Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: RE:

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RE: - 21/6/2006 11:16:17 AM   
Juvenilemike

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 1/10/2005
~~~~~~~~Spoilers~~~~~~~~
Not sure which part you didn't understand so...
1) She didn't castrate him, just froze him and then put a bulldog clip on him to mess with him.
2)She appeared as Kitty Pride in X3

(in reply to Gimli The Dwarf)
Post #: 31
- 21/6/2006 6:39:00 PM   
n13roy

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 5/10/2005
Certainly a different type of film indeed, I think I enjoyed it, and what a brilliant performance by both leading actors too......

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 32
RE: Hard Candy - 22/6/2006 8:53:59 AM   
bupesh

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 22/10/2005
a film little short of pure brilliance. my friend, who only really enjoys action films loved this one.
the acting was rather good and the story was great, just a shame the director failed to maintain the intensity as it seemed to peter out at the end

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 33
RE: Hard Candy - 22/6/2006 9:51:23 AM   
jennibean

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 21/6/2006
From: Perton, Wolverhampton
My boyfriend took me to see it on Saturday and for once it was a film that we both enjoyed (he's more action/horror i'm more more drama/thriller) I was blown away at the two leads, I can't think of many other films that managed to keep a film going with such a small cast.

For me the editing really stood out, from the lingering shots on the two as they 'flirted' to the fast paced opertation and frantic searching of the house. It was everything I wanted after I saw the trailer, the only disapointment was there there was only four people in the cinema (including me and my boyf)

< Message edited by jennibean -- 22/6/2006 9:54:22 AM >

(in reply to Juvenilemike)
Post #: 34
RE: RE: - 24/6/2006 3:42:41 AM   
Gimli The Dwarf


Posts: 78118
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Central Park Zoo
quote:

ORIGINAL: Juvenilemike

~~~~~~~~Spoilers~~~~~~~~
Not sure which part you didn't understand so...
1) She didn't castrate him, just froze him and then put a bulldog clip on him to mess with him.
2)She appeared as Kitty Pride in X3


I missed the part that she didn't actually castrate him. In my defence though. the screen blacked out in the cinema for the last 10 minutes or so, and we could only hear the sound.

< Message edited by Gimli The Dwarf -- 24/6/2006 3:43:04 AM >


_____________________________

So, sir, we let him have it right up! And I have to report, sir, he did not like it, sir.

Fellow scientists, poindexters, geeks.

Yeah, Mr. White! Yeah, science!

Much more better!

(in reply to Juvenilemike)
Post #: 35
RE: RE: - 25/6/2006 2:33:44 PM   
Mike TV


Posts: 161
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Parentville
Perhps a mite overrated by some but overall an interesting and original film.

It's a little morally iffy due to the occasion sense of empathy with the male lead, especially considering later developments but that all plays to the core themes of the script. I'd have to agree ,the last 20 minutes was a bit much and the resolution of the killer or not? thread was perhaps a tad predictable.

Overall though, thoroughly recommended.


_____________________________

118...247...give us a call it's directory heaven...

Poke it.

(in reply to Gimli The Dwarf)
Post #: 36
RE: RE: - 26/6/2006 9:53:09 AM   
lord of the pies


Posts: 1254
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The church of JJ
quote:

ORIGINAL: Juvenilemike

2)She appeared as Kitty Pride in X3


What? No way?!

_____________________________

Join The Church of JJ today!

http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=527670&mpage=23&key=&NID=0#2414995

(in reply to Juvenilemike)
Post #: 37
RE: RE: - 27/6/2006 12:39:13 AM   
indysgill


Posts: 5137
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: relic hunting
quote:

ORIGINAL: lord of the pies

quote:

ORIGINAL: Juvenilemike

2)She appeared as Kitty Pride in X3


What? No way?!


Yes way!

I saw X3 before this and was amazed by Ms Page.
A brilliant film, the person i was rooting for kept changing all thru the film!

Only spoiler was the people sat behind me talking thru most of it and some other laughing during "that" scene.


_____________________________

It's not the years honey, Its the mileage.

Are you kidding? You get to go home and say "I punched Indiana Jones today". - Gary Oldman.

(in reply to lord of the pies)
Post #: 38
Couple of Issues - 27/6/2006 5:46:02 PM   
carmen_reserved

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/1/2006
Generally decent film, but didnt anyone else find it a bit morally misguided? Sure, fancying kids isnt nice, but he can hardly help it. I thought it was a bit of a villainisation of paedophiles in general.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 39
RE: Couple of Issues - 29/6/2006 11:00:40 AM   
maffew


Posts: 2811
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: chester
yeah, man! paedos have a bad rep! i mean, they can't be all bad, can they?


...freak

_____________________________

"Now i don't know much about security lighting, but i'm guessing they'll be using 180-degree dispersing halogens with motion sensors"

(in reply to carmen_reserved)
Post #: 40
RE: RE: - 29/6/2006 12:43:52 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8788
Joined: 13/4/2006
I agree with the hardest film to sit though ever line.  This is one of the most important movies of the last 5 maybe 10 years.  The leads totalling pull it off espically Ellen Page.  A also liked the way the focus changed in how it was shot though out the film.  It brings up many question's but never awser's them and that is part of the point.

(in reply to Gimli The Dwarf)
Post #: 41
RE: Couple of Issues - 29/6/2006 5:32:34 PM   
Gazdance


Posts: 1239
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Southampton
quote:

ORIGINAL: maffew

yeah, man! paedos have a bad rep! i mean, they can't be all bad, can they?


...freak


Oh please, that's oversimplfying things a bit isn't it? 

(in reply to maffew)
Post #: 42
RE: Couple of Issues - 29/6/2006 7:38:27 PM   
Dready


Posts: 749
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Maidstone Toon!
** No Spoilers as such just a mention of a part of the film**

I saw it today and really enjoyed it. There was a great suspense about the film, if you didnt know anything about it then it would come as a shock. The obvious "torture" scene did have a lot of the male cinemagoers crossing their legs, however it was done very cleverly. I would recommend!

_____________________________

Killer Boots man!!

What's up Harry, some philly break your heart?

Nah, it was a girl!

(in reply to Gazdance)
Post #: 43
RE: Hard Candy - 30/6/2006 11:59:16 AM   
demoncleaner


Posts: 2451
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast
Perhaps it’s just a coincidence, or maybe I’m one of those self-loathing males.  But it just occurred to me this morning that of the films I’ve seen in 2006, Lady Vengeance and Hard Candy tower over everything else.  Perhaps the leads in these are a new type of character, about a billion miles away from the femme fatales of gangsters molls to the sibilant dick teasers of eighties “sex-thrillers”.  Even as revengers these movies differ significantly from the norm, amid the obvious character thrust there’s a new streak of righteousness in these women.  With Lady V you have the character drop her own grievance by the third act to avenge that of people she’s never met.  In Hard Candy, Ellen Page’s “Hayley” who’s personal connection is never established nominates herself as a sort of generalist revenging spirit.  An everyman if you will, where the emphasis is on everyman’s fucking nightmare!

Hard Candy’s a fraught affair.  I lost sleep over it last night after I saw it.  You might find yourself nauseated by consternation as the survival will you have for each character changes hands perhaps more than once.  As an audience you perhaps only know where you stand by which of the protagonists currently repels you more.  This isn’t easy, the film is a bit of a moral imbroglio, always in flux.  And it’s hard to be repelled by the allure of these hotter than hot performances, Oscar nods should follow (hoping for a second that these things are governed by a meritocracy and not the suspected Hollywood aristocracy that gets evidenced sometimes).  For writer Brian Nelson the only case to answer lies solely with the viewer and their own personal acquiescence with Hayley’s sadism.  Similarly David Slade’s direction offers a painstaking character forensics where the clues are to be trawled from the faces.  The scene where Hayley elicits the unspoken truth from the captive Jeff by looking him in the eye is a sinister example of this understated power, and that of the movie as a whole.

The thing I like about this film is that although it has the precision plotting and the pacing of a slick by-the-numbers thriller it has a naturalness with it too that comes from the basic ambiguity of the your-word-against-mine premise.  Its currency resides in the natural grey areas of life, those things that are subjective; matters of personal opinion or perception.  For this reason it never over reaches, the twists don’t twist that far.  When it ends, it ends naturally, the whole thing feels fated, adhering to the Shakespearean edict that the play can only end when things have gotten about as reasonably bad as things can reasonably get.  The portrayal of the 14 year old Hayley is a masterstroke, both in the writing and its execution.  This is a character more from the Mamet stock than an alumni from the Kevin Williamson school.  There’s a finality to her discourse, she is a lecturing teen, fuelling the adult neurosis of our coming up against a precocious know-all who is aware of our immature mistakes that have carried through to adulthood.  If there is a slight petulance to her in the early rushes this gives way to a matter-of-factness when it comes to torture that is its own chilling sarcasm. 


**************POSSIBLE SPOILER***************************************
I had worried that the Red Riding Hood reference was a bit much but the more you get to know this unhinged equaliser you understand that this is a knowing personal affectation of the character.  Part of the cruel sense of humour that’s a defining characteristic.  As Hard Candy ends it might even occur that this gamine’s career in misery over.  Sequels please!

5/5 

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 44
RE: Couple of Issues - 30/6/2006 7:09:13 PM   
lord of the pies


Posts: 1254
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The church of JJ
quote:

ORIGINAL: carmen_reserved

Sure, fancying kids isnt nice, but he can hardly help it.


You should be a lawyer, you'll be able to get every paedophile off the hook with that defence.

_____________________________

Join The Church of JJ today!

http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=527670&mpage=23&key=&NID=0#2414995

(in reply to carmen_reserved)
Post #: 45
Hold on to your balls. - 30/6/2006 7:50:48 PM   
eatmycheeseplease


Posts: 15
Joined: 30/6/2006
From: North West England
If the hyperbolic damnation of Brass Eye’s Paedophile Special taught us anything, it is not that paedophiles can disguise themselves as schools, it’s that paedophilia is a touchy subject. British Director David Slade knows this, and has used the media preconceptions of paedophilia, as well as the moral hysteria it generates, and crafted one most fraught and claustrophobic thrillers in recent memory.

Hand Candy (internet slang for under age female) was released in Britain amidst a surfeit of topical circumstance. Headlines and families across the country were again rallying their cause that the penalty for paedophilia was too flippant; in this instance, a repeated paedophile (reported to have been committing crimes against children for over thirty years) was sentenced to only 11 years in prison, and could be street-bound again within 6 years. Many, it seemed, called for stronger judgement.

Enter Hard Candy’s Hayley Stark, the barely-pubescent angel of death, torture and castration. Hayley is the golem for self-served justice and primal vigilantism; claiming to be the vengeful spirit of every girl or boy ever abused… yet this isn’t entirely what concerns director David Slade and screenwriter Brain Nelson. What makes Hard Candy so affecting (see: disturbing) is the fact that the audience is never entirely sure whether the horror that Hayley unleashes is warranted or simply wicked.
Squaring off against the pubescent purveyor of pain, our feelings are with Jeff. We feel every scream, every bead of sweat.

A tipper-tapper of a keyboard, along with quasi-suggestive internet chatroom banter acts as the calm before the storm. Thirty-something affluent photographer Jeff has been talking to 14-year-old schoolgirl Hayley in internet chatrooms for several weeks; at her request, he agrees to a rendezvous. Director David Slade uses extreme close-ups for what seems like the first third of the film, and lays down a chilling ambience over any potentially upbeat moment; it creates a consistant queasiness and claustrophobia that only heightens as events unfold. The initial question is: “What is he doing? he seems approachable, doesn’t look like a paedophile should, does he have an agenda? Is this simply a misguided friendship?” Yet before long, we’re asking: “What is she doing?” and “what is she going to do with that?”

Ellen Page (as Hayley) last seen cuddling up to the Ice Man in X-Men 3, seems almost artificially rendered for the role; her character uses her bright-eyed naivety and diffident smile to ensnare her prey; she’s a sociopathic Lolita ‘on the honour role’, as she’ll tell you. But where Page’s transformation from school girl to into dead-eyed purveyor or pain is entirely believable, and completely petrifying, our feelings are with Jeff. His methods of dissuasion, at first from the point of authority, and lastly to a point of endless pleading, are intelligently made, and he provides reason where she provides only malice. At one point he asks: “When you grow up, get married, you’re going to think of this moment, do you really want that?” We feel every quiver of his lip, every scream, every bead of sweat.

Aside from one or two minor grievances; the heartless and sardonic quips that Hayley reels off become tiresome, and why exactly does she hate Goldfrapp? – despite this, David Slade has crafted a malicious and claustrophobic film that provides thrills, chills and some occasional spills. It boasts towering performances from both leads, and Ellen Page may even deserve an Oscar, does anyone know of any other recent, such impressively acted female psychopaths? Besides Misery? Probably not, but Hard Candy, to its utmost credit, is the kind of film that truly demands a response… popcorn escapism, it certainly ain’t. The question here may be: does pitching evil against an evil, violence against violence, really provide closure? However, many of us will simply be clutching our balls.

- eatmycheeseplease.co.uk

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 46
Hard Candy - 2/7/2006 12:31:21 AM   
Philconcannon

 

Posts: 135
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
There are few issues facing society today which provoke as much fear, anger and disgust as paedophilia. Nothing is more likely to strike horror into the hearts of parents, and a special kind of contempt is reserved for those who commit these terrible crimes. With such an emotive and delicate subject matter, it is imperative that cinema should tread carefully when venturing into this particular territory. Occasionally, filmmakers get it right, such as Todd Solondz's bleak and brilliant Happiness or Nicole Kassell's The Woodsman; but it's very easy for a filmmaker tackling paedophilia to get it spectacularly, horribly wrong. Guess which category Hard Candy falls into?

Hard Candy is the controversy-courting tale of a fourteen year-old girl and a man two decades her senior. The film opens on one of their internet chatroom conversations - her using the name Thonggrrrl and him under the pseudonym Lensman - and the flirtatious, teasing banter between them suggests this is by no means their first encounter. The conversation ends with the pair making plans to finally meet.

The location for this rendezvous is a café named Nighthawks. Thonggrrrl is actually Hayley (Ellen Page), a softly-spoken, tomboyish teenager who aspires to be taken as an adult but still takes a childish glee in her chocolate dessert. Lensman soon appears in the shape of Jeff (Patrick Wilson), and he hardly fits the stereotypical view we have of what an internet predator looks like. He's tall, handsome, intelligent and charming, and these early scenes are queasily plausible. The pair seem to share plenty of common interests, and Jeff is increasingly impressed with his young friend's maturity. Ellen is alternately coy and brazen, and before long she has invited herself back to Jeff's apartment. As soon as Jeff agrees to take her home, you know it's a decision he will come to regret.

Screenwriter Brian Nelson has come up with a potentially clever conceit for Hard Candy; a film about paedophilia in which the young girl is the hunter, not the prey. Jeff and Hayley knock back a few drinks at Jeff's apartment, but then he makes the mistake of allowing Hayley to mix him a drink out of sight and, after losing consciousness, he awakes to find himself tied to a chair with a fierce and vengeful teenager standing over him. She is nowhere near as weak and defenceless as she first appeared, something Jeff is about to find out the hard way.

It's just about this point at which Hard Candy begins to unravel. The film's collapse is gradual at first, with the unnerving set-up and skilful performances managing to maintain the viewers' interest during the early stages. But Nelson and director David Slade keep boxing themselves into corners as they try to continually pull the rug from under the viewers' feet and play with our emotions; and Hard Candy eventually spirals out of control, becoming more ludicrous and unpleasant every step of the way.

Hard Candy is a battle of wits between Hayley and Jeff. He's a photographer who has a penchant for shooting semi-clad underage girls, but he claims its simply part of his job. Hayley accuses him of 'grooming' her over the internet, but he says he was genuinely interested in her, with their shared interest in Goldfrapp and Zadie Smith (this is one of the film's oddest aspects; that Zadie Smith is held up as the height of sophistication) bringing them together. Throughout the film Nelson and Slade carefully hide the truth about Jeff's alleged paedophilia; plenty of evidence is stacked against him, but much of it is circumstantial and he seems to have a convincing answer for everything Hayley throws at him.

Unfortunately, it's hard to believe in any of this, and it's even harder to care. If Hayley had been a more plausible 14 year-old then perhaps her actions would have carried more weight, but this is a 14 year-old girl who is a vengeful psycho, who knows every intimate detail about Jeff's life, and who can lift an unconscious, fully-grown man into various positions and tie him up in knots. In truth, Nelson's premise is not really strong enough to be stretched across this Hard Candy's 103 minutes, and although the subject matter is a pertinent one, the film ultimately emerges as little more than a cheap torture fantasy; a film which aspires to Takashi Miike's Audition, but comes closer to the nasty amorality of Eli Roth's Hostel.

The film's centrepiece scene is one in which Hayley takes surgical measures to remove Jeff's "weapons” and prevent him from committing more of the crimes which she believes he is guilty of. This is a horrible sequence and it proves startlingly effective thanks to Slade's decision to focus on the two characters' reactions and steer clear of showing anything graphic, but this is the exception for Slade rather than the rule. Too much of Hard Candy's action is directed in hectic, abrasive fashion; with shaky camera work, colour filters and intrusive music making this unpleasant tale difficult to watch for all the wrong reasons.

Hard Candy
's long and uncomfortable castration sequence is guaranteed to have male viewers wincing and crossing their legs, but it acts as something of a dead end for the film's narrative, and after Nelson employs an outrageous cheat to get things moving, the subsequent action becomes little more than a run-of-the-mill slasher movie. The filmmakers seem to forget what the film was originally about at this point, and the final third could be any two anonymous people chasing each other around the house with knives. It's generic, pointless and excruciatingly dull.

This is a shame, because there are two outstanding performances being thrown away here. When a film is a essentially a two-hander it's imperative that both performers are right at the top of their game; and Hard Candy benefits from two of the year's finest pieces of acting (Sandra Oh has a late cameo, as possibly the world's most stupid woman, but it's mostly confined to the central pair). As Hayley, Ellen Page gives an astonishingly assured performance which possesses a maturity beyond her tender years. Page's ability to play both the innocent teen and the vicious torturer is a sight to behold, and she can switch moods without skipping a beat. Her victim Jeff is played with great sensitivity by Patrick Wilson, who infuses the character with feeling but maintains a level of ambiguity; it's an extraordinarily committed performance from Wilson who acts as if his life, and his balls, really are on the line.

It's just a pity the efforts of Page and Wilson weren't devoted to a more worthy project. Hard Candy is a nasty piece of work; utterly lacking in meaning and vaguely offensive for the way it uses this painfully serious subject for what is ultimately little more than an ugly exploitation flick. Nelson and Slade have nothing to offer beyond the initial disorientation of their set-up, and the film is just a long, distasteful wallow in pain and suffering. Hard Candy contains two of the best performances you'll see anywhere this year, but they don't offer enough to make me recommend this shoddy and empty exercise in provocation.


< Message edited by Philconcannon -- 15/10/2006 6:35:49 PM >

(in reply to eatmycheeseplease)
Post #: 47
now turn to your left and cough!!! - 10/7/2006 12:47:17 PM   
popcorn23

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 10/7/2006
I went to see this film knowing very little from the teaser trailers.
I sat there and was quite suprised at how two people can hold such a film together - pure genius.
I am still unsure as to if i am to feel sorry for the male character - is this a bad thing if i do?? Oh well it's only a film, its only a film.....until the "removal of balls" sceen - maybe it didnt help that the night before i had a heavy drinking session but i could feel the sweat down my back and the vomit begin to curdle with the vodka shots....urgggghhhh - will be sober when it comes out to rent on dvd.

I did enjoy the film - not meaning to sound too sick and i will always probably remember it as one of those clssics to talk about in a few years time.

Well worth a watch - just corss your legs when you see the little devil child and her scaple

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 48
Paedos - 6/9/2006 2:34:43 PM   
carmen_reserved

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/1/2006
L: lord of the pies. I know what you mean but a paedo is only a menace to society when he is acting on his urges.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 49
Paedos - 6/9/2006 2:35:02 PM   
carmen_reserved

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/1/2006
L: lord of the pies. I know what you mean but a paedo is only a menace to society when he is acting on his urges.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 50
Emotional - 24/9/2006 2:54:40 PM   
bittersweet

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 1/10/2005
Forget the rest, this is the best film of the year (so far). A lesson in film making, susspense and horror and hust shows what can be done wihout the need for graphic violence (which I am all for). Disturbing, realistic, and above all else sadistic what else could you wish for loves it!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 51
Emotional - 24/9/2006 2:54:54 PM   
bittersweet

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 1/10/2005
Forget the rest, this is the best film of the year (so far). A lesson in film making, susspense and horror and hust shows what can be done wihout the need for graphic violence (which I am all for). Disturbing, realistic, and above all else sadistic what else could you wish for loves it!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 52
Overated!!! - 8/11/2006 6:30:06 PM   
nikkimariedavies

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 11/9/2006
The problem with this film is the reviews. The cinema goer will expect too much. First the positives. The acting is ok. The direction and setting is good. The first half an hour or so is seems to be building up to something interesting. Then We find out rather labouriously that our teenager is a bit Troubled and our adult has a boring secret. I was hoping that they would both commit Suicide by the time the credits came up. I think we have all seen 12 Certificate films that are more shocking.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 53
- 9/11/2006 12:22:19 AM   
Bubba76

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 30/9/2005

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 54
Modern Filmmaking at it's best! - 15/11/2006 9:46:41 PM   
KieranB

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/10/2005
People who like to cling to the old graces of cinema (not that that is bad in any way) should watch this film. This is what modern film can do now. Imagine tackling this material in the 40s. Imagine how much punch the visuals will have without the new techniques we now use. This film throws you around like a toy. You're completely split yet completely sure. Ellen Page and Patrick Wilson are superb and the direction unnoticeable which is what good films have. The script is genius but like all small indie movies it'll be lost and forgotten under the tide of Hollywood gloss pics. See this film!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 55
14 year olds don't talk like this - 30/11/2006 1:19:56 PM   
Michael Dukes

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 7/12/2005
Very disappointing. You need to believe in characters, alas the 14 year old in this film has dialogue you'd never hear from one so young. Some of the lines sound more like they've come from a Barrister rather than a teenage girl.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 56
- 5/3/2007 6:22:43 PM   
moviemaniac2


Posts: 525
Joined: 17/9/2006
Too theatrical and stretched out to be considered more than a promising film, Hard Candy's greatness is to be found in this young actress

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 57
RE: - 6/3/2007 8:14:03 PM   
spideyfan666


Posts: 88
Joined: 13/2/2006
Excllent film on such a taboo subject. An outstanding performance by the young Ellen Page of X Men fame. Went in thinking it was going to be all out balls to the wall toture ala Hostel and the Saw movies but this turned out to be a smart physcological thriller loved the twist ending too. The supposive casturation is enough to make any male cringe but the real treat is the genuine disturbing nature of the movie without the use of gore which is a welcome pleasure, recommended viewing.

_____________________________

Movies are about imagination and enjoyment respect EVERYBODIES opinion

(in reply to moviemaniac2)
Post #: 58
RE: RE: - 7/3/2007 7:35:05 AM   
Lydia_H


Posts: 3799
Joined: 26/11/2006
I thought it was wasted potential and squandors a hugely promising premise in favour of wallowing in the audience's obligation to care about such things, making no real effort except to congratulate itself on it's intellectual stylings. Ellen Page is a promising actress but her character here is insufferable, this may be the failure of the writers but I think she should shoulder some of the responsibility. Course, whether this translates into a really bad performance is highly debateable, and she is still a kid, but I suppose I wasn't meant to actually want the kiddy fiddler to win and shut her up. Patrick Wilson does a cracking job though it must be said

4/10



_____________________________

I'm hot like Pol Pot. Squeeze me.

(in reply to spideyfan666)
Post #: 59
RE: RE: - 7/3/2007 3:06:07 PM   
BigKovacs


Posts: 3214
Joined: 6/4/2006
From: Textile Street.
The acting and sets were superb and the photography was excellent althought I thought the shakey cam in action moments was out of place. The only thing I wasnt sure about was the ending, the film raises so many moral questiosn but answers none of them. I think I rememeber Slade mentioning in the 'making of' that the ending is left open for the viewsers desicion but I think its a bit of a cop out. However, the begginning with the chat room was brilliantly simple and set the tone for the film perfectly.

< Message edited by BigKovacs -- 7/3/2007 3:07:09 PM >


_____________________________

Gamertag: Cambo1979.

(in reply to Lydia_H)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.672