Avaliações de usuários

...don't confuse yourself with a reviewer. "Beneath the Skin" is about a half-step above an ordinary student film. It has a respectable plotline and likeable characters, but it doesn't go anywhere. The script is problematic: Loose ends all over the place which scream out to be connected up and aren't; characters who do things with little or no motivation; subplots (and there are way too many) which are not fleshed out and have nothing to do with anything anyway. Some of the actors are quite promising, but the insufficiencies of the script leave them with little room to maneuver. Others of the actors are just not as yet very good (and may never be). The nudity is largely gratuitous. (If nudity isn't motivated, don't use it. In the 21st century, nudity no longer needs to barely suggested, but if the characters are going to have sex, it also no longer works to just hint at it.) The scenery in Nova Scotia is beautiful, of course, and in general the cinematography takes advantage of that, although at times the shots seem to be largely just random filler. The music ranges from pleasant to annoying. The editing seems ragged, although the editor may have done the best he/she could with the footage available. In short, "Beneath the Skin" is a beginner's work. It shows potential and shouldn't be dismissed because it isn't brilliant. Let's see what comes next; the creators deserve another chance.

Honestly, I don't understand how or who gave this so-called movie such a high rating, I only can think that it was given by someone involved making it. And even so, I think it could be a bit objective, instead of promoting it without any real reason.

It is just a terrible movie, too slow, bad acting (if you can call it that), too long, and very amateurish, not to mention the inept editing. And let's not forget that repetitive and boring piano score played over and over and over, besides the unacceptable sound throughout the whole film, that sometimes it was just impossible to hear the dialogue, and then at the next minute, it was just too loud.

I am gay and have the tendency to be a lot in favor of most gay-themed movies (meaning I am usually not to severe to give them not a favorable review), but sometimes I just cannot help it and be up front and be as objective as I can, and this is one of those times.

It is very disappointing to see that there are not that many good gay-themed movies made in the USA in the last few years.

I do recognize the effort of some movie makers (including the ones that make this one) about showing gay people just like any other human being, but it would be refreshing to see some good scripts, good actors, editing, etc.

Just don't watch this. 8th grade level writing, cringe worthy acting and just plain awkward directing. I've never written a review but I just can't hold back on this one and I don't even know that you need 10 lines of texts for a review. None of the nude scenes in this movie makes any sense or are necessary. The actors have zero chemistry with each other. The directing is just awful. I don't know the director's background but whatever the school he went to, don't go there. They cast a porn star to be one of the main roles, but unlike a few others that had been on the "big screen" before, there was not a single moment that you would think "oh damn he can actually do more than fk on camera". This movie is neither inspiring nor entertaining. There is literally no reason to watch this.

This was seriously terrible, on so many levels. This movie was nothing more than a vehicle for writer/director/star Ellis to make out with porn star "Hunter Page". In an interview with Page, he exposes Ellis for finding him while "viewing his work" (gee, I wonder what that means). Page didn't seek out this job, it was Ellis who pursued Page and then (conveniently) cast himself as Page's love interest. The film itself is equally awful. I literally made it to 39 minutes into it before having to turn it off. The idea that Ellis' character, who has the personality of a dead snail and the looks of the most boring accountant on earth, would cause Hunter Page to instantly fall for him and then Page be the aggressor, is beyond laughable. Steer clear of this one folks.

It is tempting to be very critic about this film. Yes, many motives, a lot of mistakes,awful dialogue, not small expectations, wooden acting - the supporting actors as a sort of some spice - and a story not very inspired driven and, more important, the feel about nudity as axis saving the film. But the good intentions are obvious, the story works , in some measure, for a time, as crumbs, the naivety can be, first, terrible but it sounds reasonable to end, the plot is not bad but wrong used and a better chemistry between lead actors could be a good detail. But, short, not so bad.

A film with no redeeming features whatsoever: a storyline with more holes in it than a colander, the pacing of a snail, gratuitous scenes of gay bashing, repetitious incidental music, amateur British actors attempting Canadian accents, and a suburban Berkshire house that doubles for a Nova Scotia apartment building (the entrance for which is the kitchen back door).

The lead, Aaron Ellis (also the writer and director), has the charisma of a soggy biscuit.

Just awful, on almost every level.

OK some of the reviews for this are unjustifiably harsh. Yes, the writing is a lil' cringe in places, the acting can be a bit wooden in parts and the British actors trying to do Canadian accents could've been left out... but over all it was a lovely story. Especially since the writer was just 20ish when this was made! I think for a film made on what was most likely a shoe-string budget, by a very young writing/directing team this was a fantastic effort! I believe with a bit more time and experience, they'll make some wonderful lgbt films in the future (with more HFN endings please.) I was actually considerably impressed with the production value knowing that the budget would've been microscopic.

Also did anyone else get an Ed Sheeran vibe from the main actor/writer?

People expect to much out of indie films. No it's not perfect by Hollywood standards. It's a sweet love story that had a few bumps in the road, can be a little slow but, I loved the story. That first couple minutes were really intense,and that bully and his bimbo girlfriend will get you upset! But in the end love conquers all..

I really wanted to like this movie but somehow it fell short of boredom. How many landscapes with piano music backgrounds can you have? It was far fetched that someone from Alabama was on their way to Canada to open a tattoo shop, but how do you meet someone on a park bench and decide to take them with you. The writing was dismal at best and most of the actors sounded like they were reading off cue cards. I gave it 6 stars because I thought it was sweet but not really believable at all

CHRONICLES OF FIRST AND STRONG LOVES... WITHOUT TIME OR DISTANCE

I wandered off to see this feature film because I don't usually watch low-rated films, as it's a clear warning of what you're about to see. But that's not a rule written in stone (as we say here in LATAM), so I decided to give it a chance. And it was, at least, enjoyable.

We have the typical plot of first-time teenage love, that plot over-explored by independent cinema and Hollywood to the point of nausea, but here, at least on paper, it didn't feel like a rehash of other films or cinematic devices, although ironically there are some, but they are necessary to a certain extent.

The acting was good for what the script proposed. Even judging by the script, the acting was above what one would expect in a typical film of these modern times, and even more so in a plot that's already over-explored in general cinema, but it wasn't perfect either. Despite the fact that some actors occasionally didn't connect with their characters (there was, at times, a slight discomfort on the part, mainly, of the lead actor/director), and Wayne Virgo, who wasn't even the raw promise of the time, did something as good as he did in his debut feature and, to this day, his greatest film, Shank (2009), because they gave him a mediocre, almost filler character, forgetting how great he can be without feeling pressured. Still, it was clear that an effort was made to avoid falling into mediocrity.

The script was the film's downside. It has many flaws that seem straight out of a super-amateur film or a university thesis-type project, even though it was noticeable that there was production and certain resources (I mean, it didn't feel like a cheap film, at least from what you see in close-up), and it's a shame because the essence of the plot isn't bad. In fact, I saw some similarities with Steel (2015) or a better-made film in every way, Gameboys: The Film (2021), but due to a mediocre script and direction bordering on amateurish, it felt empty, without substance, and at times, like something that was done more than anything to please mass audiences than to make a more robust, daring, and courageous proposal. The film needed that because the proposal required it.

In short, it's not a bad film, but it's not perfect either. At least by its release date, there weren't yet the 1,000 films made in droves, repeating the same plot indefinitely, with different approaches, but which contributed little or nothing to cinema in general. It's entertaining to watch, at least if you want to relax in your room watching something for those nights when it's hard to sleep.

The title of my review was taken from the song "Mas Allá De La Piel" by Frankie Ruiz and curiously, it coincides with the film's title in Spanish.