job, even for students.) But as a film that got real attention and supposed awards and wound up on a major streaming site that I pay money for? No fargin' way.
Hello, everyone! If all you horror buffs out there are on the prowl for the kind of interesting, compelling, and innovative horror-thriller that really isn't made anymore, that dares to *involve* the viewer in its horror (and not just splay it all out there graphically for the viewer to revel in), then "Gut" is absolutely the perfect movie for you! :) It's a terrific socio-psych horror film...think of it as "Fargo" with a Todd Solondz spin for the first half (with all the occasional dark humor that implies), with really great character development and humor, and an building sense of ambiguous mood/dread throughout (with Kubrick-esque sound design) that leaves your mind racing faster and faster. It has a Western/Jarmusch-esque alternation of quick cuts and long takes, but never in like a distancing or showstopping sort of way like Michael Haneke. And to top it all off, the underlying issues/theme of the movie are always clear and 100% relatable, about the neediness and isolated dependency and suppressed hostility of American suburbia, and the arrested development and uncommunicativeness that can result. The plot may revolve around snuff films, that is true (only VERY rarely seen on screen in slivers), but the film is REALLY about all the suppressed emotions and urges that get manifested *through* them. If you like movies like "Fight Club" and "Cape Fear", but on a smaller, more human indie-horror scale, this is most definitely the movie for you! Enjoy, everyone! :)
Before I even get into the movie, their use of music amounts to torture in itself. It is worth taking several points off any rating. We meet Tom and Dan, friends for a long time, and Dan considers himself sort of a horror film maker, although one he did got really panned. They both work in an office, but what they do is impossible to guess, as Dan seems to do little, and Tom not much more. Tom is bored with his work, and Dan seems like the proverbial sad sack. Oh, Dan often wears his jacket while at work, and they frequent a diner for lunch, as regulars. Dan got an interesting DVD, and invites Tom to watch it with him. It is torture/snuff porn, but is it real? But it is addictive. Tom even gets visions about it. It starts to take over their lives. But it turns out there is a very, very dark side, and that is the latter part of the movie. In a movie, the music can set the mood, and in this movie, the mood is not to watch it. I did make it to the end, where the real horror is.
Do not watch this movie. It's pretty gross/ graphic and there's a ton of un needed nudity (not in a good way). Every time the main actor got out of bed I was getting sick from seeing his saggy butt. The camera comes close over and over from actually showing his junk (I don't think they ever did). The plot is sad. I wanted to like this movie bit it's really really bad.
Você sabia?
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Gut?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Кишка
- Locações de filme
- Nova Iorque, EUA(on location)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 31 min(91 min)
- Cor
- Proporção
- 1.78 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente