Back in 1991, Koji Suzuki’s novel “The Call” was released, and it was a real furore, a hit and a breakthrough in the field of horror films, which languished from a lack of new ideas, remaking sequels and remakes of cult slashers of the 80s. Director Hideo Nakata introduced the fashion for horror films in a mystical-Gothic manner with an inevitable tragic end, which was so different from American films that always shot a happy happy ending. It was bright, interesting, exciting and to confess very, very scary, so I consider the film adaptation of the novel “The Call” by Koji Suzuki, one of the most successful horrors in the history of cinema.
Despite my sympathies for the franchise, I approached the movie with apprehension, as the films of recent years Sadako 3D, Sadako 3D 2, Damned: Confrontation were quite controversial. But what happened, and now we have a new film and shot with a good budget and smart actors.
A young man, Holt, goes to college and breaks up with his girlfriend, Julia. They communicate every day, and remain faithful to each other for several weeks, until Holt's acquaintances persuade him to go to a party. From this evening, Julia can't reach Holt until a strange message comes from his laptop from a girl named Skye.
Honestly, the film does not make the proper impression, and seems to be an ordinary drama about love divided by distance and loyalty, which was sung in the myths and legends of ancient Greece with a slight dose of mysticism, from the ubiquitous Samara Morgan.
It seemed that everything was predetermined and the finale was predictable initially, and that there was no place for new ideas in the worn-out theme of horror with a famous ghost. But then the director Javier Gutierrez, unknown to me until then, managed to surprise me with a sharp change in the storyline of the film and the introduction of new characters related to Samara.
And the line with the show of the girl’s hometown, I liked, as the picture became more complete and more meaningful than the usual average American horror films of category B. But this also hides its main drawback, since I did not like the story of the birth of the child, I think it was completely superfluous designation of the father of Samara.
The atmosphere of horror has changed, if you look at the original film 1998 and the remake of 2002, then there was hopelessness and a nightmare, a real horror that permeates to the very tip of your hair. And in this film, the atmosphere was created artificially due to the classic stamps in the form of creaks, rustles, walking through a dark house and shadows behind the heroine's back, but by the way, they all worked, it was creepy and in a couple of moments the heart reeked with surprise. The scenes in the basement and in the crypt were the most memorable.
The actors who played the main roles of Holt and Julia I liked. They're cute, they're young, they're energetic, and they've overplayed, but that can be attributed to inexperience and age. Of the minors, I liked Professor Gabriel performed by Johnny Galecki.
The film was severely criticized, but I thought the film was a good picture, especially against the background of tasteless thrash horror films. So against the background of a clear crisis of the horror genre, the film becomes a noticeable picture of the last 2-3 years.
The drawback of the picture is that the director moved away from the mystical line towards the thriller. It was not scary but unpleasant, as if a bucket of dirt was poured on you, it is suitable for thrillers and detectives but not as for horrors, from which you want terrible moments and feelings of hopelessness. Maybe I’m biased, but such impressions left me from watching.
Verdict, maybe I contradict myself, but I liked the film, in general, it lived up to expectations. It was scary, it was sad, it was interesting. I will recommend to all fans of the horror genre.
The continuation of the successful franchise finally came to the screens.
This film willingly borrows the legacy of Gore Verbinski, in the form of frames that were shown in the first film. It's kind of nostalgic. Samara inspires terror again, we are rediscovered her story, the story of her birth. We are beginning to wonder why she was so special before she died.
The soundtrack pleasantly takes us back to the days when we were just beginning our acquaintance with this evil spirit.
The main character Julia tries to help her boyfriend get out of the dangerous club 7, but she drives herself into a trap. What will come out of this and whether she will be able to resist Samara you will know after watching the film.
There are a couple of screamers in the film, but they don’t belong to the most frightening elements. They look rather funny. Even the barking of a dog makes you smile for the next second rather than feel scared.
However, it is the creepy moments that are present in the film. Imagine being in the next room and knowing that a supernatural force is raging and doing things that even your imagination is afraid to draw? There were nasty moments. Sometimes I wanted to turn away and not look. So, in my opinion, this film has fulfilled the main task that is usually put before horror. He left an impression after himself and it was scary to fall asleep.
The big drawback is that the creators themselves in the trailer revealed the main intrigue of the picture. If you look, you'll know what I mean. Watching the finale and understanding what you are about to see, to some extent this fact kills this very film for you. Alas, the intrigue in this movie is dead. All because of the trailer. Of course, it spoils the viewing experience. After all, watching a movie, especially such, you hope that you will be surprised.
Also attentive viewers will pay attention to the absence of many moments from the trailers in the picture. This practice takes place, but something too many moments have not shown us.
Given the general impression that this film managed to scare me, sometimes to feel disgust, I would like to positively note Calls.
Have a great and enjoyable look!
There are a lot of negatives, but I think the title is true. In our time, this is no longer a horror or a thriller, but rather a weak detective with their shades. In this regard, I am surprised by people who expect meat from a film (and there are such) or sleepless nights, when the idea itself is more important here.
The idea of not a scary girl killing heroes like Freddy Krueger. It is more about the actions of people exposed to mortal danger. How they try to escape, understand something, transfer the problem to another. In this universe there is even a subculture based on this, but it is not revealed here. But in this film you can learn more about Samara: what was and what became. There are also several quite watchable moments and a controversial, but, imho, interesting ending.
The above implementation, of course, is not perfect, but I was interested in watching, given the rather low expectations. These expectations do not even apply to Calls, but to the entire genre as a whole. He hit the wall and almost stopped developing. The same stamps are transferred from the film to the film, the fingers have already dried up, from which the plots are sucked out. But for some reason people still hope to get something worthwhile from the next sequel.
My desperate six, staged such a film, objectively does not correspond to it, but lately the genre is drowning in a passerman and this is not the worst representative of it.
P.S. You only need to look with a clear understanding of what you are doing. Or don't spit later.
Honestly, I did not expect much, but ... it was not worth it to completely fuck up the legendary character and his impact on the people of people.
Minuses. Darkness. The storyline is precipitous, there are often all sorts of shortcomings. Hard to describe without spoilers, but I'll try. From the first minutes of the film comes the understanding that the writers did not bother with the dialogue, they are boring, there is no tension.
Plot: Plays out the story of the study of the phenomenon 'Samara Morgan' and cassettes, as a door to the other world. And then we jump to the history of its appearance. This is more like a detective series.
The horror that has plagued people for many years is becoming a mass phenomenon. The ghost ceases to be the curse of the character, tormenting both body and spirit. I think that’s the main drawback of the film. Each appearance of Sarah should instill fear, which is ' Calls' just not. Drama would at least be added to the story of the mother and child, so you can feel why the ghost is so angry, and he has no rest. Like Silent Hill. But there's a failure again.
Actors' play is a failure. For the most part, it gives the impression of a detective. They are more interested in solving mysteries than getting rid of the curse. The sailors on the ship, from Pirates of the Caribbean, were more afraid of the dress that was driven by Elizabeth Swan than the protagonists of the real ghost in Calls! But they can be understood, Sarah does not want to scare them, does not want to suck life out of them, etc.
Result:
3 out of 10
Just for the appearance of Johnny Galecki, I really love TBV (for me, this is the only plus in the film).
Calls are the third part of the franchise, which for such a long time has already managed to become a cult. Fans had to wait for it for 12 years, because the second part was released in 2005. And now, we finally have a chance to look at the terrible girl from TV again - but is this the right Call?
In the story, a young man became interested in a videotape that kills those who watched it in exactly 7 days. In the pursuit of answers, he does not notice the danger that threatens him, unlike his girlfriend. She is seriously worried about her boyfriend, and takes a hit on herself. However, no one even suspected that there is a so-called ' film' in ' film' which will open the veil of the mystery of the whole affair.
If you look closely, the film is positioned as 'horror, drama'. Yeah, that's already in doubt. And indeed, viewers after watching will understand that there is little left of the horrors.
It’s more like a mystic with elements of horror and drama. Creepy and scary moments in the film, as I thought, not enough, so it does not reach the full ' horror'.
Good story. The directors tried to fully reveal the story of Samara, and they succeeded.
I watched with interest, but there was something missing in the film. I haven’t figured out what exactly – but, it seems that we have a standard modern horror, which does not stand out much. The only thing surprising is Samara, she brings fear and terror. And you certainly do not want to find a letter in the mail with this ' damned' video.
I recommend it to horror fans. O'Ring' everyone has heard, and you're probably wondering what the sequel is. However, I will not watch the film again.
As a fan of the first two parts, I was very much looking forward to this film and went to the premiere the very first day. Yes, I was prepared for the fact that the film will not reach the bar, which was set in 2002 and confirmed in 2005. That's what happened.
The film continues the story of ' urban legend', a videotape that kills. In 7 days. However, now evil is placed not in a video cassette, but in a digital video, and instead of VCRs, we have computers and smartphones. And no, adapting to the modern world is not a bad thing, after all, the actions unfold in our time. The problem is different.
We've seen all this before. Each next frame in the most tense moments is guessed, for it was in 'Call' and in 'Call 2'. We are trying to scare old tricks and scenes from the first two films, it looks cool, high-quality, stylish, but old and not frightening.
And the picture in the movie is really great, which is probably his strongest side. All these images and manner of presentation and scream that this is the same ' Call', a stylish and terrifying film about the girl Samara Morgan.
' Calls' tries to keep that original atmosphere of the whole story, and I would even say it turns out, but when watching the film, there is absolutely no sense of empathy for the characters. Uninteresting characters, unconvincing play, hence the unimpressive plot twists follow, although everything is good in the script plan.
Despite the fact that the faceless characters overshadowed the entire impression of the ending of the film, I liked the ending. That’s how it should be, otherwise it wouldn’t be interesting.
Calls is a sequel to the cult film 'Call' which is one of the scariest horror films to this day. But alas and ah, the continuation was absolutely not terrible, boring and protracted.
The film almost repeated the error of the series 'Paranormal phenomenon' where in the last film broke firewood so much that from this lumber, it would be possible to rebuild the Garden and Gomorrah again, with ' circle', that is, from scratch. The most interesting thing, in all this mess of failures in modern sequels and remakes, is that no one learns from other people's mistakes, everyone wants to make their own, stepping on the rake of colleagues. In the project ' Calls' decided to do exactly the same thing that Oren Peli did with 'Paranormal phenomenon' - that is, to follow the path of least resistance, for maximum collection of the cash register. Namely, to absorb into the tape all the most successful that was in its predecessors and wrap it in a modern, new wrapper, so to speak, paint a rusty trough - passing it off as something new and modern, depriving all this of its former quality.
' Calls' turned out to be absolutely not terrible, moreover, the feeling that the creators themselves did not understand what they wanted, a remake or a sequel, shuffling the plot along the tape with incomprehensible and stupid actions. In the film there is absolutely no frightening atmosphere, remember the original ' Call' and ' Call-2', so goose bumps get. After those movies, people were washing their pants, and they tried not to turn on the movie, so as not to wash their underwear again. Here, there is nothing terrible: no atmosphere, no frightening moments (screamers, of which there was not much in circulation do not take, tired of repeating that it is no longer scary). Contemporary horrors are a stream of screamers who are supposed to scare, but the viewer twitches for a second, and then? And then there's emptiness and disappointment. Real horror is the atmosphere when you are afraid and worried about the characters, when you penetrate into this atmosphere, plunge into the head and live the horror with the characters. In modern horrors this is not, there are exceptions, but extremely rare.
Playing actors is a complete failure, of course, I understand that the composition of the stars from the sky was missing, but it is far from the stars. The acting finally drowned this movie, the only one who is remembered is Vincent D’Onofrio, he is also not ' fire' but against the background of the rest is a contender for all nominations of praise from me.
In the end in front of you absolutely not terrible, protracted film, which can not be called horror, because there is nothing terrible in it. It’s more like an average detective with an admixture of a thriller, but I paid money to get scared – and the film is rated as a horror movie, according to this tape in my opinion – failed!
The Internet has replaced us with cassette tapes, just as bad and insignificant films like this have replaced us with real horrors, which seem to be on the path of their seven days and are already flying to that very well.
Thank you for listening, I have everything!
A vague impression after watching, in general, everything unfolds so quickly in the frame, not that in the first ' Call' where Rachel learns everything bit by bit and comes by chance to the cassette ... but in general the film generally resembles this part: the story of the guy in the beginning about what he saw and his death, Julia visits the caretaker (like Rachel - Morgana) and it is not clear why they decided to take the actor. And the ending is like deja vu: finding and resting the remains, then Julia's scene in the shower. And #39;- That was your daughter!' (reminds me of anything?)
I also liked that the heroine had visions and signs like Rachel, but it is a pity that there was no countdown, there is no feeling that death is approaching Julia.
For me, the film lacked more heroes (as in the 2nd film), did not feel that they were students, it would have been cooler with big deaths in the film ... because it also has a drawback: the presence of Samara, in the first part it was felt in every moment, and in the second next to Aidan in general all the time!
Also, I liked that the theme of the melodies was the same, almost cried with emotion at the session, although I will say that in some scenes it did not seem to be noisy at all ... but to give credit to Matthew Margeson unwisely replaced Hans Zimmer.
Another topic Evelyn tried to reveal more and understand who is still the father ... although, honestly, it would be better not to raise, I did not like what they messed up with how she became pregnant with Samara (and in general she did not look like that Evelyn from the 2nd film).
It’s nice that there were moments from the first parts, as if they gave us a connection to feel that this is a real sequel, and not a fan-movie (as it may seem at first glance) or a spin-off. Also, it's a pity that the trailers immediately revealed the topic ' rebirth'... it's like in the first film ' make a copy' we learn the truth, and then the truth (and suddenly surfaced) would be this rebirth. And it's a pity that a lot was cut out of the film, on the example of the scene where Samara grabs Julia from behind, a terrible plexus of hands, a ring in the form of a mark on the back, Holt's fight with ghosts, Julia's mother who was not shown at all ... I hope now it all goes into the director's version.
Why did Samara (or Evelyn?) try to kill Julia 2 times? Why else did Samara choose Julia, Skye, what would not have been suitable for rebirth? (and why Julia had some visions before she watched the video, also a mystery) – I will not say everything.
In general, you can watch the film, there were unexpected moments taken under fright, the film even aroused interest and looks good.
Unfortunately, modern films of the genre 'horror' less and less justify their title. From the sinister atmosphere and mysterious plot, directors are increasingly resorting to the so-called 'screeners' which are frightened only by children.
And the film 'Calls' was no exception.
Love the classic story 'Call'? Forget it! If you discard all the little things, then before us appears the most ordinary horror movie for once. History is distorted, motives are unclear, events occur simply at the click of a finger.
Forget about the oppressive atmosphere of classic films, for here you will see nothing that would distinguish ' Calls' from any other simple horror film. However, the film is filmed in rather gloomy blue-gray tones, which undoubtedly pleases the eye (more pluses I did not reveal).
The verdict: This is a horror movie that has little to do with the first one. It will be interesting for teenagers and very loyal viewers.
Continuing a series of murders due to watching videos or something new?
First, I want to say to those who are fans of the first two parts: do not expect the same analysis of flights as in the previous two films.
Dada, of course, the girl will come out of the TV again and kill her victims after 7 days, but, unfortunately, does not bring any fear to the viewer. A couple of unexpected scenes - that's the horror of what's happening.
The film is more narrative, as we are told what happened to Samara.
This movie lacks the turn of events, epic moments and horribly calm musical accompaniment that actually affects the overall picture of what is happening. Some scenes were simply too obvious and banal.
But with such a painfully boring scenario, it is worth noting in principle a good game of actors and some moments of the investigation of sinister murders, which at first gave a chance for a sharp turn, but in the end turned out to be a false signal.
5.4 out of 10
F. Javier Gutierrez, a Spanish director not known to everyone, presented a plume of a wet dress stretching from the novel Suzuki (Ringu 1991). In cinema, success had Nakatov Call (Ringu, 1997): the author continued the tradition of the folklore genre of Kaidan.
Verbinski's call (Ring, 2002) psychologized dead Samara. With tons of makeup and the look of a killer psychiatrist, Davy Chase won MTV's glass of golden popcorn - the main prize of sympathy - as the best villain (or villain, if you will).
Then there was a sequel, when paid Nakata, and he instead of Jung strengthened the mythology, and, most importantly, tried (as part of the Hollyvdu project) to maintain the tradition of Kaidan: to impress (do not scare!) the viewer with the beauty of the terrible.
There is a Japanese prequel Call 0 with a litter of birth (Ringu 0: Basudei, 2000), but there is sad with the fees.
In general, Guttieres had something to see, but he was fascinated by Verbinski and, alas, superficially. Johnny Galecki, the star of theoretical physics (Bing-Bang Theory, 2007-..), plays an important lecturer-biologist, who kind of watched the tape and wants to prove the existence of the soul, but the script line of the assistant, drinking bourbon, somehow stupidly hushed up to give a look at the main characters.
In 2002, Watts lulled the viewer with a drowsy passivity (hearing the Lynch nightmare of Mulholland Drive 2001), and in contrast to the tale of revenge, it was especially frightening. The main actress Zvonkov (Matilda Luts) copes with her task at the level, but she lacks experience. Too expressive, too loud. Scene with the inscription Julie in an empty grave failed at the root (as it was missed, in general). Alex Rowe as if running from the fitness center: ' Baby, I love you so much, I will not turn around'. I'm sure he would say in breaks: 'When's lunch?''All right, then that take' In other words, the guy plays himself, but not on the success of the film.
It's not clear yet, are we considered idiots or are non-professionals sitting behind the spotlights of fenced rooms? I guess it was like this:
'Guys, see:
The camera moves slowly, and then so, rrrrrhaz and to the side.
Or this:
Birds, corpse flies, rain... What else can I do to make these corn people understand? Come on...Cicada! And that sounds cool! The viewer, like a radish, will feel guessy, once easily recognizes the visual metaphors'.
The last shot will be remembered, but this is the merit of the screenwriters, of whom there are (sic!) three, not counting Suzuki , who launched catavasia for several decades.
I don’t want to see horror in this movie. Technically, this is a very awkward movie. The one where the armpits tickle with the nerves. Guttieres constantly poking his face at the obvious - 'Look, it's horror' Or even: 'He is profound, about the importance of taking care of your neighbor'. But for some reason, the only award that you want to give to the creators is a bought bucket of salty popcorn, maybe at least when creating another thing, they will feel like viewers.
3 out of 10