Silent House

I might have liked it more if they had gone a different route with the ending, this particular "twist" is getting pretty old.

SEX CAULDRON?! I thought they shut that place down. The camera is perched basically on Olsen's bubz the entire time but then the movie gets in the way of it.

An effectively tense and technically respectable effort completely undone by the stupid stupid ending.

No, guys, this is good.

Not as amazing as the trailer seemed to promise but Elizabeth Olsen's performance saves this from being absolute Shit.

Though Elizabeth Olsen couldn't have performed any better, the directors of this dull horror film are mistaken that a virtuosic single-take and a handheld camera add the slightest bit of tension to rote scares and setups. By now these methods provide purely formal recognition not pleasure. When it all turns psychological, the air in the house has been completely sucked out. Saw it yesterday. Can't remember how it ended.

I'm really beginning to like Elizabeth Olsen as an actress and not really sure why it was shot like it was supposed to be through the eyes of Olsen other then that the movie sucked.

Shot almost entirely in the dark with a torch only source of light. Elizabeth Olsen mostly on her knees or leaning forwards but nothing really happened. A lot of long shoots without cuts. The mind mixing takeoffs did not bring anything surprising to otherwise dull story.

I think I'm able to look past some of the illogical and ridiculous bullshit because of the "gimmick." The fact that the movie is made up of 12 minute takes (!) and edited together to seem like it's all one, that's fantastic. I mean, that's awesome. It really made me involved in what was going on. Some of the special effects were straight up some Silent Hill shit, which is cool. Olsen was great, but the dialogue and script needed some real work. That's what is keeping it from being higher.

This movie makes me mad. I have so many problems with it. First of all it starts off being really dull. Then out of the blue Elizabeth Olsen is locked in the house with no explanation. Then about an hour of the film is her running away from some unknown enemy. Then a big bombshell of a twist hits you and then the film ends abruptly. The twist didn't make the movie better because at that point the hour of film you watched has left you exhausted. I would never recommend this movie to anyone.

The long takes "one continuous take" was an interesting idea as was making the movie in "Real Time" however since the film still plays out like any other generic movie of this type it failed to keep my interest and I found it hard to stay focused on what was going on. It's not good when you check your phone every 5-10 minutes while watching a 88 minute film. For the most part Elizabeth Olsen did an alright job with what she had to work with.

#14#, Elizabeth.O!/10a5, rewatch(2) }*{ #12#, Elizabeth.O!/9-5, story

Remake of a uraguayan film, of the same name. Its been quite some years since i saw the uraguayan one, but i remember enough to say this, both have things they do better than the other. Uraguayan ones atmosphere and setting was more creepy and dark, felt scarier throughout. but from what i remember, this one has the better conclusion in the narrative, though it telegraphs its ending too early, you know how its going to be far too soon. This still feels very tense though. recommend.

Elizabeth Olsen's still a fantastic actress. I still hold out hope that she'll make a movie I'll like one day. This sorry-ass, trendy, unoriginal hunk o'horror gimmickry certainly ain't it. Lousy in pretty much all respects. Move along, gang...

Silent? She didnt stop screaming and crying for more than a few seconds in the entire film, annoying to watch.

I couldn't even watch the whole movie because the camera never stayed completely still and ended up making me feel a bit motion sick. Though it's a bit strange as Quarantine had the same sort of camera work but didn't seem as bad. I think it might be because in that film the camera was a character and not an outside viewpoint trying to get the movie like closeups and shots while being handheld in long takes. Gave it a 50/100 cause I can't really say whether it was a decent movie or not.

A very film-school-student style opening (plain white text over black background to long overhead shot of girl on rocks). Some decent early foreshadowing of creepiness to come, but in general the conversations in the first 20 minutes are awkward and tedious. I like the continuous shot gimmick, give it props there, and there are some frames of those shots that are marvelous. Olsen is just too damn wooden for the suspense to come across. Some "classic" horror movie wonk & idiocy there, too. Pass.

The continuous shot illusion is a pretty interesting 'innovation', but the movie feels flat.

52.000

The "twist" many complain about isn't handled particularly well, but its basis is built perfectly. While the scares aren't very scary and the single take presentation is more gimmick than execution (see Russian Ark for a good use of this), the story told and the tension built around it serve well.

ev, baba-kiz, amca-yigen, evdeki yabanci, seneler sonra gelinen ev, kesintisiz tek cekim, aktüel kamera, elektrik kesintisi, cekmeyen telefon, ensest (finalde), gizem, tek mekan (cogunlukla evde), büyük ev, karanlik odalar, kapali camlar ve kapilar, gercek zamanli (Finalibegenmedim onun disinda fena degil)

"Silent House dies a sudden and egregious death when the amateur players in Olsen's company, Adam Trese and Eric Sheffer Stevens, as her character Sarah's father and uncle, respectively, open their traps." - Ed Gonzalez

Started off and had the feel of a great film - but missed the target completely.

the "continuous shot" editing was less gimmicky than i thought it would be. there is some exceptional tension, unfortunately this peaks just past the middle of the movie and it's a steep downhill slide from there.

Granted I was trying to multi-task on the laptop while watching the first half of this flick, but still, not too good

The story-line was weak traditional late 90's psychological horror/thriller. But the cinematography was incredible! Granted the film was not a one long shot as claimed, but several shots almost seamlessly fused together to give the illusion of one long shot, making it truly beautiful.

I think this was a good idea, but the general execution wasn't. I always liked the idea of journeying through a situation with someone going mad... The idea of a one-shot film, no editing, is great. In this case, though, I feel that the events could not possibly have all happened in real-time. My friend and I also found Elizabeth Olsen's acting laughable at times.

Elizabeth Olsen gives a strong performance, and they set up the creepy atmosphere well, but ultimately this movie gets too hysterical, dumb and downright illogical to enjoy

It was better than i thought it'd be, which doesn't necessarily mean it's good. The story is kinda tired and the plot is absolutely predictable, but some scenes were fine, and i thought the way they chose to film it was interesting, if anything.