Cathex
Visually this film is at times quite stunning, but beyond that there's not much else to recommend it.Unfortunately one reviewer had to compare it to Dario Argento's work, which then started a trend. In reality it is only the director of photography that resembled Argento in this film, the actual director had some nice ideas but fails to hold the film together. The comparison with such a brilliant director is nothing short of total nonsense.The cinematography was the best part of this movie, providing a powerfully attractive opening scene which exquisitely recreates Fuseli's 18th century oil painting, The Nightmare. After this point however the film is gradually let down by weak acting, a poor script and an overall immature plot.That's unfortunate because it seems this film had potential, taking iconography from sleep paralysis, some interesting ideas provided by Jungian psychology and consistently attractive scene construction. But all of this gets flushed down the pan by a director who seems determined to compromise everything this film could have been with an over reliance on visual effects and music apparently compensating for a lack of any real substance.This film is the work of a great cinematographer and a director that needs to develop his ability, especially his screen writing.
lathe-of-heaven
I fully agree with Angiris' review above. I thought he articulated it really well as to what this film is 'about' and how it comes across.I THINK that I can see what the director is TRYING to do. I appreciate a number of the visual sequences, especially the REALLY creative lighting. The Ambient soundtrack (NOT the sound design. I will come back to that in a moment) is quite good. VERY moody. This is the ONE aspect where I think the director did achieve a Lynchian feel in the movie. In my lowly and wretched opinion, IF they had just approached the film DIFFERENTLY, I think there was enough creative energy and vivid imagery to pull it off. BUT... what I feel is 'wrong' with this film and unfortunately where it fails in what it is TRYING to do, is just the approach is all wrong. If you are going to imitate or be inspired by or try to have a similar approach to a film as, say, David Lynch, I feel that the single, vital thing ABOVE ALL is the MOOD that you create. Now, I feel that he did this SOMETIMES with certain short sequences. But, where I feel that he worked against himself is by 'jarring' or kind of 'cross-purposing' the very mood he was trying to create by introducing a kinetic visual style and Techno-Electronic sound that, to me anyway, totally destroyed whatever eerie, disturbing mood that he was trying to create.Again, just my opinion... But, I think that if he had gone for a more laid back, static shot, murky sub-conscious approach and ditched all the Techno-Electronic / Mtv crap, then it likely would have worked pretty well. Just the wrong approach. And, what the HELL was up with the almost bloody CONTINUOUS hand-held crap in just about every scene. Dude... you are NOT going for a 'Found Footage' feel here mate. What the hell is the film all about anyway...? DREAMS, right? So, to me, it seems that the ENTIRE mood and visual / sonic approach to the film should have centered around Dreamy, murky, understated visuals and effects. Just SLOW the damn thing down dude... All that hyperkinetic Techno stuff, in my opinion, just ruins the whole thing. This is PRECISELY why I hate the 'American Horror Story' series. Absolutely NO subtlety at all...Look... if you are making a film about 'Lucid Dreaming', I can understand why you would want to let loose with all these GREAT awesome visuals. Okay, fine... However, WAIT until you build up to it. WAIT until you create a ponderous and disturbing and YES, a DREAMY mood, even a Nightmarish mood and then BUILD and ratchet up the tension until you have this great WILD, Hallucinatory finale. THAT would work, I think. It was a shame too, because some of the technical approaches and techniques were GREAT, in and of themselves. A shot here, a short sequence there. BUT... you HAVE to be able to put it all together in such a way that it is EFFECTIVE and creates the mood and overall result that you are trying to achieve.Also, maybe it was just me, but I REALLY thought the girl was LAME. She was not a very good actress. So, when you are trying to evoke this deep, disturbing, subconscious fear in your audience, you ABSOLUTELY have to have an actress who can convey that BELIEVABLY and GEEZ, a LOT more subtly than this girl did. Particularly this really stupid, open-mouthed expression that she had throughout most of the film. Bad...And I KNOW that I've harped on this before, and I KNOW it is one of my little personal neuroses, but the Sound Design was VERY amateurish, and at least to me, that takes me right out of the film every time. What I am talking about is like for example the girl is opening a little box across the room from the audience's perspective. And from where you and I are seeing her it is like 30 feet away. And yet, the sound of the cardboard rustling is around like 100 decibels and sounds like it is right next to your ear. Or, just in general, EVERY bloody sound is HUGELY amplified, every footstep, every swish of material, ALL of it is boosted up to '11' I'm sorry, but not only is that NOT at all realistic, but to me it just is plain stupid and inexcusable.So, yes, I did give the film a '5' And yes, that is probably a little generous. BUT, what tears at me somewhat is that I can ALMOST see the film that the director is trying to make coming through on the screen, but it is hidden under all this crap that I mentioned which basically ruins it. And I DID truly appreciate the EXCEPTIONAL creativity that went into a lot of the lighting, editing, and some of the visual techniques, so I felt that my score should at least reflect my acknowledgment of some of these things.I guess I would say that if you are like me and you REALLY like David Lynch and what he does, then you likely will find this film to be clumsy and conflicted in it's approach and mood. If you like the subtlety that David Lynch uses in his long, static shots, and SLOW build ups and weird images and visuals that seem like he dug them up right from your subconscious, then I think this film here will probably come across as far to jarring and disjointed. Now, IF you are the kind of person who likes stuff that is more 'In your face' and kinetic with an Electronic-Techno soundtrack, and you like more direct, brutal imagery, well then you might like this movie more than I did. So, it just depends on the TYPE of visually 'Out There' kind of stuff that you like...
James Bailey (biopsyheaven)
In my opinion I'm being slightly generous about the ranking that I give this movie. I think the only good parts (excuse my being a simple minded male at this time) was the bathtub scene. Not the battle between 'Horsehead' and our trusty wolf totem, not the story line (or the lack of), nothing. The bosom of our main character is quite possibly the only appeal this movie has, that and the intriguing horse headed figure.Not many remember their dreams thoroughly upon waking, nor any time thereafter. If any recollection is made of the startling dream, it's usually a jumbled mess. As is the case with this film - maybe that was the intent? I couldn't help but take a glance or two at my cellphone as there were a few REALLY dull moments.My speakers were acting up for the first five to ten minutes so I missed most of that dialogue, however even so I can validly state that I feel I did not miss too much important information at all. Moving along; The main character studies deep sleep and how to control her dreams and such (again, I honestly wasn't giving this movie my undivided attention - and there's no way I'm bound to watch it again) she finds herself waking to hear her grand mother in the next room (her deceased grand mother) she keeps going on about finding a key (said key is later found and utilized) and it is not found. Her grand mother soon turns around revealing a face that looks like it had been torn. She (the main character) then wakes after some incontinent flashes of herself being crucified and her rolling around in bed whilst the lights flicker for some odd reason even though, if I remember correctly at the beginning of the film her mother hands her a new set of bulbs. (What?) <<< Lets stop here... The bulbs are flickering because an entity IN HER DREAM, is haunting her..? I don't remember Freddy Kruger making the lights flicker in the physical world. However I could be wrong, don't quote me it's been quite a few years since I've watched that series. >>> Then she wakes and speaks with her mother about the short images she witnessed in her dreams, her mother seems concerned and then she goes back to sleep shortly after the discussion and the nonsense begins again. Only this time she referred to an audio recording of what I presumed was a lecture from her professor. This instructed her to take a photograph blablablablah, look at her hands blablablah (full details are in the film) to help control her dream and she begins speaking with her grand mother. Her grandmother tells her to follow the wolf, not the horse, always run from the horse. OH! Excuse my inaccuracy, THIS is where the nude crucifying came in. Anyways, I'll skip a few hours of detail. She decides it's a good idea (after her mother's boyfriend suggested it) to go to a church near by (in her dream) and this is where we see our friendly wolf totem fight the satanic horse headed figure. <<< This whole costume reminded me of what I like to call Pyramid Face (Head) from Silent Hill >>> They then engage in an obvious one sided combat where the wolf then dies. THIS, THIS is where the key is found. Our main character finds the wolf's carcass and goes "Hey lets reach inside of this cadaver and see what I can find!" She then pulls out (Drum roll please) THE KEY!!! OH GOOD, now she can go and figure out what this not-so-bloody-comparatively-even-though- it-was-pulled-out-of-a-dead-wolf's-flesh key unlocks. (WAAAIIIT!!! How did the key get into the wolf, how did she by any means decide to take a gander inside the wolf, whaaat is going on?!) She walks into the church and she sees (AND EVEN HELPS) her mother give birth to a stillborn (her twin sister) and herself. (Think that's bad? A couple scenes before she made out with her mother, YUP!!! MADE. OUT. WITH. (((WITH))) HER. MOTHER! ...Interesting dreams she's having... SO! The key, isn't really a key - I mean it is, in a sense, but it's also SUDDENLY A WEAPON TO STAB INTO THE ABDOMEN OF THE HORSE GUY! See how random that was? Well... That's pretty much how it goes down in the movie as well... She then twists the enlarged key and it makes a grinding noise inside of the abdomen and she unlocks a door. (OH!!! You know when you see terrible actors holding the sword at their side pretending to be stabbed in the abdomen? IT'S IMPLEMENTED IN THIS MOVIE! IT'S NOT EVEN AT A DECENT ANGLE SO YOU HAVE TO LOOK FOR IT. IT'S AS BLATANT AS AN ORANGE IN THE MILK SECTION BECAUSE SOME JERK WAS TOO LAZY TO WALK 10 METERS TO GO PUT IT BACK!) MOVING ALONG.... She walks through the door revealing what looks to be an amniotic sac then surprisingly (not) her twin sister pops out, they hug and then she dies in reality. The ONLY way I can make sense of this movie is that the unborn sister was envious that the living sister was in fact alive she became jealous and then began to haunt her and lure her away toward death eventually succeeding. The wolf was a protector to stop her from doing so (maybe) and the horse head was like an omen of impending doom.CONCLUSIONThe trailer was intriguing, there's bare chested-ness, there's dubstep music, the movie is entirely random and as fun deciphering as the enigma code... Wouldn't recommend this to anyone who values their time.
fernandomancinelli86
An absolute joyride of a movie , with twists in its plot so simple but yet so touching , the psyche , the heart. Its all entangled into this huge Beautiful film that whatever everyone might say ....... its a jewel in brute , anybody can do blood and guts but not anybody cant touch your mind and heart in ways like Horsehead does. I wish to applaud the director of photography. The Scenes are wonderfully done , beautiful not so much dialogue but with such scenes .......... it does not even needs to be an actor talking or such but again such a great cast. It has taints of the great Dario Argento , Some of Kubrick and I totally found some Clive Barker at his Best in here with Hellraiser 1986 ........ for those who love Cinema, Please support this movie and if you are disappointed i clearly wont understand why , and you are missing the whole point of the dedication and passion put into this. ITS ART IN ITS MORE ABSTRACT YET BEAUTIFULLY POINTED OUT AND PURE AND RAW WAY. My favorite thus far. 10/10 And if i could give it a 12 i would.
