ÉVALUATION IMDb
5,2/10
4,5 k
MA NOTE
Lorsqu'un tueur en série enlève le fiancé d'une jeune femme, elle doit courir contre la montre pour découvrir l'identité du tueur et, plus important encore, son mobile.Lorsqu'un tueur en série enlève le fiancé d'une jeune femme, elle doit courir contre la montre pour découvrir l'identité du tueur et, plus important encore, son mobile.Lorsqu'un tueur en série enlève le fiancé d'une jeune femme, elle doit courir contre la montre pour découvrir l'identité du tueur et, plus important encore, son mobile.
- Prix
- 2 victoires et 2 nominations au total
Renu Gandhi
- Mother Park
- (scenes deleted)
Callie Johnson
- Christy
- (scenes deleted)
Avis en vedette
I really wasn't sure where this was going for the first half. Then when the twist hit, I thought wow what a great plot! However, the ending for me was just not right. I don't want to give anything away so I'll just leave it at that.
I am a prodcued writer director and part-time critic. The reason the movie generally fails is because people don't think like this, and it didn't delve into the supernatural part of the movie like it seemed like it would.
Ultimately the movie doesn't touch base with reality yet doesn't delve into the hypothetical or experimental, so it doesn't end up going anywhere. There's a lot of overacting, and the screenplay feels written by one person instead of a team. The script is unimaginative, and by that I mean it's based almost in a hyper exaggerated, brutalized version of reality with zero sense of one event having any relationship to another that takes the world, makes it unbelievable yet doesn't create one of its own.
The videography stands out as bad, and doesn't serve to make the film more interesting by capturing or creating distinct, visceral pictures. It's almost the opposite of a Coen brothers' film, in which things move naturally and the landscape is captured in a mindful, symbolic way where one scene interacts with others throughout and establish motifs, etc.
The characters ramble without purpose, are superficial and lack substance, and the overacting is unbearable. The reactions are ultimately unbelievable, which is ultimately the worst thing a movie can do seeing as how it can make the impossible believable. I am also reacting to the praise being given to a "first time filmmaker." You need to make a few features before you make a good one.
Ultimately the movie doesn't touch base with reality yet doesn't delve into the hypothetical or experimental, so it doesn't end up going anywhere. There's a lot of overacting, and the screenplay feels written by one person instead of a team. The script is unimaginative, and by that I mean it's based almost in a hyper exaggerated, brutalized version of reality with zero sense of one event having any relationship to another that takes the world, makes it unbelievable yet doesn't create one of its own.
The videography stands out as bad, and doesn't serve to make the film more interesting by capturing or creating distinct, visceral pictures. It's almost the opposite of a Coen brothers' film, in which things move naturally and the landscape is captured in a mindful, symbolic way where one scene interacts with others throughout and establish motifs, etc.
The characters ramble without purpose, are superficial and lack substance, and the overacting is unbearable. The reactions are ultimately unbelievable, which is ultimately the worst thing a movie can do seeing as how it can make the impossible believable. I am also reacting to the praise being given to a "first time filmmaker." You need to make a few features before you make a good one.
The subject matter of this film is not something I normally watch but this film is the exception. I was happy that flashbacks were used were it was deemed necessary to explain background of characters. It left me without having to ask questions nor was their gaping holes in the story.
It is about control over people's lives and this particular type of story was very good. The plot twist for the ending was completely a surprise. The acting was very good throughout this movie. I'm so glad I viewed it.
It is about control over people's lives and this particular type of story was very good. The plot twist for the ending was completely a surprise. The acting was very good throughout this movie. I'm so glad I viewed it.
As far as a thriller goes, I liked the story and premise.
It had bags of potential and some decent cinematography.
Sadly, the hammy acting and terrible lead performance really let it down.
I get it's a smaller indy film, but some of the acting was downright painful at times and when it's the main lead who is the worst, it really takes away from a film that could have been great.
Seriously, with some better actors this would have been great.
It had bags of potential and some decent cinematography.
Sadly, the hammy acting and terrible lead performance really let it down.
I get it's a smaller indy film, but some of the acting was downright painful at times and when it's the main lead who is the worst, it really takes away from a film that could have been great.
Seriously, with some better actors this would have been great.
100 Days To Live has its flaws but overal it's a movie that's worth a watch. The whole thing looks like a tv-movie, it could have been an episode of Law And Order, or another similar series, but then a good episode. The story itself isn't bad, not something that we really saw before so that's a bonus. The acting is okay from most of the cast but there are a couple actors that could try another job, even though it wasn't all that bad. The cinematography could have been better also. In short, it's mostly the plot that is interesting, the rest could have used some improvement.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is 100 Days to Live?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 30 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant