Starve Acre
- 2023
- 1h 38min
VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,4/10
4573
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
L'idilliaca vita familiare rurale di una coppia viene messa a soqquadro quando il figlio inizia a comportarsi in modo strano.L'idilliaca vita familiare rurale di una coppia viene messa a soqquadro quando il figlio inizia a comportarsi in modo strano.L'idilliaca vita familiare rurale di una coppia viene messa a soqquadro quando il figlio inizia a comportarsi in modo strano.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 2 candidature totali
Neilesh Ambu
- Cricketer
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
George Arthur
- Child
- (voce)
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Antony Barlow
- Cricketer
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Lowri Burkinshaw
- Villager
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
As a fan of folk horror, small-production films, and Matt Smith & Morfydd Clark, I admit I might have had too high expectations. Especially since it took two years between the first limited release and the wide release on streaming platforms, the sheer anticipation raised my hopes even more.
With all that in mind, I still feel the film missed its potential because the thing with small production is that it relies on atmosphere-building and a good storyline. And both of those aspects could have been better.
For instance, regarding the atmosphere, I think they succeeded in portraying grief as raw, lasting, and sometimes merged with magical thinking and anger. Sometimes, it's bearable, and the characters even manage to squeeze a smile and get excited about things they work on or even an unexpected family visit. The grief is ever-present but fluctuating in intensity, which feels realistic, unlike Hollywood cliches that tend to go over the top. However, the film lacks in creating suspense due to the pacing and some scenes that feel disjointed. When you think it will pick up and elevate the tension, it moves to another scene.
Which brings us to another issue of storytelling. While the overall idea is good, the film would have benefited from a more developed lore. You quickly learn there is a lot at stake, but they never tell you why, and it somewhat obscures the characters' motivations. Without knowing more about mythology, we fail to see the appeal and the temptation of some choices they make. For this reason, I believe it was challenging to wrap up the film in a satisfactory way, and they chose a tried and "safe" route instead. In theory, it could have worked great, but in practice, it feels stretched and even forced at some times.
The problems might have roots in the original material - Andrew Michael Hurley's book of the same name, as some works of literature are untranslatable to movie screen. Or perhaps the author failed to develop the mythology sufficiently, so the movie crew did not have much to work with. I still haven't read it but intend to, which means that, despite its shortcomings, the film succeeded in provoking some curiosity. And if you drop your expectations - which, sadly, was impossible for me - it may work even better, who knows?
With all that in mind, I still feel the film missed its potential because the thing with small production is that it relies on atmosphere-building and a good storyline. And both of those aspects could have been better.
For instance, regarding the atmosphere, I think they succeeded in portraying grief as raw, lasting, and sometimes merged with magical thinking and anger. Sometimes, it's bearable, and the characters even manage to squeeze a smile and get excited about things they work on or even an unexpected family visit. The grief is ever-present but fluctuating in intensity, which feels realistic, unlike Hollywood cliches that tend to go over the top. However, the film lacks in creating suspense due to the pacing and some scenes that feel disjointed. When you think it will pick up and elevate the tension, it moves to another scene.
Which brings us to another issue of storytelling. While the overall idea is good, the film would have benefited from a more developed lore. You quickly learn there is a lot at stake, but they never tell you why, and it somewhat obscures the characters' motivations. Without knowing more about mythology, we fail to see the appeal and the temptation of some choices they make. For this reason, I believe it was challenging to wrap up the film in a satisfactory way, and they chose a tried and "safe" route instead. In theory, it could have worked great, but in practice, it feels stretched and even forced at some times.
The problems might have roots in the original material - Andrew Michael Hurley's book of the same name, as some works of literature are untranslatable to movie screen. Or perhaps the author failed to develop the mythology sufficiently, so the movie crew did not have much to work with. I still haven't read it but intend to, which means that, despite its shortcomings, the film succeeded in provoking some curiosity. And if you drop your expectations - which, sadly, was impossible for me - it may work even better, who knows?
This movie is well done in most regards, but it'll test your patience right up to your breaking point. I don't need or want a horror movie to be action-packed, but there needs to be a progression of things actually happening. This movie is around 60% slow, moody shots of people or things sitting still (think like in a Yorgos Lanthimos film). These kind of shots can work very well when used in moderation, and when that kind of gravity is earned by the plot, but neither is the case here. There are only a handful of times in this movie when something actually happens, and really only two that are relevant to the overall plot. I love atmospheric and creepy horror, but I had a very hard time focusing on this. By the time it finally ramped up a bit at the end (which is the only good part of the movie), I only had a rough idea of what was happening because my mind had drifted so many times during the tedious, slow dialogue that accounts for around 30% of the runtime. This needed to be at least half an hour shorter. The unearned slow parts just make it feel like a half-baked (although very cool) concept with filler to make it a normal runtime.
"Richard" (Matt Smith), his wife "Jules" (Morfydd Clark) and their young son "Owen" (Arthur Shaw) have moved back to his late father's remote hill farm. Not long after they arrive the young, asthmatic, lad starts to hear a voice that seems to be compelling him to become erratic, even violent. Before his parents get to the bottom of this, though, there's a tragedy that upends their marriage and sees him spend an increasing amount of time doing what he likes to do best - archeology. He is out in all weathers and one day discovers the skeleton of an animal. Meticulously boxing it up, he takes into his study to examine it further. Boy is he in for a surprise and what now ensues takes us all back into his unhappy childhood with a brutish and unloving father and lots of standing about in his underpants. It's starting to look like the folklore surrounding an ancient oak tree that might have been an entrance to the underworld and maybe even the legendary "Dandelion Jack" might be influencing their behaviour as their lives take a turn for the distinctly bizarre. It does fall into place a little at the end, but for the most part this all centres around a jigsaw puzzle of a story with too many bits missing. Even if you do know a little about the underpinning mythology, the narrative still has too many gaps. It might make for a solid enough short film but extending this to ninety minutes puts too much pressure on the underwhelming Smith (and his hair) and the presence of her sister "Harrie" (Erin Richards) for much of their process of grief just doesn't help to create an atmosphere of menace, pity nor, really, of mystery either. There are a couple of wonderfully "Arcati" style performances from local medium "Mrs. Forde" (Melanie Kilburn) but the rest of the drama relies too heavily on it's bleak weather and heavily over-scoring. It's watchable enough, but it reminded me a little of "Enys Men" (2022) - a quirky story that provided us with some bones of the bones of an intriguing story but where near enough meat to sustain much interest.
When their young son dies a couple's lives are thrown into turmoil and things at their rural home start to get very weird. Some reviewers insist that this is not a horror movie but they are mistaken, Starve Acre is a British folk horror movie. Unfortunately it is not a good one. I will start with the positives - Matt Smith is a very versatile actor and again delivers a good performance. In fact the whole cast are good. I liked the 1970's period setting, the clothes, the old vehicles etc. And I thought that the rural Yorkshire location at times gave off a strong feeling of isolation and bleakness at times. What I did not like was the fact that it felt so slow. There are a couple of small jump scares and the odd feeling of dread but I am not lying when I say that I found my eyes closing numerous times when i saw this last night at my local independent cinema. The struggle to stay awake got harder and harder as it went on, if you suffer from insomnia then watching this at home may well cure you. Then there is a very fake looking hare that becomes central to the plot. I will not give away the ending but there were people laughing out loudly (which I found to be quite disrespectful) in the audience. Britain has produced some fine folk horror movies but this entry is sadly near the bottom of the barrel n terms of quality, quite disappointing.
This is a movie that I only found out about through Dead Meat Presents and it had Matt Smith, so I decided to watch the movie and it was okay.
Positives for Starve Acre (2024): Matt Smith gives a good performance as the father and it's easily the best performance in the movie. The sound design in this movie is genuinely creepy and terrifying. The movie takes its time to get to the big climax and when it gets there, it pays off perfectly.
Negatives for Starve Acre (2024): I wasn't all that invested into this story, but I'm rarely invested into folk horror and I can't remember the last time I was invested into a folk horror story.
Overall, Starve Acre (2024) is a decent enough folk horror movie that will appeal more to fans of this subgenre in horror, but it's still a movie that I would still highly recommend this movie if you're a fan of House of the Dragon like me.
Positives for Starve Acre (2024): Matt Smith gives a good performance as the father and it's easily the best performance in the movie. The sound design in this movie is genuinely creepy and terrifying. The movie takes its time to get to the big climax and when it gets there, it pays off perfectly.
Negatives for Starve Acre (2024): I wasn't all that invested into this story, but I'm rarely invested into folk horror and I can't remember the last time I was invested into a folk horror story.
Overall, Starve Acre (2024) is a decent enough folk horror movie that will appeal more to fans of this subgenre in horror, but it's still a movie that I would still highly recommend this movie if you're a fan of House of the Dragon like me.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizIncludes a shot of Donald Sutherland, who starred in Don't Look Now, the classic film of parental grief.
- ConnessioniFeatures Hamlet at Elsinore (1964)
- Colonne sonoreSoon I Will Be Gone
written by Andy Fraser, Paul Rodgers
performed by Free
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Starve Acre?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Бесплодная земля
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Yorkshire Dales, Yorkshire, Inghilterra, Regno Unito(Primary filming location.)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 160.498 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 38min(98 min)
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti