Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Wordiezett So much average

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

ryanfrazier-23235 I created an account just to leave the 2 star rating this movie deserves. Not a thrilling moment, character to care about or coherent storyline to be found here. This may be the most disjointed story I've ever had the misfortune of seeing. Fifteen minutes in and I couldn't have cared less what actually happened to the family or who was responsible. The satanic ritual side story had NOTHING to do with the plot whatsoever and totally could have been left out. Charlize Theron, who's typically great, was obviously phoning in this performance. Please, do yourself a favor, watch something else. Anything else!

cheergal About good thrillers, they need to suspend audience with darkness. This one did not. Its excessive plots spoiled over common reasoning. I had hard time to follow the irrational storyline which killed my curiosity eventually. Hiring a hit man carrying out murders in order to receive insurance payments is a common scheme since the invention of insurance. However, the author might think she reinvented the scenario, she did not. She indeed facilitated a lot of horrors to resonate audience with the crimes. But it failed to deliver thrills and chills unlike "Gone Girl" ultimately did. Psychopathic scenarios are mostly welcomed by thriller movies. Some of them truly horrified audiences to the core. However, this one failed to do so. The reason might be it intended to tempt audience with realities. No one was bothered by the possibilities of "Gone Girl" happening in real lives. Moreover, just like other successful thrillers, "Silence of Lamb", "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" even "The Girl on the Train" were mainly focusing on those unbelievable coincidences to contrive stories which would not merely possibly happened for real even when all the stars align in the sky. Documentaries are for the reality. Even though they are still done with some explainable coincidences to entice audiences. Directors only have one choice to make great thrillers which is weaving all the impossibilities together and bringing to the screen without concerning any probable realities in them. This one unfortunately mocked that.

Cheese world Dark Places:Rating: shaky I got mixed feelings about this movie, though it is very intense. I liked the whole idea of the killer club (a group of people interested in crimes doing their own investigation), but felt as though they should've been involved more in the film.A major problem which absolutely didn't stick well with me in this film is when Lyle (member of killer club) who really isn't involved in the film, contacted Libby about information, it came out of nowhere. When, where and how, there is nothing to show the viewers how he got it.

mistoppi Of course I'd hate to compare Dark Places to Gone Girl all through this review, but Gone Girl had a big effect on me. So obviously the first thing I notice is the difference between Amy and Libby. Amy is clever and ambitious, while Libby doesn't seem to care about anything. They both had money though, money they didn't exactly earn themselves. Amy got her money from her parents, and Libby got her money from generous donors. Both lose their money, but the biggest difference seems to be that Amy is active while Libby is passive turning active. Still, Libby is an interesting character. She has gone through a lot and has clearly put up some walls, and the movie keeps us at a certain distance from her. I feel like we could get to know her a lot better in the novel, which is why I'm really interested in reading that. To be honest the distance from the main character of Dark Places and Gone Girl shows the key difference between the film adaptations. Gone Girl's screenplay was written by Gillian Flynn herself, and in the movie we get to know Amy. We don't get to know as much as in the novel, but we know enough, while with Libby the audience doesn't know enough. Maybe the screenwriter didn't know "his" character as well as he would need to. But of course this is kind of in theory, since I haven't read the novel, but judging by Flynn's style in Gone Girl, I doubt she'd leave the main character at a weird distance. What's great about the story is how you can guess what happened. You know who could've been behind it, and you can form your own theories. I formed mine very early, but knowing Flynn I felt like it's not going to be what I guessed. Well, that was disappointing, because I guessed it right. Again, I feel like in the novel it might have been a bit harder to find it out before it was said, but in a movie those few clues can't be drown in as many details as would be necessary. That's what let me kind of disappointed, that and the fact that the feeling after you see or read Gone Girl is... haunting. That's what haunting about that story. But with Dark Places, the end just is. The feeling is completely different. Of course I'm not expecting every story of Flynn's feeling the same, but Dark Places doesn't feel as dark as Gone Girl.The atmosphere - cinematography and music - of Dark Place are very typical for a thriller, and when looking at those Dark Places just drowns into all the other thrillers.But while Dark Places isn't as good as I hoped it to be, it's still a decent thrilling. It's what it needs to be - it's an intriguing mystery. It just isn't a thriller which would haunt you, it's not that original. It won't stay with you for too long, and you probably won't think about watching it again. You could never watch it and you wouldn't miss anything. It's good for a one watch, it's thrilling enough for that, but once you've seen it all and you know everything, what would be the point to see it again, when it doesn't offer something really extraordinary like its counterpart?