beccabentley

The only decent actors in this were the children. I kind of liked the theme of redemption and it managed to keep my interest (if only because I wanted to see what ideas the mother would have to try and get out of the pantry.. spoiler...she of course doesn't try any more obvious ones). The main character's acting was very poor. I can only imagine she was chosen for her looks. Probably wasn't helped by the lacklustre script. There is no emotion or sense of connection between her and her (ex) husband and even when she's locked in the pantry and her children are left to own devices, you barely feel any tension. I mean, what mother would stay so relatively composed in such a situation? Even when she knows her children may be at serious risk from a child molester, she shouts a lot but doesn't come across as all that distressed! She hacks at the floor but never seems to look for another way out (until drops of water/the crucifix captures her attention) or bang or search around in desperation like a normal person would. The pantry door looks so weak I'm sure she could have got out of it easily, certainly before her husband reinforced it.

SPOILER HERE At one point she sets the child molester's hand and arm on fire and it nearly sets the whole pantry on fire and yet, after she puts it out, the door shows no scorching at all and later on it appears that the man has suffered no burns?!

All in all, an ok premise but a mostly disappointing film.

I've only given this five stars due to the fabulous badass pregnant woman who acted the part fabulously. The kid was pretty good too. But otherwise, cannot understand the good reviews for this film. So many plot holes and lack of explanations! And the CGI fires were very unconvincing.

I'll list some of the issues here but I'm sure there are more I've forgotten: Why (admittedly the assassins themselves questioned this) if the people wanting to cover something up (we never find out exactly what!) were so rich and powerful, did they just use two assassins and not target all the whistleblowers at the same time (as the house explosion gave Jake Weber's character a head's up).

He was already on his laptop so why did Jake Weber's character then not immediately email the media the secret information and make it too late for them to try and silence him?

How could the assassins know from one photograph that that place was their destination?

Why did Angelina Jolie decide to run with the boy in such a weird way through a lightning storm?

How on earth did Angelina Jolie know the odd directions she gave the boy in the face of the fire would lead to a creek?

Why did absolutely no one cough or show any signs of being affected by the heat of the fire or all the ash floating through the air?

What was the point near the beginning of the boy stopping to stroke a horse and why did the horse the pregnant woman was riding suddenly disappear?

What was the point of the camaraderie shown at the beginning between Jolie's character and the rest of the crew when they never appeared again (except I think at the very end)?!

Why was there absolutely NO response to the raging forest fire (you're not telling me that just because Jolie couldn't inform anyone by radio that they couldn't eventually see it!) Why did the sheriff provoke the assassins at one point and encourage them to kill him? This made no sense and they'd been so quick to kill some innocent passerby earlier on (a stupid action as this just made it obvious the car crash wasn't an accident) so why did they show such restraint?

Why did Jake Weber write the incriminating information down on paper? In this day and age with the phones we have this just wasn't believeable. If it was so straightforward he could write it down, he could have sent the information to the media at any time using a mobile phone!

Why did we never find out what the huge secret was or who in government was really behind the assassins?

And the ending was awful. The boy was orphaned (lost an uncle to boot), traumatised and poignantly asked what would happen to him and Angelina Jolie's character just said something pathetic like "we'll work something out"!

I could go on and on and Angelina Jolie was just going through the motions, hoping her cheekbones and pouting would be enough!

And I really don't know why they cast Nicholas Hoult as an assassin. Assassins are supposed to not draw attention to themselves. But he's way to good looking to be a convincing assassin.

So all in all I wouldn't recommend except for the two occasions when the pregnant woman kicks the assassins' asses!

I really don't understand all the one star reviews. I have seen terrible movies and this wasn't one of them! I used to wonder why movie studios were forever churning out remakes and the same tired old plots but now I know why. Clearly they know that people are only happy with the same old predictable nonsense. Rosamund Pike is fabulous in this. Peter Dinklage did a great job, too. I loved how they made both main characters villains for a change. I hated her character with a vengeance and felt sickened by what she was doing. But that is what made the film so fascinating. It was cleverly done because there were times I feel a teeny bit of empathy for both antagonists. I did start to wonder if the film would fail to completely condemn Marla's actions, especially as at one point it seemed to revel in the "girl power" of Marla and her sidekick. The film really gets you thinking about how cunning, manipulative people can abuse the system. It really opened my eyes to what corruption and injustice can go on if you are able to use the law to your advantage. Yes, there were flaws and aspects that were unbelievable (especially her escape from the car and the overly idiotic henchmen) but I was riveted throughout. I've been so bored with so many films recently but I was pleasantly surprised with this one. I'd say ignore the bad reviews and give this a try. It's worth watching purely for Rosamund's performance.

I had heard good things about this so decided to give it a watch. I remember the AIDS epidemic as a child growing up and I remember it always being stressed that it affected heterosexuals as well as homosexuals - so it was surprising to me to learn from this series how the gay community was stigmatised in the beginning. It did open my eyes to what it must have been like, before the virus was identified, and how frightening it was to not know what was happening to people. However, we did clearly move on from this and I think perhaps this drama does concentrate a little too much on the impact on just the gay community and portrays a strange, alternate reality where every single one of the younger male generation is gay. The main female character is, by contrast, portrayed as basically asexual, is only friends with gay men and never has a sexual relationship of her own! I loved Callum Scott Cowell's portrayal of "Gladys" - he moved me to tears. I think the rest of the male cast were a little OTT (especially Roscoe) and reinforced rather than challenged gay stereotypes (and the parents of Ritchie were also very predictably conventional). I felt the graphic, gratuitous sex was unnecessary and, again, doesn't help change attitudes as it perpetuates the idea that most gay men are just a bunch of rutting animals. SPOILER HERE: I didn't quite understand at the end why Jill and Roscoe didn't do more to see Ritchie than just keep ringing his house. And the final "moral" that the story left us with i.e. that Ritchie's mum was completely to blame because of the "shame" he constantly felt, just didn't hit the right note for me, especially after all the shameless behaviour and Ritchie's admission that he knew he was infecting people and carried on regardless. It also felt like a very contrived speech to me and not a genuine one. I have given this 5 stars as I have mixed feelings about it. There were parts that were brilliant but I think a subtler approach, characters with more dimension, and a more empathetic lead would have made it much better.

I have watched quite a few Robin Hood movies (and tv series) in my time. And I love Robin Hood (perhaps influenced by the fact that my dad and his sister are named after Robin and Marian!) and so I have got a vested interest in seeing a good story. I went into this without expectations and thoroughly enjoyed it. I have since read all the negative reviews and don't understand them. Robin Hood Prince of Thieves had flaws (Kevin Costner's American accent REALLY annoyed me) but didn't seem to get slated like this film did. Taron Egerton is fabulous as Robin and he's British! Yay! Why can't people just enjoy things at face value? Robin Hood is folklore after all! Who knows what really happened?! And it doesn't take itself seriously and says at the beginning of this film to forget everything you know and that it isn't trying to be a historical account! Yes, there are a lot of anachronisms but I just watched it with an open mind and with the idea that it was set in some kind of fantasy/alternate universe. I have watched so many films that are so much worse than this with awful acting and plot and design that deserve low stars. This does not! I wasn't bored for a second! And it had all the elements that really matter with Robin Hood - subterfuge, romance, action, heroism, robbing from the rich to help the poor! Watched it again with the kids and they really enjoyed it, too! I also felt the CGI didn't jar like it can in some films. All very action-packed and seamless. Just enjoy this for what it is. A very entertaining film with great acting and some fabulous one-liners! And it doesn't do it any harm that the actors aren't hard on the eye! Would happily watch this again. If you aren't a film snob and just want to relax and enjoy yourself, then give this film a shot. I really don't think you'll be disappointed!

Watched this film tonight with my 10 and 13 year old boys. Took a little while to get into it but loved the children and the storyline. Had some great themes for kids with magic, bullies, family, halloween and an adorable orphan all combined to make an entertaining film. I especially liked that they had used a real black panther instead of some CGI effect (really hate how they've used a CGI cat in the new Witches film!). However, what could have been a really fantastic film was spoiled for me and the kids by the odd choice of jarring, mismatched music in places and the terrible slow mos and camera work. At one point they switched to an outside shot of the house about 5 times for no real reason (and this shot was the fakest looking thing in the whole movie!) Think this film would have really benefited from a talented director. At times, it came across very pantomimish. Nevertheless, the ending, though predictable, managed to bring a tear to my eye and, all in all, I would recommend it as an enjoyable family film.

This had potential. And really, you should be off to a flying start already by using a well known and loved fairy tale as your baseline. Well, baseline is the correct word. Because this only got off the mark with its cinematography and setting. It could have been amazing. But it tried to be too different and had too many jarring or absurd elements. The only parallels to Hansel and Gretel were the children being cast out in the woods and a witch with a house of plenty (and even this part where the children looked through the window at the wonderful feast laid out on the table I felt was ripped off Pan's Labyrinth). I wouldn't have minded the changes to the original story but they weren't good changes! And it made no sense that the children even had the names Hansel and Gretel or were supposed to be siblings when Gretel spoke with an American accent and Hansel with a British one, while the witch was Irish and all the other children that had been killed had Western names! PLOT SPOILERS now. List of anomalies and disappointments! The identity of the witch herself was VERY confusing. The film started off quite well with a backstory of a young girl cured of an illness by an enchantress but left with a telepathic gift that also led her to kill people by thought alone. But, other than showing up in Gretel's nightmares (and it became difficult to tell when she was dreaming and when she wasn't!), WHAT happened to her? I assumed that she must have grown up to be the young, beautiful witch we saw down in the big basement but THAT turned out to be witch who was the mother of the girl just making herself look young again! And since the witch was the mother of the girl, WHY did they use a different actress for the mother when showing a flashback? Did they change their minds as well? Was it supposed to be some kind of twist? Well it was the most poorly executed "twist" I've ever seen. And what even happened to the Enchantress?! JUST CONFUSED? Yes, I was! The witch had supposedly "gained" her own dark powers by killing and eating her other innocent children. And the mother of Hansel and Gretel had threatened to chop up Gretel when she had refused work for a nearby, rich pervert. What's with all the murderous mothers?! There were lots of things that just seemed to serve no other purpose than to draw out the running time e.g. a ghoulish man who chased them and was never explained, meeting a helpful hunter whom they never saw again, eating magic mushrooms which made them hallucinate, Hansel practising with his axe (what WAS the point of this if he was never actually going to use it in terms of the plot?) Then it was just silly how easily the witch was killed at the end. Why would the witch just pin Gretel to a table by her sleeves when she was already aware of and had been teaching Gretel how to harness her own powers!? And why have a huge ladder up to a cage above the fire that Hansel had to climb to? This was so clearly contrived to give Gretel time to save him! The acting was passable but Sophia didn't do as well as she did in IT (possibly because the script was also so poor) and I didn't really feel a connection with either of them. When Hansel went missing, there was no sense of urgency or even really much of a sense that she was playing along to appease the witch. It's a shame because it could have been a really good, well shot, gothic-feeling horror story. But all I could think was how much time I had wasted watching it. I've been generous with 4 stars because it started well and looked great.

I quite liked the premise of this film where the main character is under house arrest. The acting wasn't too bad, especially Famke Janssen. However, the film had way too many flaws for me to take it seriously and I am surprised by all the favourable reviews: The ghost was just terrible quality cgi and way too physical. It could do all sorts of things, had no subtlety and would surely have killed her long ago if that's what it wanted to do. She gave in and invited the grocery boy in for sex when she knew she was putting his life at serious risk. What person would do that?! The copper fluctuated too much in his attitude towards her..one minute hating her for killing his best friend, the next trying to exonerate her..and why would he be allowed to just camp outside her door all the time? And he would have heard the screams and been in there way before she had time to clean up so well and hide the boy's body. She realised she had to get rid of all the things connected with her husband, threw her wedding ring stupidly down the garbage disposal..putting her hand in when she knew her husband's ghost was around..and yet then still put the ring back on!!? And she stayed in the house stubbornly even though she was getting attacked all the time when if she had just run away, yes she may have gone back to prison but at least she'd have been safe?! She was in the raging fire in the cellar for ages at the end and would have died from smoke inhalation long before but wasn't even coughing!!? The bit when the ghost attacks the grocery boy was done quite well (though I still felt Marnie was at fault) but for me the whole film was let down by way too many plot holes and an angry, violent but not very ghostly or scary ghost.

Really liked the mix of drama, family and suspense with this film. I have watched a lot of horror films and am often disappointed with the weak characters and plot. People that like lots of gore and jump scares in a horror film won't like this film. And some won't like the famous five/coming of age feel to it but I felt it worked really well as it got me emotionally involved. I loved the way the family dynamics and mystery was used in this film. There were lots of very suspenseful moments, like when the youngest child had to go out on the landing to retrieve the dice. The acting was strong, especially from the leading male. I wasn't terribly keen on Anna Taylor Joy's portrayal - think she overdoes the wide-eyed, sugary sweetness - but felt all the other actors in the film did a great job. I've seen Mia Goth in a few films now and she always surprises me because, at first glance, she seems very plain looking but she manages to grab your attention in every scene she is in. The film reminded me a bit of "The Others". I did like the twist, which caught me by surprise even though this kind of twist has been done in other films. I did think though that the film would have been better if the very last section had been cut out - it just dragged the idea on unnecessarily. However, this film kept my interest from beginning to end, was directed and crafted very well and I would highly recommend it.

This film was a cinema treat for my mum as she fancied seeing it on her birthday. I had no clue going in what it was about. And if I had to describe it afterwards to someone, I'm sure it wouldn't sound like a particularly amazing film. The story wasn't terribly exciting but the characters made the story so moving and gripping. The acting by everyone in it was superb. Not a big fan of all the bad language but it did make the film feel more grittily real. I usually prefer more fantastical films which give some escapism but I surprised myself and the film itself surprised me. Sam Rockwell (whom I have liked since The Green Mile) was such a dislikeable character but the way he developed through the film was really well done. The film plays well on your emotions and somehow manages to bring little bits of humour out of a tragic situation and some appalling decisions. I still smile thinking about my favourite bit when Sam Rockwell's character shies away a little bit from his lighter (because of what has happened to him - I won't spoil it by saying what). It doesn't sound funny here but he makes even a small thing like this funny. The film makes you think about how inherently decent people can make bad or good choices and what the unexpected consequences can be. I wasn't too sure about the ending but I suppose it left the viewer to decide for themselves what happened next. I would say this film definitely deserves some oscars.

I had seen this movie recommended somewhere and was surprised I had never heard of it. I had high hopes especially as there are some good actors in it. However, by the time it finished I was sadly disappointed. Kevin Costner seemed to just be reciting his lines rather than acting most of the time. He was the blandest serial killer I have ever seen. Perhaps he thought that he was being meditative or deep in some way or perhaps he was trying (and falling far short) to be a bit like Christian Bale's character in American psycho. He just came across as wooden. I really didn't see the point of William Hurt. If he had been a bigger contrast with Kevin Costner, then I would have understood him being an outward sign of his inner devil. However, instead of Jekyll and Hyde, you just got Bland and Blander! Because of this, the whole thing did not work for me. Hurt was like a spare and unnecessary part hulking about the place. POTENTIAL SPOILER HERE - And then supposedly finding out that his daughter was also a killer just fell flat. He didn't even have any evidence that she truly was and neither did the viewer. We never saw her alleged kill happen or even see Costner's murder to try and cover it up/provide her with an alibi! And, except for the sequence at the end when she turned on him, she never showed any signs at all of having that kind of psyche herself (and he didn't even challenge her or speak to her about it! Though he was happy to speak to the complete stranger "Mr Smith" about what it was like to plan to kill someone!) And then even the sequence at the end was all just a dream!? This spoiled a last twist that I had finally quite liked! His daughter was another character that just came across as slightly bored all the time. I did quite like Demi Moore's character but only because she came across with a bit more spark (which wasn't hard!). And it was just freakish and unbelievable that, not only was Kevin Costner's daughter a would be serial killer, but so was the peeping Tom in the flats across the way that saw Costner commit murder! Wow, this kind of thing was contagious! The writers even inexplicably felt the need to throw in another serial killer called "The Hangman" and his psycho girlfriend. The film just lost all plausibility and sense (especially when Demi Moore's serious head wound miraculously healed up without a trace!) I would not recommend it to anyone. If you want to watch Costner in a more recent film that is actually entertaining, watch 3 days to kill.

I came to watch this film with low expectations as it was on the horror channel. I was pleasantly surprised. I thought the directing was excellent. Especially like the facing person perspective when the mother was exhausted and going through the motions of collecting clothes for washing. I have watched numerous mainstream horror films that have been well received but severely lacking in plot, suspense, acting skill and sense. This film ticked all the boxes for me. The acting was strong and the way their lives and relationship slowly degraded through lack of sleep and what was happening to them was really well done. As a mother of 4 kids I can fully understand the effects of sleep deprivation. I liked the way the couple were left doubting themselves and didn't know whether they were hallucinating from lack of sleep or whether the things they were seeing were real. I did find it unbelievable that they would have stuck so stubbornly to staying in the house. I think realistically they would have given up on the house long before. And where were family or friends in all that time? And why did they insist on keeping the child in his own room? Realistically they would have brought him in with them long before too. The ending surprised me and I thought it was a good twist. Although there were some believability issues I still gave this film a 9 as after, becoming jaded by so many over hyped under quality horror films, I felt this was really effective, very suspenseful and really well directed. I would definitely recommend it.

This very much reminded me of the British crime series Silent Witness. Had the same feel to it. Also had a slightly "Wicker Man" feel to it. The characters were strong and though the story was a little far fetched it remained believable and convincing. It isn't a cinema quality film and certainly doesn't have special effects or big budget action scenes but the acting is good and the sense of malevolence and mystery compelling. It is worth watching and it kept my interest throughout. I liked the twists and turns, the scenery was beautiful and wild and created a dramatic backdrop to the story. I felt it was a pity this wasn't a pilot episode of a series as I would have carried on watching!

Couldn't remember this film but was running out of good family films the kids hadn't seen and remembered all the other kids films from the eighties being fab so thought I'd give this a try. I was enjoying it and so were the kids until the aliens were revealed. It started so well! The acting was good, the different characters were very relatable, even the effects were fairly believable and it was good to see how the boys progressed with their knowledge until they created their spaceship. Even when they first got to the alien spaceship it was OK, like a big funhouse. But then we met the aliens. They were awful, really cringeingly awful. One of them didn't even really talk to the boys but just gabbled on like a cheesy American advert all the time. They were godawful ugly and looked and sounded completely fake. Spoiler... The idea that they were children was OK (i think Stephen king may have stolen and improved on this idea for his book Under the Dome!) but why oh why did they have to ruin a good movie with such farcical, nauseating aliens? Any belief in the film just went out of the window. I now think I may have watched it as a child but put it out of my mind because the end is so awful. What a shame as this could have been up there with the other 80's greats like Goonies and Big.

I love the star wars films especially the originals. I was expecting a lot from this one as it was at last the "newest" episode. I wanted to be amazed and reinspired. I liked the idea of a defecting stormtrooper and I like the new Jedi girl. However the film was spoilt by too many repeating themes...a new and bigger death star? Really? A son/father, one dark side, one good? An old, wrinkly looking alien (like Yoda) who seems to know everything? The Empire basically renamed as The First order. The leader- masked, cloaked and in black (just without the heavy breathing)? Han solo back to being a smuggler for no apparent reason? It felt as though the writers felt they had to do almost a remake of the very first film just to get younger viewers up to speed. There was also no explanation for so many things e.g. why were they all looking for Luke? Why had no-one done anything about the new death star before it became functional? Why do they seem to have gone backwards in 30 years? Why has Han's and Leia's son gone to the dark side and why aren't they together? It was spoilt even more when Kylo Ren took his mask off..he just looked like some haughty student. He just was not scary any more. This disappointed me almost as much as when darth vader was unmasked in return of the jedi (never got over how ugly Anakin was!) Spoiler: and when Kylo Ren killed his father it just seemed so unnecessary and meaningless. Did the writers just think oh yeah we will make it like the opposite of when Luke fights his father. As we had no back-story for it, it just felt like a cheap trick. I have still given the film 5 because despite all this i enjoyed quite a lot of it. Liked the effects, liked the humour and I did like seeing all the old characters again. My kids were thoroughly entertained. Just a pity it did not live up to all it could and should have been.

I don't normally write reviews but felt compelled to because I couldn't get over all the positive reviews of this film. It starts off like a family film (home alone style) but then abruptly changes into unfunny, excruciatingly bad horror. I wouldn't mind but the acting is poor, the plot nonsensical and the characters so unappealing and idiotic that I really stopped caring what happened to them. Spoilers here..what mother would let her daughter go out in a horrendous blizzard and then not worry when she hasn't text to confirm her safety? And what father would hear what he thinks are his daughter's cries and then not investigate? In fact he just returns to the house and battens everything down (even though at this point no attack has been made on the house!) The film is full of these kind of inexplicable decisions. The back story is done in this weird animation and it makes no sense that krampus would descend on this family simply because a boy ripped up his letter to santa. I just couldn't buy into it at all. Krampus himself does nothing and just looks like some frozen puppet. I like comedy horror but this film is not scary and only funny in that it is laughably poor. It takes elements from other films and mashes them together as if this will somehow make a good movie. I've only given it 2 instead of 1 because i liked the montage at the beginning with the fighting Christmas shoppers. I wish I'd turned it off after this as the film just deteriorated from there.

Please do not take the positive reviews of this film seriously. Anyone who thinks this film is worth watching is living on a different planet. I love well made horror films and was inspired to watch this by all the gushing reviews. I think I managed to sit through about 20 mins of this mess. The acting was wooden, the plot disjointed and confusing. The jarring soundtrack did not fit with what was happening and just became a ghastly annoyance. I don't understand why everyone goes on about the use of colour..everything just looked garish and completely unrealistic. The whole thing came across as if a child had put it all together. I've watched more believable and more sophisticated hammer house of horror episodes! This film should never be on any top films list. Awful, just awful.

My husband took me to see this film and when he said it was a horror I was expecting to sit through another of his kind of horror films i.e.stupid teenagers with lots of gratuitous blood, guts and violence thrown in. I was fortunately very mistaken! I have not seen the original "Ringu", which everyone keeps harping on about, but I am glad I saw this first as it is good not to have anything to compare it to. Taken by itself, I think it is a fantastic film. It's not everyone's cup of tea and the usual horror fans may think it slow, incomprehensible or just plain unscary. However, I loved the mystery and weirdness of it.

It begins a bit like your typical American nonsense with two teenage girls chatting and the conversation coming around to a videotape that is supposed to kill people that watch it. My first thought was: how "urban legend"ish and ridiculous!! However, as the film went on, it clearly had a darker, more powerful and very much more thought provoking aspect. The images on the videotape itself are so "nightmarish", in that disjointed and freaky way that real nightmares can be. They really got under my skin anyway and I actually came to believe in the power the tape had to kill. You wonder how on earth Rachel is going to escape the same fate as the others and I felt real horror and despair on her discovery that Aidan has also watched the tape.

One thing that I think really robs horror films of their ultimate "horror" value is when you come to the explanation/discovery of what's behind it all at the end. I thought the film had let itself down with a typical, rationalised ending. I was very pleasantly surprised with the horrifying twist that developed and I loved the eerie "non-ending" ending - it left me really freaked out and actually believing that the whole thing might be real after all. It is wonderful, psychologically terrifying stuff and I defy anyone to watch it and forget it - I am still thinking about it and giving myself the shivers months later! I won't give any film 10/10, as this is the ultimate and I am always challenging for there to be an even better film out there (this film does exist and is Ringu if everyone else's comments are anything to go by). I give it a superior "must see" 9/10.