kushina3
The first half is nice and watchable, but the second part of the movie was a disappointment for me. In that part many things are happening very fast and in chaos, and it just gets stupid.On top of that it is a very slow movie, predictable, and not very special in any way.
neotyrael
Every detail was quite captivating, and the movie is worth a watch, even if you don't like drama that much. It's not cliche, like some people reviewed, and it's quite atmospheric and well detailed. It's not that good for everyone, but i'm pretty sure it will never be that bad.
Go on and see for yourself! Greatly recommended!
tammykins
Disappointing. Not a thriller, any suspense scenes have no payoff. It may be a subtle ghost story but too subtle for its own good. The movie is slow to develop, the ghostly elements are supposed to seep in as you're lost in the atmosphere, but it shifts focus unexpectedly and awkwardly.
The scenery was nice, including Emilia Clarke, but the movie seemed like another opportunity for her to get naked to get more viewers. I wish she would stop resorting to this. She's cute and captivating, the only reason we watched the whole thing, but it wasn't worth it. Her character, supposedly an experienced child therapist, mildly arrogant, is actually pretty inept with children which had me losing sympathy for her. The leading actor, who was not terribly impressive as Celeborn in LOTR, not terribly impressive here either, had a perpetual forced scowl and a sullen brooding demeanor that got old, until they later attempt to do some sudden character development on him as the characters are changing, but its too little too late. There was too much of a distraught kid that keeps running away over and over ad nauseum, I guess his endless running away was a technique for taking the viewer through the scenic environment but it got irritating. There are two other characters on site that are mainly for ambiance and don't pan out into much. The mother's character wasn't very well developed either, but depending on how you look at the plot maybe it didn't need to be.
So if you like spending time watching Emilia Clarke and other nice scenery and don't need a whole lot more, you might like this movie. It could be summed up as "nice isolated scenery, a kid keeps running away, and Emilia Clarke gets naked again".
I wish the voice from the stone had whispered to us to skip it, or at least not expect too much.
PS: I should probably give the movie a little more than 2 stars, but I got tired of seeing 10-star reviews saying "Ooooh its gothic!! and subtle!!! and subtly gothic!!". Firstly, there's a difference between "subtle" and "boring", and while it may have been gothicesque I never really felt much depth to it, a quiet corner of Hogwarts would've been better immersion.
Fredvs79
I caught this movie because my GF wanted to see it. I went in without knowing what it was about, but was pleased to see Emilia Clarke was in it. The original premise seemed intriguing, and the setting and cinematography sets the mood for what could have been a very capable ghost story /haunted house movie. The characters are introduced and the scene is set, and then.... nothing. Unfortunately, the pace of the movie slowly plods along, with nary a bit of suspense or fright. No spooky scary things go bump in the night, the characters just bore the audience to tears. If it weren't for the fact that Emilia Clarke is beautiful, I can't see how anyone would spend more than 20 minutes watching this. To make matters worse, her supporting actor is a child who has not a single line of dialog the entire movie (until the very very very end). Most of the movie the two of them just go around listening to holes in walls, to which there are no strange voices, or eerie whispers, just silence... There is also a groundskeeper who doesn't talk very much at all, and the boy's father- one character that does have some lines to deliver. He actually seduces the lovely Emilia Clarke to model nude for him while he sculpts a life-size rock into a statue of her (with a hammer and chisel, from scratch, without any clay mock-ups) while she just lays naked for the audience to feast their eyes on. Then he has a sex scene with her - after all, her clothes are already off, how much more in the mood could she be? And that I suppose is the purpose of and only reason to watch this movie: for the director to have an excuse to disrobe an actress for a gratuitous nude/sex scene, and to see Emilia Clarke naked, which without it would make this movie a 1 star.
AD
