And that ending. How dare they??? This is/was awful. A pitiful watered down attempt at a prequel to a horror masterpiece. It's as if a group of stoner film students had a "prequel" assignment and some of the less ambitious students chose "The Thing" as their film. This is just sad and pathetic. Save yourself the tedious embarrassment of watching this, instead devote your precious time to watching John Carpenter's masterpiece.
Reviews
7 Reviews
Manos: The Hands of Fate
(1966)
Look no further, this is the worst
6 February 2021
I don't think I can add anything that hasn't been written. Suffice it to say, there is no redeeming qualities to this. It is truly awful. It makes Troll 2 look like an Oscar best picture winner (that's not saying much I know). It's 70 painful, atrocious minutes. I dare you to watch it. Other "terrible" movies have funny moments and quotable lines. You won't find that here. You'll just find an outright mess. Consider yourself warned......
Oppressively boring and dull
21 November 2020
As someone who has viewed and thoroughly enjoyed long shot/take cinema, I must say this is an exercise in masochistic boredom. I watched Satantango and The Turin Horse in a cinema. Those films are riveting. I tell friends how they must watch Ozu. I love and appreciate laborious filmmaking. What these films have that this mess lacks is this- a human element. None of the players here have any humanity, they are essentially robots, nothing more. Akerman gives us little to nothing to work with. It almost feels like a pretentious insiders chuckle with how she duped all the cinephiles out there into believing this was something important. It's not. It's simply an ultra boring stab at auteur filmmaking. Avoid this at all costs. It's basically just wasted time.
Pretentious drivel
20 May 2019
The Haunting of Hill House
(2018)
Drivel
23 October 2018
Absolutely horrible. An absurd waste of resources, time, and effort both from the creators/writers and the poor viewers who attempt to watch this terrible excuse for entertainment. It is so agonizingly slow, with few of any scares. It's essentially a soap opera with an occasional CGI ghost appearance. If you're in the mood for something scary watch something classic such as the Excorsist, Halloween, The Thing, or Rosemary's baby. This is just another sad celebration of mediocrity in our insipid pop culture.
Dunkirk
(2017)
Devastatingly Disappointed
28 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
-Contains Spoilers-
After reading such amazing universal critical praise, my less than stellar experience of watching Dunkirk obligated me to write my first ever review on IMDb. I am a big fan of Christopher Nolan, in many ways I think he has truly changed cinema and how we experience film. I would go as far as to call him a visionary artist. This is why Dunkirk truly baffled me.
Let's think about the technical facts of the Dunkirk evacuation, it is said over and over in the film that there are 300,000 men on the beach. We see maybe 1,000. A mass evacuation this scale took hundreds and hundreds of vessels. We see upwards of 30-40. And the Luftwaffe was definitely assailing the beach, yet in the film we see a paltry 8 planes. There is something missing here, it's called "scale". This film has a complete dearth of it. And that is a shame and blaspheme to the experience of the true Dunkirk evacuation.
Beyond the obvious factual incongruities, there are glaring narrative holes. We have no connection to these characters, they seem cold and distant from us. There is no character development whatsoever in the film. I understand that Nolan was trying to show the entire character of the Dunkirk evacuees, but again we only saw a minuscule few hundred of what was supposed to be 300,000 so this argument is moot to me. We don't even get to see one Nazis either, so the "grand villain" that was forcing the evacuation was never even on the screen!!!!
The score and the sound design have been mentioned by many reviewers, and again I was so underwhelmed. There have been so many better films for both scores and sound design, too many to list actually. Yes, there is some stellar cinematographer, but we expect that from Mr. Nolan.
Finally, I've heard and read "One of the best war films ever" so many times now. Give me a break. There are many many better war films- Ran, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, The Thin Red Line, and Saving Private Ryan to name just a few. I'd suggest you rent or buy one of these instead of watching Dunkirk. I wouldn't waste my time viewing this film again. I hope Nolan's next film is far better.
After reading such amazing universal critical praise, my less than stellar experience of watching Dunkirk obligated me to write my first ever review on IMDb. I am a big fan of Christopher Nolan, in many ways I think he has truly changed cinema and how we experience film. I would go as far as to call him a visionary artist. This is why Dunkirk truly baffled me.
Let's think about the technical facts of the Dunkirk evacuation, it is said over and over in the film that there are 300,000 men on the beach. We see maybe 1,000. A mass evacuation this scale took hundreds and hundreds of vessels. We see upwards of 30-40. And the Luftwaffe was definitely assailing the beach, yet in the film we see a paltry 8 planes. There is something missing here, it's called "scale". This film has a complete dearth of it. And that is a shame and blaspheme to the experience of the true Dunkirk evacuation.
Beyond the obvious factual incongruities, there are glaring narrative holes. We have no connection to these characters, they seem cold and distant from us. There is no character development whatsoever in the film. I understand that Nolan was trying to show the entire character of the Dunkirk evacuees, but again we only saw a minuscule few hundred of what was supposed to be 300,000 so this argument is moot to me. We don't even get to see one Nazis either, so the "grand villain" that was forcing the evacuation was never even on the screen!!!!
The score and the sound design have been mentioned by many reviewers, and again I was so underwhelmed. There have been so many better films for both scores and sound design, too many to list actually. Yes, there is some stellar cinematographer, but we expect that from Mr. Nolan.
Finally, I've heard and read "One of the best war films ever" so many times now. Give me a break. There are many many better war films- Ran, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, The Thin Red Line, and Saving Private Ryan to name just a few. I'd suggest you rent or buy one of these instead of watching Dunkirk. I wouldn't waste my time viewing this film again. I hope Nolan's next film is far better.
Tell Your Friends