Sweet, Sweet Lonely Girl

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!

This is an extremely slowwww movie with no pay off. I have no idea why this is on Shudder in their "A good scare" section. This is not a horror movie, or even a thriller, just a boring drama.

Lonely Adele moves in with her agoraphobic aunt to take care of her and get some money for her family and meets a free-spirited peer who leads her down a dark path.

Those uninterested in slow paced character studies would be wise to swipe Sweet, Sweet Lonely Girl off their watch list immediately. Even those who enjoy such films might find parts of the journey interesting even when the destination isn't much to write home about. Performances are mostly decent to fairly good and the film is beautifully shot, evoking a 70's/early 80's mood right from the start. There are moments when the film could sit comfortably alongside the likes of Let's Scare Jessica To Death, The Nesting, or even the more recent House of the Devil. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to know how to end in a satisfying fashion and all that great mood and build up feels like it was all for naught.

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.

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.