krachtm
नव॰ 2006 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
रेटिंग1.7 हज़ार
krachtmकी रेटिंग
समीक्षाएं323
krachtmकी रेटिंग
A trio filming a travel show in the arctic circle suspect they are victims of a supernatural event when everyone else disappears.
This seems like more of an indie character study than anything else. It's got a little bit of plot, but it hardly even matters. The story is very barebones, and little actually happens. The entire plot could be summed up in just a single paragraph. That can certainly work, but it tends to feel a bit pointless when it doesn't.
Most of the movie is the two main characters interacting with each other and acting confused as to what's going on around them. The events are a bit mysterious, and there's some atmosphere. There's even a polar bear. The problem is that nothing really happens until the end, much like The Blair Witch Project.
If you felt watching a trio of idiots wander aimlessly through the forest in BWP was suspenseful, you'll probably feel the same about these adults. They're kind of interesting people, and the acting isn't bad. The scene with the polar bear was good, too. However, it wasn't as interesting or atmospheric as the old Stephen King miniseries The Langoliers.
The end was pretty cool, I thought. Much like BWP, it didn't tie up all the loose ends, but it was a powerful and tense ending. If the rest of the movie had been like that, instead of characters just wandering around aimlessly and looking confused, it would have been a better movie.
If you walk into this knowing that it's all atmosphere and has very little story, it's probably a more enjoyable experience. I could see rating Arctic Void anywhere from 4 to 7, and it's not easy to settle on a rating. There were parts I liked, and I had fun trying to come up with answers to the mystery. It's not for people who enjoy mysteries, though.
This seems like more of an indie character study than anything else. It's got a little bit of plot, but it hardly even matters. The story is very barebones, and little actually happens. The entire plot could be summed up in just a single paragraph. That can certainly work, but it tends to feel a bit pointless when it doesn't.
Most of the movie is the two main characters interacting with each other and acting confused as to what's going on around them. The events are a bit mysterious, and there's some atmosphere. There's even a polar bear. The problem is that nothing really happens until the end, much like The Blair Witch Project.
If you felt watching a trio of idiots wander aimlessly through the forest in BWP was suspenseful, you'll probably feel the same about these adults. They're kind of interesting people, and the acting isn't bad. The scene with the polar bear was good, too. However, it wasn't as interesting or atmospheric as the old Stephen King miniseries The Langoliers.
The end was pretty cool, I thought. Much like BWP, it didn't tie up all the loose ends, but it was a powerful and tense ending. If the rest of the movie had been like that, instead of characters just wandering around aimlessly and looking confused, it would have been a better movie.
If you walk into this knowing that it's all atmosphere and has very little story, it's probably a more enjoyable experience. I could see rating Arctic Void anywhere from 4 to 7, and it's not easy to settle on a rating. There were parts I liked, and I had fun trying to come up with answers to the mystery. It's not for people who enjoy mysteries, though.
An amnesiac wakes to find that everyone around him is dying, though he remains alive.
I love a good, mysterious premise like this. This kind of setup can be milked for a long time, building up the mystery. However, a lot of these low budget thrillers don't have much more than a cool premise. An immersive, interesting story that holds up past the first act seems a bit uncommon.
Radius is an exception. I was constantly wondering how it would progress, and I enjoyed following the characters as they explored the mystery. The plot went in interesting and occasionally unexpected directions. Although not all of the answers were as exciting and original as I might have hoped, I enjoyed the ending.
The directors came up with an interesting idea that didn't require massive amounts of CGI and kept it personal -- a smaller story told with fewer characters. Besides being a great way to make an independent film, this also drives viewer interest in both the premise and characters. It's pretty much everything you could want from a small, independent movie.
If you enjoy grounded but fantastical stories, definitely give this a watch. Even if you're disappointed by the ending, I think you'll enjoy getting there.
I love a good, mysterious premise like this. This kind of setup can be milked for a long time, building up the mystery. However, a lot of these low budget thrillers don't have much more than a cool premise. An immersive, interesting story that holds up past the first act seems a bit uncommon.
Radius is an exception. I was constantly wondering how it would progress, and I enjoyed following the characters as they explored the mystery. The plot went in interesting and occasionally unexpected directions. Although not all of the answers were as exciting and original as I might have hoped, I enjoyed the ending.
The directors came up with an interesting idea that didn't require massive amounts of CGI and kept it personal -- a smaller story told with fewer characters. Besides being a great way to make an independent film, this also drives viewer interest in both the premise and characters. It's pretty much everything you could want from a small, independent movie.
If you enjoy grounded but fantastical stories, definitely give this a watch. Even if you're disappointed by the ending, I think you'll enjoy getting there.
A man takes his daughter to a pop concert, only to find that the police are looking for a serial killer there.
I didn't remember who Josh Hartnett was because it's been so long since I've seen one of his movies. It turns out that I really liked several of his earlier ones, including Lucky Number Slevin. I guess he dropped off my radar for a while after that.
Shyamalan, however, is a known quantity and has been so since the late 90s. He burst into the thriller genre with such a killer movie, and then it felt like everything afterward was a vague disappointment at best. I think he's a good director, and his movies always look good. But, man, I wish he'd let someone else do the writing.
Still, I admire Shyamalan for ignoring the haters and doing what he loves. I think he's taking criticism onboard, and the average rating of his movies has definitely improved. Still, I was apprehensive about watching a new Shyamalan movie given my memories of Lady in the Water. If you're a hater, this certainly won't turn around, but it'll probably entertain people who don't mind Shyamalan's style.
This is a kind of goofy one, though not nearly as much as Shyamalan's rough period back 20 years ago. If you weren't bothered by Signs and The Village, I doubt that you'll care about the silly plot contrivances and plot holes here, either. I guess now that I know how goofy Shyamalan movies can be (and I'm properly prepared for it ahead of time), it doesn't bother me as much.
This seems like a good movie for teen girls. It's got some good roles given to women, and there's nothing that would give a kid nightmares. Despite the goofiness, I found myself buying into some of the scenes. If you're outside of that demographic, you can still have some fun watching the older characters -- they are the stars, not the kids.
However, if you're like me, I think you'll find the music annoying and ever-present. I don't know if this sort of thing is popular with kids today, but I did not like it. It didn't kill the movie for me, nor did the goofy plot, so if you can get past that stuff, too, check it out.
I didn't remember who Josh Hartnett was because it's been so long since I've seen one of his movies. It turns out that I really liked several of his earlier ones, including Lucky Number Slevin. I guess he dropped off my radar for a while after that.
Shyamalan, however, is a known quantity and has been so since the late 90s. He burst into the thriller genre with such a killer movie, and then it felt like everything afterward was a vague disappointment at best. I think he's a good director, and his movies always look good. But, man, I wish he'd let someone else do the writing.
Still, I admire Shyamalan for ignoring the haters and doing what he loves. I think he's taking criticism onboard, and the average rating of his movies has definitely improved. Still, I was apprehensive about watching a new Shyamalan movie given my memories of Lady in the Water. If you're a hater, this certainly won't turn around, but it'll probably entertain people who don't mind Shyamalan's style.
This is a kind of goofy one, though not nearly as much as Shyamalan's rough period back 20 years ago. If you weren't bothered by Signs and The Village, I doubt that you'll care about the silly plot contrivances and plot holes here, either. I guess now that I know how goofy Shyamalan movies can be (and I'm properly prepared for it ahead of time), it doesn't bother me as much.
This seems like a good movie for teen girls. It's got some good roles given to women, and there's nothing that would give a kid nightmares. Despite the goofiness, I found myself buying into some of the scenes. If you're outside of that demographic, you can still have some fun watching the older characters -- they are the stars, not the kids.
However, if you're like me, I think you'll find the music annoying and ever-present. I don't know if this sort of thing is popular with kids today, but I did not like it. It didn't kill the movie for me, nor did the goofy plot, so if you can get past that stuff, too, check it out.