उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

The acting in this movie is so amateur I couldn't last more than about a half hour. I guess if you don't mind terrible acting you might be able to see through to the actual story. I personally couldn't. It starts off with what is supposed to be "relaxed" conversation among friends but the interactions are manufactured and awkward. I stopped paying attention to the story and couldn't help but focus on the strained attempt at relationship. Initially they express contempt for a woman who hadn't arrived to the gathering yet. This contempt was apparently because she flaunts her beauty with tight, skimpy clothing. When she finally arrives, she was not nearly what was described. She was attractive but not beautiful and dressed appropriately. Then they began to focus on what is the news of the day - a comet that is supposed to pass their way, but the transition to the conversation was not segued well and became awkward very quickly. That's where I gave up.

I have seen my share of bad (3-star) movies, just for the purpose of trying to find some good in them. But they usually don't disappoint and live up to their reputation. Coherence is no different. To paraphrase a classic: Much ahype about nothing. Those who try to pawn this as a masterpiece of cinematography might be blinded by their strong urge to focus on brilliant plots and the makers' ability to utilize every penny in an honorable way that they simply don't see the reality of bad acting compensated by overacting compensated by needless (and misplaced) profanity and covered up by a shaky cam (because it's the norm nowadays, no?) I did not expect a perfect movie, flawless plot or spectacular acting but I did not find a fraction of my expectations. Frankly, I cannot provide any good spoilers because I turned the film off before half-way. I cannot say that I enjoyed this Blair Witch Project wannabe footage. Was this a high-school project made by 16-year-olds? I was insulted by the actors' constant attempts at redemption by squeezing emotion into tight corners. I stopped watching SNL years ago when the cast was replaced by clueless and talentless understudies whose constant failure kept calling for supplements by more understudies. Thinking so little of SNL, you can probably now start to understand what I mean when I say that this movie's cast presented a new low in my book. To sum up this flick, watch it only if you have no standards and are bored out of your mind. Be prepared for bad acting, lots of angry yelling, gasps of surprise, fear and other poorly expressed emotions. And most of all: you have been forewarned.

Watched this movie as it has such a high rating. It proved that everyone has a different taste and view. I found this movie quite boring, endless blabbing in a family dinning room, shaky camera work at times. Typical low budget film with not much happening. Improvised lines and amateurish acting was most annoying. The idea was fine, but I quickly lost interests after 10 minutes of watching it.

Gave it 20 minutes to develop, nothing riveting happened. Had to fast forward it and ended up turning it off. Sorry to other fans, but I didn't enjoy the movie at all. Give it a go if you have nothing else to watch...

This story is based on a twilight zone episode, The Monsters are Due on Maple Street, no matter what anyone says. A bunch of foul mouthed yuppie liberals are having dinner together and the lights go out and mass hysteria sits in. Everybody freaks out (for no real reason), and turns into a bunch of freaks acting like they are going to die. There you go, thats it in a nutshell. Although I have to wonder if they were all so freaked out and scared, whey didn't they just get in their cars and leave? Oh, yeah, then there wouldn't be a "movie". This is the second worst movie I have ever seen, and I wasted to much of my life watching it waiting for it to get better, it never did.

The shaky camera work is enough to send you running out the door screaming. The fact that no shot is longer than 3 or 4 seconds is very irritating to say the least, the out of focus cam also is so repetitive that it gets on your nerves. The Constant chatter and speaking over each other will also drive you mad. I found the acting poor. This thing feels like a play more than a movie. Alot of people loved it. I think maybe they loved the idea of it. Because the delivery sucked on so many fronts that it made it unwatchable for me. This movie (and many of its reviews) feel pretentious. Like :oh you don't get it. Watch something else please !

Almost to prove a point to myself, I sat through this entire movie. After the first twenty minutes of inane, intersecting dialog and ridiculous camera work, I could finally see some slight character development. This was quickly erased by incoherent plot points, terrible acting and a leaky, sloppy and poorly developed script. The interaction of characters seemed so contrived and forced at times it actually felt painful to watch the actors. Fortunately, I feel quite certain they had no clue. A listless idea of a movie that simply confused and distanced viewers. The film did nothing but detract from the craft.

A pretentious pseudo-suspense upper-middle-class bore-meister.

Oh! The angst!

Oh! The repartee!

Oh! The designer sets!

Oh! the smart outfits!

.

Bad in every possible way. Script, characters, direction, cinematography, acting. Two stars just because I usually don't trust one-star reviews. The characters always act on the basis of illogical premises, I think that there's not a single action in this movie that is reasonable. The characters are clearly plot-driven, I mean that the writer forces them all the time just because he wants to lead them to his (utterly uninspiring) ending. That being said, I'm fed up with totally off-target rating. There's really no reason to give this movie north of five stars - no reason.

Its difficult to watch the movie for more than 5 mins due to terrible camera work. The concept could have been better but the bad camera work and direction ruins it completely.

Incoherent, boring, confusing. I can only assume it rated so highly because it is the sort of nonsense that peculiarly appeals to Americans, who seem to mistake this sort of thing (eg, 'Lost') for profound.

Low-budget independent films are boxes of surprises. You never know if they are excellent or crap. This film seemed like a good bet, with a plot based on a group of friends who get together for dinner during the passage of a comet that, in a somewhat mysterious way, causes a series of problems such as the Internet and electricity failing, broken cell phones and , stranger still, a juxtaposition of parallel realities.

I thought it would be more of a psychological horror film, and I believe there are scenes where some inroads are made in this field, but the suspense and the clever mystery created end up standing out. However, the characters are poor and very cliché, and the whole story becomes so strange that it quickly loses credibility. At one point, it all sounds so surreal that it doesn't really matter what really happened there. Another annoying thing was having so many characters talking on top of each other during the film. If it happens on time it makes things more authentic, but if it is always happening it is too much. None of the actors are known, the bet was on unknown names, but with experience in indie films and sporadic participation in TV series (Emily Baldoni, Maury Sterling, Nicholas Brendon etc.).

The film uses sound effects and music quite well to increase suspense and become more tense. Being a low budget film it is not surprising that there is only one filming ___location and that it is a relatively poor film. What is more difficult to forgive is the rather amateur work of filming, with most scenes so shaky that it seems that the cameraman was nervous. Another thing that is not easily forgiven is the deficient editing and post-production work. These are details that may seem of less relevance but that can lose the chances of a serious film career.

I tried hard to watch this, as it had good reviews and an interesting premise, but I had to give up after 20 minutes. The camera movement was way off the scale, not just typical hand-held camera jerkiness, but additional cameral tilting on top of that, intended, I believe, to heighten the impression of surrealism, and I was literally starting to feel queasy. I skimmed ahead to see where it was heading, and if intense camera movement doesn't bother you, "Coherence" might be worth checking out. But if shaky camera bothers you, don't even attempt to watch this film.

The concept is decent but I would honestly kill myself if I had to sit through a dinner party with any of these people. They make this an unbearable experience.

The opening 10 minutes were so interminably dull, and the people so irritating that I already had no interest in any story that this group might have to tell (or be part of).

When will directors with limited budgets realise that "exposition by dinner party" is the lamest of all low-budget sci-fi film tropes. Manufacturing drama/conflict through people making silly choices (like being evasive to questions for no reason whatever) is another trope we could really do without.

Might this work as a theatre production? Maybe, but I still wouldn't go and watch it. Irritating people manufacturing irritating conversation for 90 minutes with no cerebral pay-offs? No thank you. Next...

This film tries too hard to be clever and gets lost in its own pseudoscience. The script is poor, the cinematography is annoying, and the characters are dull. I was excited by the premise, but the execution was awful. It's starts off very slow and the more it picks up, the more you want to bang your head against a wall. It's just so confusing and hard to follow, which renders the whole thing pointless. It had the potential to be a very clever and thought Provoking film. Shame.

It started out slow and about nothing at all surrounding people I found pretty annoying. The shakey cam bothered me in the beginning but I have seen worse. My husband likes indie artsy movies so he didn't want to turn it off even though I would have gladly quit 10 minutes into the drudgery. We have a joke between us about how 99% of indie films have a fade to credits at the worst possible moment and waste all potential. This one did not fail. I was close to saying it was relatively interesting by the end, but the ending. Wow. What... the... I just can't. Waste of time and a terrible conclusion.

This steaming pile of dog s+++ is just another example of what can be done on a barely shoestring budget, but shouldn't be done. I forced myself to keep watching out if curiosity, hoping that it would start to make some kind of sense to me, but no such luck. The script is fairly inventive, but the acting is positively horrible! I am usually glad to see unknowns in movies and series, but in this case, I am disappointed...just a jumbled mess all the way through that is nearly impossible to follow. There's no interesting cinematography, mostly just darkness followed by brightly lit rooms (at least until one of many power outages happen) I wasted 89 minutes on this garbage...thankfully, I had nothing but time, sitting . Waiting for my wife to come home from a trip.

Sometimes the IMDB rating fails you on a movie and this is definitely one of those times. If the shaky cameras and the actors constantly talking over each other don't bother you after the first five minutes, don't worry, it never stops. I read a review, sadly after the fact, which stated that while watching this you will never stop being aware that you are watching a movie, but I would add you will also be consistently asking yourself if you should stop it and start something...anything else. Chances are you will desperately want this time back, I promise you. Heed this desperate warning, or not, but future you will definitely wish you had.