VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,0/10
38.620
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Una psichiatra forense scopre che tutte le personalità multiple del suo paziente tranne una sono vittime di omicidio. Dovrà scoprire cosa sta succedendo prima che il suo tempo finisca.Una psichiatra forense scopre che tutte le personalità multiple del suo paziente tranne una sono vittime di omicidio. Dovrà scoprire cosa sta succedendo prima che il suo tempo finisca.Una psichiatra forense scopre che tutte le personalità multiple del suo paziente tranne una sono vittime di omicidio. Dovrà scoprire cosa sta succedendo prima che il suo tempo finisca.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Brian Anthony Wilson
- Virgil
- (as Brian A. Wilson)
Charles David Richards
- Holiday Inn Bar Keep
- (as Charles D. Richards)
Trenton Rupecht
- Young Monty
- (as Trenton Ruprecht)
6,038.6K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Recensioni in evidenza
Shelter Shmelter
Måns Mårlind and Björn Stein's 'Shelter' is very much just another one of those horror movies that classifies itself as a 'supernatural thriller' in order to appear more classy and cool. The direction seems confused and even if the film is well shot, it's nothing outstanding. Clichés and plot holes are abundant in 'Shelter' (which is very much the case with most movies of this genre) and it has a disappointingly typical ending that tries to be haunting. It tries to be tricky by initially giving the impression of being a psychological thriller and then the writer throws in the occult to tell you that it's actually a horror film. Would fans of 'The Ring' like it (as the promos suggest)? Probably. Julianne Moore does a great job. I only watched 'Shelter' because she was in it. Her castmates are okay at best with the exception of Frances Conroy who stands out as a mother who lost three sons. Overall, 'Shelter' is a disappointing film that has absolutely nothing new to offer.
From forensic psychology to hillbilly voodoo: messy, incoherent, but fun
I caught this film on Netflix the other night in the "recommended for me" section. It certainly looked promising: a taut psychological thriller with Julianne Moore as Dr. Cara Harding, a forensic psychologist trying to disprove a diagnosis of multiple personality disorder in mental patient David/Adam/Wesley (Jonathan Rhys Meyers).
But it quickly morphs from the cooly clinical and scientific to hillbilly voodoo and fundie religious hokum replete with a hot, steaming, incomprehensible -- some of it kind of fun in its incoherence -- compost heap of plot elements: the 1918 flu epidemic; skin rashes; chronic coughs yielding -- ughh -- dirt; slip-and-falls; spinal injuries; atheism; Catholicism; faith healers; vaccines; curses; snake venom potions; apparitions on video; and a suddenly discovered -- and quite laughable -- silent film, replete with +90 year old narrator. There's even a test for red-green color blindness.
And, like the antagonist, this film suffers from an identity crisis. Is it a psychological thriller? A slasher / stalker film? A medical mystery? A serial killer whodunnit? A witchcraft / occult movie? I enjoyed just trying to figure out what the producers had in mind. This is like a film made my committee (or someone with multiple personality disorder).
Saving grace: A good faith try at making the crazy script work by Moore. And an enthusiastically evil performance Meyers, though he needs to take an intensive "American accents" workshop. That southern twangy thing was the worst, and so not right for upper Apalachia.
But all-in-all, I actually like really bad, messy movies, especially those that try so hard. Maybe Netflix knows me afterall? Hence the six -- how appropriate -- stars rating.
But it quickly morphs from the cooly clinical and scientific to hillbilly voodoo and fundie religious hokum replete with a hot, steaming, incomprehensible -- some of it kind of fun in its incoherence -- compost heap of plot elements: the 1918 flu epidemic; skin rashes; chronic coughs yielding -- ughh -- dirt; slip-and-falls; spinal injuries; atheism; Catholicism; faith healers; vaccines; curses; snake venom potions; apparitions on video; and a suddenly discovered -- and quite laughable -- silent film, replete with +90 year old narrator. There's even a test for red-green color blindness.
And, like the antagonist, this film suffers from an identity crisis. Is it a psychological thriller? A slasher / stalker film? A medical mystery? A serial killer whodunnit? A witchcraft / occult movie? I enjoyed just trying to figure out what the producers had in mind. This is like a film made my committee (or someone with multiple personality disorder).
Saving grace: A good faith try at making the crazy script work by Moore. And an enthusiastically evil performance Meyers, though he needs to take an intensive "American accents" workshop. That southern twangy thing was the worst, and so not right for upper Apalachia.
But all-in-all, I actually like really bad, messy movies, especially those that try so hard. Maybe Netflix knows me afterall? Hence the six -- how appropriate -- stars rating.
Wow! Zooooom... CRASH!
I can't easily recall a movie that started better and ended worse.
During the first few minutes, I kept thinking, "Man! what are all the negative reviews about?" The camera-work was not only good, but stylish and captivating. The framing, the acting, the dialogue, the plot — everything was firing on all cylinders. It had interesting characters with real relationships who said things that made sense, whose lines were delivered by actors who could act...
And then the darned thing just went off the rails. The more Julianne Moore's character went off on her own investigations, the more meandering and "Huh?" the story became. Then by the last half-hour or so, you're just waiting for the whole thing to be over. You've lost hope that it will make sense. Which is good. Because it doesn't.
Pity. It had all the elements for a really first-rate movie; but instead of coming together to form a coherent whole, they all scattered and left the viewer gasping for sense.
During the first few minutes, I kept thinking, "Man! what are all the negative reviews about?" The camera-work was not only good, but stylish and captivating. The framing, the acting, the dialogue, the plot — everything was firing on all cylinders. It had interesting characters with real relationships who said things that made sense, whose lines were delivered by actors who could act...
And then the darned thing just went off the rails. The more Julianne Moore's character went off on her own investigations, the more meandering and "Huh?" the story became. Then by the last half-hour or so, you're just waiting for the whole thing to be over. You've lost hope that it will make sense. Which is good. Because it doesn't.
Pity. It had all the elements for a really first-rate movie; but instead of coming together to form a coherent whole, they all scattered and left the viewer gasping for sense.
I enjoyed it.
Supernatural isn't my cup of tea, but I will give points to Shelter for doing more than just keeping me in my seat. At times, it reminded me of Shyamalan's better days. Though very much a slow mover, Shelter is haunting and gripping, shot perfectly and never too superficial. Julianne Moore, is a compelling lead, and there is enough 'human' in the character to deserve some credit, and earn some sympathy from the viewer. Horror movies almost by nature, don't have a heart, but this is one of the few that has some.
The one problem with the movie, is that the plot is heavy. The first hour may seem a little disoriented, but the scenario brings everything together with enough coherency in the last act. The matter in which it does so however raises some questions that are left unanswered, and could qualify as plot holes.
As a straight to video release, one would not typically set high expectations. Shelter exceeded mine, It's not a film for an impatient viewer, but it's an appetizing ghost story if you are looking for one such film.
The one problem with the movie, is that the plot is heavy. The first hour may seem a little disoriented, but the scenario brings everything together with enough coherency in the last act. The matter in which it does so however raises some questions that are left unanswered, and could qualify as plot holes.
As a straight to video release, one would not typically set high expectations. Shelter exceeded mine, It's not a film for an impatient viewer, but it's an appetizing ghost story if you are looking for one such film.
Started great but then....
There's some great acting in this movie and that helps most of the way through.
However it gets to a point where the acting isn't enough to make up for the story which stops making sense about 2 thirds in.
The amount of questions left unanswered and the sudden lack of sense coupled with plot holes stops this being a great movie and drops it into mediocrity.
Not recommended as it feels unfinished.
However it gets to a point where the acting isn't enough to make up for the story which stops making sense about 2 thirds in.
The amount of questions left unanswered and the sudden lack of sense coupled with plot holes stops this being a great movie and drops it into mediocrity.
Not recommended as it feels unfinished.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizMovie also goes by the title "Shelter". The "6 Souls" is the title for US release.
- BlooperDavid says in his childhood home there are 10 windows; 11 if you count the star in the front door. When Dr. Harding drives to his childhood home, 12 windows are visible, and that is not counting however many there are on the unseen side of the house.
- Citazioni
Cara Harding: Just because you're older, doesn't mean you're right. It could just mean that you've been wrong for longer.
- Curiosità sui creditiGod is the first credited on "the producers wish to thank" part of closing credits.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Projector: Shelter (2013)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is 6 Souls?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 22.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 3.205.167 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 52min(112 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti







