ftonks
ene 2020 se unió
Te damos la bienvenida a nuevo perfil
Tenemos algunas actualizaciones en proceso y algunas funciones no estarán disponibles temporalmente mientras mejoramos tu experiencia. El enlace versión anterior será accesible después del 14/7. Sigue atento para el próximo relanzamiento.
Distintivos3
Para saber cómo ganar distintivos, ve a página de ayuda de distintivos.
Reseñas10
Clasificación de ftonks
One of the messiest movies I've seen in a long time. I'm a fan of the books and if you are too then don't even bother watching this dumpster fire. I saw an early screener and I could barely take this movie seriously. The villains goals are devoid of all logic, the humour is awful and dry, none of the events are really tied together, it feels like a bunch of scene strung together in a hope to come up with an actual plot. Daisy Ridley is fine, Tom Holland is fine, Mads Mikkelson as always is flawless but it would be good if they actually made his character have logical motivations or if they fleshed him out. These actors don't deserve this, Daisy was screwed over big time with the sequel trilogy and now this, I hope this isn't the end of her career. As for Tom, he needs a better agent. Cherry was a self indulgent disappointment, but not as bad as this. Do not watch this movie, it'll be a waste of time and money (if you're gonna buy or rent it) ESPECIALLY if you're a fan of the books. This movie massacres the books story and characters. Obviously Tom Holland stans or tasteless moviegoers will spam 10/10s which is almost more of a shame than the fact that they butchered the script so much.
A true masterpiece of an episode, everything was brilliant.
I'm a huge slowburn fan, I watched Hereditary 3 times, Midsommar 2 times, and a bunch of others. I was very excited when I heard of his film, although i'll admit I hyped it up a but too much. I think the main reason this movie was hated was that it was mismarketed, meaning people went into the film expecting some epic and tense new horror, and got a slow, apocalyptic instead. But I feel like nobody is actually critiquing the film for what it is, they are only giving the film a bad review because of what it isn't is. what I mean by that is all of the one star reviews never bring up qualities of the film, like it's acting. The only real complaint about this film I have seen people write is that it wasn't what they wanted, and that it hadn't lived up to the hype. So i'll try my best not to write a review not complaining how it "wasn't as the trailer made it look" and actually list my negatives nd positives, let's begin.
I thought the film was superbly acted, brilliant performances all around, mainly carrying the movie. It was a joy to watch the actors give it their all.
I thought the film mainly succeeded in it's slowburn style and I was still failry gripped throughout, although some parts not so much as the film did decide to drag them on a fair bit. Some of my negatives may be it's ending, like I know, arthouse films are like that. But I feel like they could've made it a bit less ambiguous, without spoiling the story, but still making the viewer guess instead of them going "ugh that ending makes no sense", so quite a big negative there. But you get the idea so i'll write my verdict and grade
Verdict: While it may be too slow at parts, It Comes At Night maintains suspense and has some powerhouse performances, worth watching for A24 fans.
Grade: B