ThreeGuysOneMovie I have recently become bored with Modern Warfare 3 so instead of playing last night I went through my Netflix library and stumbled upon High Lane, a french horror film released in 2009. The plot is pretty basic, 5 friends decide to do some climbing in the mountains of Croatia but the pass that they planned on using was closed for renovations. Being idiotic 20 somethings they decide to go ahead anyways and that would end up being a poor decision. Equipment failures, bear traps, and a half-ass love triangle make the trip far from enjoyable but that is not it, it seems there is another thing to fear besides the elements and faulty gear, a deranged killer.The film is dubbed which is a no-no for me, I would much rather read the dialogue than watch the characters mouths move out of sync from actual words, but I digress. The 5 friends are Chloe (Fanny Vallete), Loic (Johan Libereau), Guillaume (Raphael Langlet), Fred (Nicolas Giraud), and Karine (Muade Wyler). Chloe and Loic are a couple, Fred and Karine are a couple and poor Guillaume is the 5th wheel except that Guillaume has had improper relations with Chloe and desperately wants her to leave Loic for him, sadly that is one of the many thin sub-plots.Let me start out with some positives about the film before I go into the negatives. First off the location this movie was shot at was absolutely breathtaking and several of the camera shots early in the film were overwhelming in its natural beauty. Secondly, if you have a fear of heights this film will make your stomach jump into your throat as you reach for solid ground below your couch. Thirdly, Fanny Vallete, who plays Chloe, exudes sexuality and beauty in a role that calls for none. Lastly, there are certainly a few scenes that will make you uneasy.The negatives are striking and obvious and lie at the root of the film. First off who vacations or does anything with 2 couples and 5th wheel, nevermind there is obviously some tension between Loic and Guillaume. Secondly, who goes for a climb like this when they have vertigo and are scared of heights such as Loic. At this point I could not take the movie seriously, it was just unrealistic and foolish. So if you are going to make a movie that is unrealistic and foolish then PLEASE do not take yourself so seriously and this film tried to be a serious thriller when it would have made a better B-type movie. Add nudity, sex, and over the top violence and I believe this film could have been better or at least more interesting.All in all the film was on the thin side and the scare factor was not strong enough to overcome the weakness in script. The actors did an alright job but had very little to work with and cannot be blamed for the failure of this film in my opinion. This film had no identity and it desperately needed one, it also needed some solid sub-plots to pass the time between interesting scenes.Like what you see here? Then check out our full site at 3guys1movie.com

myself_shubham this movie is different from gore movies like wrong turn,hostel where main focus is on gory effects,the camera work is excellent,breathless starting.you will be eager to know what will come next.you will like the scenic beauty.there is no point in the movie where you get bore.Those who expected an intense mountaineer feature may be mixed up and feel disappointed by the second half. The mixture of both genres is very particular and I personally equally adored both halves but this experimental idea is rather courageous and might not sell well. It can be considered as a mistake from a commercial point of view. From an artistic point of view, the idea is worth it and turns out to be rather intriguing. i personally recommend to watch this movie.but the ending can be improved.

timaenot I stay wondering why so many directors and screenplay writers of wannabe-horror movies ruin the good ideas they have in the beginning. This movie starts really good, it seems to deal with hobby mountain-climbing and interpersonal tensions. Indeed, mountain-climbing can turn out to be real horror if you are not particularly good at it and if you take a closed (certainly not without a reason) path. In the first 1/2 hour of the movie, nice camera shots and great landscapes convey a feeling of vertigo and a vague sense of danger - which is very, very credible in the given situation. Things can go wrong, ropes can tear, vertigo can drive you to madness, you can get lost in the mountains, there can be a tempest - all that is horror, because it is likely to happen in real life. So WHY the hell is there any need for "boosting" a life-like situation with some maniac moron hunting the characters? WHY do they always turn a real horror situation into a stereotyped, paper-thin, seen-over-a-thousand-of-times slasher? It is the same with "The Descent" which had excellent premises to get really scary (in the end, there are not many things as gruesome as being trapped in some huge subterranean labyrinth of holes without any map) but instead, decided to put in some stupid monsters which ruined the whole suspense and the sense of horror. Horrific are only things which seem realistic or in some way convey the sense of the possibility to get realistic. There is no need for additional "boost"! Folks, show me a horror movie based on completely natural premises and the appropriate development of characters in the given situation - and I will sing you a love song. But it seems easier to get some mad hunter or monsters in than to develop real tensions and real situations.

daver6 I watch many horror films on the Horror channel and most are dreadful (e.g. Camel Spiders) whilst a few are genuinely entertaining - this to my mind is one of the entertainers; even with sub-titles! Basically the first half is a tense climbing film and the second half is a better-than-average slasher film.The Good: 1. The acting was excellent, scenery stunning, the climbing well filmed and, refreshingly, the characters were not a bunch of annoyingly moronic teens drinking and partying themselves to an early grave; although I did find Luke irritating at times and rather immaturely (but manfully) I thought Chloe extremely sexy with her low-cut top and kept hoping for more......2. I find sheer drops and hanging over precipices bowel loosening so for me this film gains credit for delivering two types of scares: the hanging-from-a-rope-over-a-2,000ft-drop type and the someone-is-hunting-me type; though the first scared me more.3. The fight scenes on 'the rock' were bloody, brutal and the characters looked as if they were fighting for their lives (apart from item 2 in the 'mildly annoying' below).4. The use of sound to induce dread; the dentist drill as the first girl was killed, the sound of steel instrument being drawn and the thud of bodies as the two climbers hung in the cellar.The Mildly Annoying: 1. Why was Fred running through the trees when he was caught in the trap? Why did he not immediately throw down the rope to the climbers below? 2. An inability to finish the job. Both Luke and Chloe die because they were not willing to kill the killer. Luke had the advantage when he was hitting the killer on the head with a stone. Why throw away that advantage (literally) and crawl to the edge of the precipice? Chloe decided to show compassion and leave the killer alive behind her.3. Is it likely that the killer could loosen or cut a steel cable (carrying Chloe) with what looked like a small home-made knife? Overall a superior film of its genre and well worth a watch.