For a film to make you wonder what is happening from the moment it goes on, I have to think that there is something affective about the filmmaking. Shot in a single "take" made up of clever editing techniques, it creates a sense of realness that pervades the entire film. Frankly, I enjoyed the photography and thought that the twist at the end gave a legit portrayal of an unreliable narrator. Definitely see this.
Just terrible despite it's 'one-take' conceit with some of the worse 'shaky cam' dp work seen yet. Olsen captured here before her career took off is serviceable but not able to overcome the incredibly weak third act in what tries to pass for a script. To call this one garbage insults dumps all over the world. Harsh eh?
The idea of this remake enrages me, as it seems like it will take everything about the original that makes the movie grand and destroy it. The beauty of the original is the flow and grace of how it's shot and how it engages the viewer. This Hollywood remake barely a year later is more than likely going to leave us with nothing more than broken acting and some jump scares.
Why does American horror films need to be so obvious? Watched the Uruguaian original before and got chills, loved the camera techniques and the plot - cleaning the house as a deep incursion to your hidden memories. At that time, I was impressed by the plot. But this one...is SO OBVIOUS that made me want to be functional illiterate to make it worth watching!
the production side of the film should be encouraging for any aspiring filmmakers trying to break out conventionally the DSLR way. Olsen shows she has range, although there's a restraint here that maybe suggests she's still unsure about it. for all it's well paced tension building, the big moments in this film are clunky, derived too much from fast paced, incoherent memories of scenes from many other recent films.
Elizabeth Olsen rules. This movie sucks, duh. More than I thought it was going to be in terms of the plot, though the overall "horror" of the movie was of the typical shaky-camera, figure in a mirror-type variety. I also hereby call a ban on the use of creepy young girls in scary films. No more of them, please find another horror trope to exploit.
A boring remake of a mediocre movie from a year earlier - the "one-shot" style was pretty interesting, while the story (specifically the ending) was boring and predictable. Tepid horror is once again on the rise, and this film was no different. "Open Water" was a far better film, except, Olsen did a great job here and is quickly becoming a new favourite.
I have never felt more uncomfortable in my own skin while watching a film. Elizabeth Olsen was fantastic and the overall atmosphere and style of this film felt so fresh and exciting but It was very hard to get passed the terrible performances of Adam Trese and Eric Sheffer Stevens which are mirrored in the equally disappointing ending; the deus ex machina strikes again.
Not since The Blair Witch Project has there been such a viscerally horrifying performance in the horror genre, Elizabeth Olsen's terror is infectious and impressive. Claustrophobic camera work only adds to the audience's sense of impending doom. Save for the end, which is a bit hackneyed, Silent House serves up some genuine thrills.
First, let me say it's a little kooky and we have been here before, but... Never like this. It is a wild ride. Apparently, it is one shot from beginning to end, and the camera goes everywhere. It's breathless. And scary, well really creepy. I was impressed by star, Elizabeth Olsen, she conveys the proper sense of fear. It is a thrill ride and if you like this sort of thing, jump on and scream your ass off! Aieeee!