Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible
Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.
Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
songbirdmc You will probably be scratching your head after this one. It's one of those films that tries to be really deep and artistic, but it's not. The description, I found, was misleading. It seemed to me that it is backwards. The uncle is actually infatuated with his neice, not the other way around at first at least. I kept expecting that this film would ultimately uncover a supernatural plot, but it didn't. It's suspenseful throughout and I can honestly say that I couldn't predict the ending nor what would happen from scene to scene. I didn't find any of the characters likeable except for the father and a couple other characters that didn't get enough screen time to really know for sure.Nicole Kidman is the same as always. Her acting annoys me for some reason. I just don't enjoy her. There was however one speech about why people choose to have children that she gave towards the end of the film that was pretty profound and put in a way I've never heard before, but agree with. This film had some good moments, but it was mostly a let down.
bob the moo Last year I loved the mix of intrigue and sexual tension which drove the beautiful-looking 'The Handmaiden'. It was this film that made me look to another film from Park of similar style, Stoker. Set in suburbia the film s a family after the strange suicide of the father of the house. Quickly the mother has started sharing the house with her husband's estranged brother, while her daughter looks on in disgust. Within this dynamic tensions and secrets start to rise.Stoker is a beautifully shot film, with a consistently great look and shot framing. It is deliberately cold and crisp in a way that produces a frosty environment of tension and superficiality. On this front I liked the film a lot, however the content isn't there to match it. The cold nature of the film doesn't adequately hint and reveal at deeper, and the delivery of most of the film lacks spark and tension. The specific twists and violent moments in and of themselves add energy, but they come over like standalone episodes in some way. This feeling draws in the cast too, and I didn't think they made their characters work, in context or out of it, which is a shame considering the talent.Stoker is a handsome film in its construction, and it has dramatic moments, but mostly it doesn't work particularly, and lacks spark.
Rebecca Legnaro As soon as you watch Stoker, your opinion about family bonds will not be the same anymore.Since from the opening shot your eyes are pleasantly amazed by the stunning cinematography of this movie. Everything is surrounded by a dream-like atmosphere and once you discover more and more about the mysterious quiet India and her family you will understand why.Matthew Goode and Nicole Kidman, who respectively play uncle Charlie and Eveline, are both excellent at portraying their characters and the camera movements keep the audience's concentration high all the time. What many might dislike, though, is the script, which sometimes appears to be too predictable.I do not want to repeat myself, but the cinematography is wonderful, how the director manipulate the viewer through mirrors and light is a good lesson to learn for anybody interested in filmmaking.I encourage everyone that likes thrillers to watch this movie. You will not be disappointed.
k-hosni Stoker is Park Chan-wook first English-language film, which I found to be more on the tamer side of his usual work. Stoker is a psychological thriller, and the best kind you can ask for. The limited amount of characters and slow pacing of the movie gives the audience time to reflect and peer into the minds of the Stoker family.The story revolves around an 18-year-old girl India Stoker (Mia Wasikowska), whose father dies in a bizarre car wreck. Her Uncle Charlie (Matthew Goode), who she never knew existed, comes to live with her and her unstable mother (Nicole Kidman). She begins to suspect this mysterious, charming man has concealed motives and becomes increasingly infatuated with him. The story isn't really that subtle or original but the film is stylishly made with Hitchcockian elements throughout the film. It was quite obvious 10 minutes into the film that the girl and her uncle are psychopaths. Thrillers usually build tension slowly throughout a plot until it gets to a point where everything unravels into a complete different direction. Instead of jump scares or whatever tricks that typical thrillers use, the film rather tests the anxiety of the audience and haunts the imagination. Mia Wasikowska really gives the film a beating heart, as she emerges from her innocence into her latent self. Matthew Goode had a quality about him that reminded me of Norman Bates in Psycho. I was quite surprised to find that the story was written by Wentworth Miller (Prison Break). This is he's first written and produced film on the big screen. I look forward to seeing more of his theatrical work including a prequel story to Stoker about the life of Uncle Charlie.
