The Good Place
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Got more questions about news letters?
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No user info supplied.
Untraceable is not a hypocritical film... Reviewers do not take in account the difference between fiction and reality - a pretty important difference to get down. So yes, I again disagree with the RT consensus: "Untraceable manages to be nothing more than a run-of-the-mill thriller with a hypocritical message." Argumentum ad populum, my friends. That anomaly aside, let's look more into the film... It's decent. It's got the whole action-like detective on the hunt thriller going for it, while it also manages to be a torture porn. Personally, I found the heat lamp scene to be a disturbing one, somewhere in the top 100 in horror history I'd say. There's a juxtaposition of an FBI official's public speech in defense of a victim and the sick curiosity (or genuine psychotics viewing in cases) of webpage viewers rapidly logging on to watch said victim. If this doesn't make sense, I suggest you read the plot, or watch the film yourself. It's not a masterpiece, but it passes as good and underrated.
Yes, this film is indeed second-person, we have the main antagonist talk to the camera on two or three occasions. Haneke, being the social genius he is, indeed weaves in a societal disturbance into this film's message. So obviously, the reason why this film is so sadistic and torturous is because that's what you presumably came in expecting. And so, as Paul says, they pack in a full length film in with exactly what you'd like. The ending also includes a thought provoking discussion between the two antagonists of this film, Paul and Peter, comparing and contrasting fiction and reality. Even if the entire plot of this film has been completely spoiled for you somehow, I still recommend watching it. I went in knowing that the entire family died and it didn't hinder the experience the slightest.
A good, suspenseful, horror film. In the RT consensus you may have read the following: "The Strangers provides a few scares, but offers little else to distinguish itself from other slasher films." and while I have a few critiques of this film myself which keep it from being better, I do not agree with this consensus. This slasher distinguishes itself with it's premise. We've probably all feared experiencing a break in while in the house, some crazed serial killer coming in to kill us right where we are supposed to feel the safest. This film exploits this. It goes from a stranger knocking on the door late at night disturbing a not-so-happy couple, to three strangers (inevitably) hunting this couple down. These villains have Micheal Myer's power, which as I mentioned in my review of The Hitcher, is the antagonist's ridiculous ability to appear /disappear at will, and to generally know just exactly where their victim is... The failed catchings / life spares are simply there to fill in the 90 minutes. With all that said, it's a minor annoyance, and this is a pretty good film otherwise. Not the most unique horror film you'll ever see, but rightfully it's own piece. Enjoy it for what it is, it's well done.
If you've seen your fair share of Japanese horror films, you'd know this film had a Japanese or J-inspired director during the first death scene, as it achieves to be both extremely cheesy and repulsively disturbing. While plot is something that's usually lost on horror films, again, the Japanese don't seem to have trouble with this either; they find a plot and build up evidence to a climax... Same idea here. The scenes make sense and go together well... It's not just a bunch of filler based around one vague idea. My gripe with this film comes in with the ending of this film, it's terrible! But then, it may just be another reason why this film has great potential in one day becoming a cult classic!
While it's somewhat interesting to look into this portrayed psyche of Bundy's, this film grows stale quickly. As soon as Bundy is caught, you know the film is essentially over. Stefani, playing Julie, fails to play a convincing role. The acting is generally poor in this movie, but it's especially bad on her end. Then there's the misogyny of this film; it's pretty intense. I realize that Ted was a serial killer who was known to rape and kill women exclusively, but still, the tone is really harsh here and it was a bit unsettling watching this. Have 96 minutes to spare? Well then, I wouldn't recommend it.