Broadcast Signal Intrusion
- 2021
- 1h 44min
NOTE IMDb
5,4/10
3,6 k
MA NOTE
À la fin des années 90, un archiviste vidéo déterre une série d'émissions de pirates sinistres et devient obsédé par la découverte de la sombre conspiration derrière elles.À la fin des années 90, un archiviste vidéo déterre une série d'émissions de pirates sinistres et devient obsédé par la découverte de la sombre conspiration derrière elles.À la fin des années 90, un archiviste vidéo déterre une série d'émissions de pirates sinistres et devient obsédé par la découverte de la sombre conspiration derrière elles.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire au total
Harry Shum Jr.
- James
- (as Harry Shum Jr)
Steven Pringle
- Dr. Lithgow
- (as Steve Pringle)
Jeff Dlugolecki
- Creepy Guy in Alley
- (non crédité)
Thomas Kosik
- Bar Patron
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
These broadcast signal intrusions are really real. Go look it up on google. The one I know about is the Max Headroom pirate video back in the 80's CREEPY --and that's what this movie feeds on. Following a man as he searches for 3 of these specific intrusion to see if it leads to a pattern that has mystified police in the past. Creepy fun but didn't get the ending. 6.3 out of 10.
Not sure what to say, it felt like I've wasted time on a incomplete mess of a movie that tackles conspiracy theories the same way a creepypasta parodies the dangers of the dark web. I'm pretty sure that this film was inspired by the ''I feel fantastic'' robot woman video that surfaced on youtube many years ago, on paper that sounds like a great idea but in reality what we have here is a movie that has nothing to be thrilled about.
I know I'm sounding harsh and someone out there probably enjoyed this and the people behind it had great ideas, but at the end of the day, I was bored, couldn't get invested in the actors and a plot that had potential but kept stumbling, slowing the movie to a snails phase.
I know I'm sounding harsh and someone out there probably enjoyed this and the people behind it had great ideas, but at the end of the day, I was bored, couldn't get invested in the actors and a plot that had potential but kept stumbling, slowing the movie to a snails phase.
'Broadcast Signal Intrusion' is a strange movie. It's based around a character who is obsessed with a conspiracy he has stumbled upon, however we don't really understand his motives or obsession, and so it can be quite hard to stay invested in it with him. Where it all ends up actually turns out to be reasonably interesting, but we don't know that's going to be the case, and so the journey can be an arduous one.
The movie does a good job of feeling like it is set in the 90s. It doesn't just feel like a movie set then, it feels like one that was made then. It also does a good job of utilising its clearly minimal budget.
The film's biggest problem is that it is lacking a hook. It isn't particularly scary, and it isn't always captivating in its narrative, so the audience may find itself drifting along purposeless at times. It's not a terrible film, but is reasonably forgettable. 6/10.
The movie does a good job of feeling like it is set in the 90s. It doesn't just feel like a movie set then, it feels like one that was made then. It also does a good job of utilising its clearly minimal budget.
The film's biggest problem is that it is lacking a hook. It isn't particularly scary, and it isn't always captivating in its narrative, so the audience may find itself drifting along purposeless at times. It's not a terrible film, but is reasonably forgettable. 6/10.
Don't worry about spoilers. I'm not entirely sure I know what happened.
I love obscure, ambiguous endings open to broad interpretation...up to a point. The ending here was a bit too "not sure how to wrap this one up, so...here you go." Roll credits. Or maybe it was the result of slash and burn editing. I don't know.
The lead (James) was believable and intense, and the mystery, atmosphere, and creepy imagery definitely held my attention. The music was...ugh. Distracting and, well...intrusive at times. Almost like the composer was scoring a completely different film.
I have my own theory about the ending, but this one requires a re-watch. Few horror movies warrant revisiting, but even with its flaws, this isn't one I'll forget 20min after the end credits. I'm not lazy about probing alternate interpretations, but I need something a bit more solid to work with. That being said, I will watch this one again and scour for clues. I rarely write reviews, but this one was effective as an "experience," if not as a full-fledged narrative.
If you're OK with the slow burn and can tolerate a "WTF" ending, give this one a shot. I can overlook some of the technical drawbacks if a movie is unique, memorable, and brave enough to abandon the horror formula. The cliches are here, too, of course, but this movie is miles above 90% of current horror fare.
I love obscure, ambiguous endings open to broad interpretation...up to a point. The ending here was a bit too "not sure how to wrap this one up, so...here you go." Roll credits. Or maybe it was the result of slash and burn editing. I don't know.
The lead (James) was believable and intense, and the mystery, atmosphere, and creepy imagery definitely held my attention. The music was...ugh. Distracting and, well...intrusive at times. Almost like the composer was scoring a completely different film.
I have my own theory about the ending, but this one requires a re-watch. Few horror movies warrant revisiting, but even with its flaws, this isn't one I'll forget 20min after the end credits. I'm not lazy about probing alternate interpretations, but I need something a bit more solid to work with. That being said, I will watch this one again and scour for clues. I rarely write reviews, but this one was effective as an "experience," if not as a full-fledged narrative.
If you're OK with the slow burn and can tolerate a "WTF" ending, give this one a shot. I can overlook some of the technical drawbacks if a movie is unique, memorable, and brave enough to abandon the horror formula. The cliches are here, too, of course, but this movie is miles above 90% of current horror fare.
Not enough meat on the bone for this script, seemed like a decent setup but it never really got out of the first act and failed to establish any kind of "stakes" to help ramp up the tension. Overall production values were decent and the acting fine for the most part. I suggest giving this one a miss however as even the "creepy pasta" subject-matter is unfulfilling.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe film's SAL-E Sparx broadcasts are patterned after actual events. In Chicago, on November 22, 1987, someone wearing a Max Headroom (1987) mask interrupted WGN's 9 o'clock news for 25 seconds. 2 hours later the same person interrupted WTTW's airing of Docteur Who (1963) for 90 seconds.
- GaffesThe Phreaker says he turned 15 in 1987, and the movie's set in 1999, making him 27. But the actor who plays him is over 40, and clearly looks it.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Broadcast Signal Intrusion?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 44 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39:1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Broadcast Signal Intrusion (2021) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre