 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 17, 2016 - 8:55 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Hurdy Gurdy
(Member)
|
I saw this film the other night at the arthouse cinema (FACT) in my city (Liverpool).
On reflection, my viewing of it was ruined by the ridiculously over the top reviews that I'd seen and heard during it's release build-up.
It's NOT the most frightening!!!, scary!!!, terrifying!!! film I will ever see (it's not really that frightening at all...I wouldn't even class it as a horror film 'til maybe the final 10 minutes...even then, only maybe).
It's a small, quiet, slow-burn film about the psychology of religion and fear and paranoia.
I imagine it's VERY authentic of it's period and time - New England, America, 1620(ish).
Sets, costumes, dialogue appear spot-on.
For a film budgeted around $1 million, it's very clever indeed.
But had I viewed it with the correct expectations, I would have probably been more impressed (as I have been the more I've thought about it), but the actual viewing experience was ruined by what it most certainly wasn't.
The screening was pretty packed and I felt it wasn't just me - at the end - who was disappointed by it's mis-selling and underwhelming mood.
It's a modest, art-house, period drama with a supernatural twist. Hyperbolic reviewers need to shut the fu*k up.
But I guess that's all moot. It's been a roaring success for the makers and studio, so they did the right thing, I guess.
*edit*
Oh yeah, the music. Impressive in the film...chilly and unsettling. Not something I would ever want to play or hear apart from the film though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 17, 2016 - 5:39 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
spook
(Member)
|
I saw this film the other night at the arthouse cinema (FACT) in my city (Liverpool).
On reflection, my viewing of it was ruined by the ridiculously over the top reviews that I'd seen and heard during it's release build-up.
It's NOT the most frightening!!!, scary!!!, terrifying!!! film I will ever see (it's not really that frightening at all...I wouldn't even class it as a horror film 'til maybe the final 10 minutes...even then, only maybe).
It's a small, quiet, slow-burn film about the psychology of religion and fear and paranoia.
I imagine it's VERY authentic of it's period and time - New England, America, 1620(ish).
Sets, costumes, dialogue appear spot-on.
For a film budgeted around $1 million, it's very clever indeed.
But had I viewed it with the correct expectations, I would have probably been more impressed (as I have been the more I've thought about it), but the actual viewing experience was ruined by what it most certainly wasn't.
The screening was pretty packed and I felt it wasn't just me - at the end - who was disappointed by it's mis-selling and underwhelming mood.
It's a modest, art-house, period drama with a supernatural twist. Hyperbolic reviewers need to shut the fu*k up.
But I guess that's all moot. It's been a roaring success for the makers and studio, so they did the right thing, I guess.
*edit*
Oh yeah, the music. Impressive in the film...chilly and unsettling. Not something I would ever want to play or hear apart from the film though.
Sounds like another BABADOOK case...Good wee film hyped into ridiculous excess by the press and probably lightly to disappoint a lot of folk becauuse of it.
Have to say im loving the score. Pretty unsettling stuff and very effective.
This does bode the question why would folk want to listen to stuff like this...and to be honest, being one of those that do, i really wonder myself!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
