Soon after moving in with her aging aunt Dora, Adele meets Beth, seductive and mysterious, who tests the limits of Adele's moral ground and sends her spiraling down a psychologically unstabl... Read allSoon after moving in with her aging aunt Dora, Adele meets Beth, seductive and mysterious, who tests the limits of Adele's moral ground and sends her spiraling down a psychologically unstable and phantasmagoric path.Soon after moving in with her aging aunt Dora, Adele meets Beth, seductive and mysterious, who tests the limits of Adele's moral ground and sends her spiraling down a psychologically unstable and phantasmagoric path.
Noel Ramos
- Bar Patron
- (credit only)
Alex Morsanutto
- Grocery Clerk
- (as A.J. Helm)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This is gorgeously reminiscent of the art-house horror of the 70s, and everything from the camera work to the sound track was just perfect.
Well acted, well-filmed, and well-edited, and definitely worth a watch, but the film consistently made promises it couldn't keep. The ending is rushed, and while the conclusion was semi-satisfying, the path there was ragged. There were great evocative, repetitive images that never even got a nod as far as anything that could give them depth or meaning. And the jump from "here" to "there" was just a little bit TOO art-house, leaving far more questions than were required.
It seems that filmmakers are so afraid of dumbing down plot points that they leave them too abstract in an effort to be more arty or erudite. I think this film could have further explored some of the basic premises without risking its artistic integrity. And the jump to the final setup could definitely used a longer bridge. Instead of being left with the haunted feeling they were trying so hard to evoke, I was left a bit disappointed and hollow. I think it would have been less disappointing if the foundation hadn't been so well done. A bad film is almost easier to watch than a "should have been" film.
This is worth the watch for style alone. Just don't expect as much substance or depth as the opening seems to promise.
Well acted, well-filmed, and well-edited, and definitely worth a watch, but the film consistently made promises it couldn't keep. The ending is rushed, and while the conclusion was semi-satisfying, the path there was ragged. There were great evocative, repetitive images that never even got a nod as far as anything that could give them depth or meaning. And the jump from "here" to "there" was just a little bit TOO art-house, leaving far more questions than were required.
It seems that filmmakers are so afraid of dumbing down plot points that they leave them too abstract in an effort to be more arty or erudite. I think this film could have further explored some of the basic premises without risking its artistic integrity. And the jump to the final setup could definitely used a longer bridge. Instead of being left with the haunted feeling they were trying so hard to evoke, I was left a bit disappointed and hollow. I think it would have been less disappointing if the foundation hadn't been so well done. A bad film is almost easier to watch than a "should have been" film.
This is worth the watch for style alone. Just don't expect as much substance or depth as the opening seems to promise.
For style as for the movie thank you for Wasting My Time like time is free I came for entertainment I got bored
I can't really comment on this movie, let alone give my review, because I don't know wtf I just saw, all I know it was really darkling loveliness, very much so , totally well written even though I have no idea wtf... lol, I can definitely say one thing, A.D. Calvo, this is his last film on his list of films but my first of his to see, I came here cause of the terrific! thespian Quinn Shephard; fell in love with the sweetness of an angel named Erin Wilhelmi in all her creepy lovely melancholic adorableness - just have to see it to actually believe this ending, what a ride, hella awesomely weird - I mean H.P. Lovecraft can't compose something this awfully creepy! But yet so cute all at the same time!
This movie is hard to analyze because there is more than meets the eye, there is a constant horror and evil heavily breathing underground just expecting to come out at any moment and you can get the hints during the film. I liked the story as it comes, from the beginning you sense that something bad is going to happen and you get intrigued by that. The atmosphere, photography , and performances nothing bad to say, on the contrary is what gives an extra point to this film and somehow compensates the lack of rhythm because it can get a little bit slow at some points of the film but nothing to worry, at the end everything comes together. Not a movie for everybody, it is all about preferences ( I'm not trying to intimidate or discriminate anyone) and Sweet Sweet Lonely Girl has more intrigue that horror...DISTURBING is the accurate word for this movie. Do not expect typical scare-jump or monsters hiding beneath the bed, this film will leave a mark on you and keep you thinking about the end with as bitter taste in your mouth
A fairly 7 and enjoy!
A fairly 7 and enjoy!
This atmospheric gem is comparable to the same-year film The Caretaker. Both are great bookends for scary-old-lady films made famous at first by Bette Davis. Creepy, artsy, with some sexual scenes but no nudity. No ghosts either.
Did you know
- TriviaThe poster is styled after the poster for the Jodie Foster film The Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane.
- How long is Sweet, Sweet Lonely Girl?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Милая одинокая девушка
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 16 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was Sweet, Sweet Lonely Girl (2016) officially released in India in English?
Answer