Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Kidskycom It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

Nigel P The opening quick-cut myriad of imagery to 'The Owlman' is so bleak you can almost taste it. Rain, biting winter, frost, landscape, a dark figure in the trees – these things come together so beautifully that the film looks set to be something special. When the actual story begins, some of the initial acting makes the heart sink a little – the low-budget-ness of it all seems suddenly apparent.James (Euan Douglas) inherits a sprawling mansion in the Scottish Highlands from a mother he hardly knew. Her letter insists he never returns there, having suffered a breakdown there as a child. So, naturally, he feels he has no choice but to return, to see if he can identify what troubled him so.Once there, he suffers increasing nightmares, glimpses of a strange owl-like creature, discarded feathers in dark places. He makes friends with Eve Turner (Lexi Hulme), a mysterious, beautiful American girl living in nearby renovated stables. ("What do you do here?" he asks. "Don't spoil it," she replies – shades of 2015's 'The Last House on Cemetery Lane'). SPOILER: The fact that Eve isn't 'real' is no huge surprise, nor I suspect is it meant to be. She is presented and played as larger-than-life, enigmatic and deeply eccentric, especially in contrast to James' more sober bearing.James is in regular contact with his friend Allen Milton (Jamie Gordon), who also appears to be afflicted with nightmares, and that of his father's seemingly incurable illness.Steadfastly, James learns his parents worshipped Moloch, a Canaanite god, and provided it with sacrifice. Unable to bear offering their son, they contracted a nanny and killed her instead. Eve is a manifestation of that dead girl. Once that connection has been made, Eve (and the narrative) take on more traditional horror film territory, jumping from MR James to David Lynch (not a bad combination). Eve's extravagances are suddenly not charming anymore, but ghost-like and terrifying. Watching it all is the Owlman (who appears to be the physical manifestation of Moloch), promising foul things to avenge the girl.Later, as James is telling his story to Allen, it appears Allen also worships Moloch and sacrifices his friend in order to save his father, seemingly condemning James to be the ghost who inhabits the estate instead of Eve.It doesn't matter that the acting is not always stellar. The story, the mood, the atmosphere, the location, the direction are all stunning, resulting in an extremely effective ghost story/tragedy. 'The Owlman' is the directorial debut of Lawrie Brewster, a name to watch out for. It won two awards at the 2013 Bram Stoker International Film Festival – one, an audience award, and the other for Lexi Hulme's performance.Highly recommended.

Ezequiel Rajoy I prepared my self with great expectations to enjoy this one. An allegedly "lovecraftian", slow burning creepy, Gothic horror movie? That sounds great! So the first and evident thing is this was done on a low budget; I'm OK with that, I prioritize a good script, directing skills, photography and dialogs over cgi and expensive technology. 20 min later I'm twisting in pain, and not in a good way (if there's such thing). This movie is actually painful to watch. The dialogs, the acting, the character interaction, makeup, directing, editing, set decoration. it's all so terribly bad that I couldn't even finish watching this aberration. There were two or three moments where illumination and photography looked pretty well (mostly scenery, and nature textures) thats why I scored a 2 and not just 1. I'm sure Lawrie Brewster will improve overtime and maybe become a great director, but right now it seems unfair to give this one a 10 star rating when it clearly doesn't deserves it

ASouthernHorrorFan "Lord Of Tears" tells a very chilling tale of mythic horror, pagan superstition and human conflict in a dark, surrealistic nightmare that is both captivating and practically romantic in its Gothic presentation. The story is intense and creepy while allowing for an artful, emotive character driven opera between the two main players, James Findlay and Eve Turner. Effectively, "Lord Of Tears" offers more expressionist, artfilm style than was really necessary but it only adds to the visual Gothic nature of the film, against the almost romantic flow of the dialog, than it does to detract. I found the film very hypnotic as the scenes moved from one moment to the next. "Lord Of Tears" is much more than the simple labels of "Gothic" and "Horror" can justify. It has an exuberant grandeur in both it's visual and expressive storytelling. Now for the cons of this film, they are limited and do not prevent the film from its chilling intentions, but they do merit mentioning. The flashes of surrealism, artistic shots between the character driven elements in "Lord Of Tears" at moments can be distracting, when more film plot would have really solidified the overall story. Some of the moments with the engaging dialog between the two main characters comes off as more theatrical than ideal to be convincing. Lastly, some scenes of the interior, more dialog reliant moments in the film are visually less appealing compared to most of the stunning production value in "Lord Of Tears". That is it, I had no more issue with this film because, for the most part, "Lord Of Tears" is a truly well executed Gothic story filled with tons of visual and aesthetic character, the the film is more than your average, chilling, Independent thriller.

voodoorockertv I really wanted to like this movie it definitely had a lot of promise, but does fall down in a few key areas. The first issue I have is with the the time period it takes place. The school buildings and all the places in the film outside of the house give the impression it takes place in the 70's. Which is odd considering it takes place in current day and that from my memory is only specifically mentioned on the hex media site and the glimpses of modern technology. This seems even weirder with the female lead who's hinted to be from a different time who looks to be in her early mid/20's , but has the style of someone growing up in the 40's and the movie tries hard to imply that she is from a very different time. Which would make sense considering the black and white photograph found later that is aged and the set heavily sets the tone of the movie taking place in the 70's which would make the main character in his mid to late 30's and a small child in the 40's when the photo was taken. One other issue I have is with the film is the main actor. I'm not sure who decided to have him freak out at everything. It makes it much harder to take him seriously later on when he is legitimately afraid, but harder to buy considering he's been doing that the whole film.The last issue I have is with the Owl Man. Great looking and he looks creepy and the movie really tries, but the movie doesn't really feature him till the last 20 min maybe half hour. Considering the whole movie centers on him they really don't include him as much. I'm fully aware a large part of horror is keeping certain things in the dark however, it seemed a lot was revealed last minute and also his appearances were sporadic. One thing about HP Love Craft did so well was the sense of for boding the power of the gods through out the whole story and in this case it really feels shoved in last minute.Had they worked out the time line/plot holes, issues with the main actor and included more of the Owl Man earlier on it could've been great. They really skip of over a lot of the Owl Man and it feels like it got thrown in at the end. The promise though is definitely there, which makes this so much more disappointing especially considering the trailer and the implication the Owl Man would be more involved.