After watching his previous efforts he seems to have a fascination with his slow burn film making. Innkeepers bored me all the way through and the payoff was not worth the effort to sit through it. It's simple...love or hate his films..he's consistent.
shareI would call this a "no burn" approach. I don't understand why people keep saying this is a suspenseful movie. The character is in no danger for 90% of the film, just walking around waiting for something to occur. I felt insulted by the bad use of screen time.
shareI haven't seen this film yet- plan on it today or tomorrow,
But; I will say Ti Wests section in VHS titled "Second Honeymoon" was definitely a slow burn. Some could argue it was boring - but looking back on it knowing the conclusion- whoa. Very creepy, very well done. Is this film actually nightmarish? Looking forward to it
> being in an isolated house with maniacs satan worshippers wanting to impregnate you with the Devil
> not being in danger
Choose one
Yeah, she's in a house. And she walks around it. And she sits around in it. And there are bad things in the rooms.
And then stuff happens to her.
There's no drive to the action at all. We're literally just waiting for someone to do something--anything--to get the damn movie rolling. That's not suspense. That's having a passive character. This movie is like watching a car drive into a brick wall in slow motion, except the people in the car are already dead.
THOTD works just enough for me. It plays even better in my head.
share