MovieChat Forums > Hush (1998) Discussion > the title killed it...

the title killed it...

posted 19 years ago by rossini1868
15 replies | jump to latest

This movie was just fine. Its not even bad enough to be a guilty pleasure. Its just a simple, pretty good movie about a twisted mother in law. If it had a better title, then maybe it wouldn't have been so despised. I've seen it three times and I'm still trying to figure out what's so bad about it. I think that movies with twisted, psyco-sexual premises scare people anyway. The movie wasn't campy or convoluted or complicated, so nobody was able to giggle away their discomfort while they watched it. Don't let anybody tell you this is a bad movie, because it isn't. CATWOMAN was a bad movie.

[–] nic_cholio 19 years ago

I totally agree, this movie was great. It should have had a title that alluded to horse ranches, or ranches in general, or something a little more insignificant-sounding, but is actual significant in the movie. But I really did like this movie.

[–] wandaful 19 years ago

I also thought this movie was good....

I really can't understand all the negative press about it...

I think the original title was something like Kilronan .....well the name of the property anyway.... but I liked the title HUSH.... cause it sorta indicated something secretive...

I thought John did a fantastic job of being the loving son and NOT wanting to believe his mother was anything other than perfect....

Cheers

[–] lbmsthang 19 years ago

I have to say I found it very entertaining and any time it somes on. I watch it that's says a lot coming from me.

Stop the Nonsense

[–] jadesliver 19 years ago

It did go through different titles:

BLOODLINE
KILRONAN (the title on the script draft that I have)

I don't see what's wrong with it, either. In fact the climax is very powerful in the sense that it's very real and the worst kind of revenge - leaving her with no family left as a consequence. That's realistic and dramatic at the same time. Whereas what they originally filmed - a huge battle in a fiery barn between Gwyneth and Lange, each wielding shards of glass - seems more contrived or less believable. Who knows, it might have worked. But I see nothing wrong with the way it was ultimately made. I think the lesson to be learned here is that people in general, when it comes to judging movies, are a lot of the times idiots. And have no taste. :) There. Mystery solved.

[–] skweeg-1 18 years ago

Personally, I found this moving absolutly boring. There wasn't anything in this film that I haven't seena dozen times before.
Also, I didn't believe the ending at all. The son was so easily persuaded one way or the other.
And perhaps they could have found the name for that "thing" that removes nails. They kept calling it "that thing."

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Critter-20 18 years ago

THis mocie was fun but corny. But, don't be dissin' Catwoman. Halle Berry is a sexy beast!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ashtaylor 17 years ago

i really liked this movie. it's similar to rosemary's baby.

[–] minnemin 14 years ago

I don't know why this movie reminded me of another one I'd seen a long time ago. It was called The Babysitter's Seduction I think. Not sure of the exact title, but that was my first movie ever to see about someone psychotic and manipulative. I loved that movie.

[–] mldardar 7 years ago

I realize I'm replying/agreeing with a very old post, but since I just saw a 2016 movie of the same name that was praised despite the ridiculous flaws, I had to praise this 1998 movie. I saw it at the cinema when it was released and liked it so much I told my parents about it, and they also liked it. I haven't seen it in a long time so I don't remember any flaws. But this 2016 movie, especially the last half hour has more than its share. A shame too, because I thought began fine and the acting was good too, especially the lead actress playing a deaf woman.