User reviews

Not quite certain of the horror or thriller elements here, but this does take us on a psychological journey with somehing creepy and supernatural underlying the plot of the film. This is a subtle film without much in the way of external scares. This is a slow descent into the psychology of a lonely but sweet girl and how manipulation can come from unlikely sources. Enchanting almost and worth a watch if you enjoy a slow burn film. Nicely produced for the retro feel.

There is something here. Something that is not fully explored, but there is also hints and nods to classic horror movies. Like haunted house ones or ones with weird unknown old people in the same house the protagonist is in. Or are they really there? Or even better: who are they? Do we get to see that person? Not here, because the aunt who is helped by her niece here, does not like anyone to enter her room. Or do stuff in that large house of hers.

You could re-watch this and probably find things you didn't notice the first time around. Or at least see them in a different light. Then again you may already see a couple of things, especially if you are film savvy, the first time around. As stated above the potential is there, but it's not always fully explored. And I don't just mean tone-wise or in the form of getting rid of shells/clothes to bare something deep skinned. The movie does seem to play it safe in certain areas and yet there is a lot of subtext. There is a lot of things that you can interpret however you see fit ... What will it be?

This is an extremely slowwww movie with no pay off. I have no idea why this is on Shudder in their "A good scare" section. This is not a horror movie, or even a thriller, just a boring drama.

This is gorgeously reminiscent of the art-house horror of the 70s, and everything from the camera work to the sound track was just perfect.

Well acted, well-filmed, and well-edited, and definitely worth a watch, but the film consistently made promises it couldn't keep. The ending is rushed, and while the conclusion was semi-satisfying, the path there was ragged. There were great evocative, repetitive images that never even got a nod as far as anything that could give them depth or meaning. And the jump from "here" to "there" was just a little bit TOO art-house, leaving far more questions than were required.

It seems that filmmakers are so afraid of dumbing down plot points that they leave them too abstract in an effort to be more arty or erudite. I think this film could have further explored some of the basic premises without risking its artistic integrity. And the jump to the final setup could definitely used a longer bridge. Instead of being left with the haunted feeling they were trying so hard to evoke, I was left a bit disappointed and hollow. I think it would have been less disappointing if the foundation hadn't been so well done. A bad film is almost easier to watch than a "should have been" film.

This is worth the watch for style alone. Just don't expect as much substance or depth as the opening seems to promise.

Lonely Adele moves in with her agoraphobic aunt to take care of her and get some money for her family and meets a free-spirited peer who leads her down a dark path.

Those uninterested in slow paced character studies would be wise to swipe Sweet, Sweet Lonely Girl off their watch list immediately. Even those who enjoy such films might find parts of the journey interesting even when the destination isn't much to write home about. Performances are mostly decent to fairly good and the film is beautifully shot, evoking a 70's/early 80's mood right from the start. There are moments when the film could sit comfortably alongside the likes of Let's Scare Jessica To Death, The Nesting, or even the more recent House of the Devil. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to know how to end in a satisfying fashion and all that great mood and build up feels like it was all for naught.

For style as for the movie thank you for Wasting My Time like time is free I came for entertainment I got bored

This movie is hard to analyze because there is more than meets the eye, there is a constant horror and evil heavily breathing underground just expecting to come out at any moment and you can get the hints during the film. I liked the story as it comes, from the beginning you sense that something bad is going to happen and you get intrigued by that. The atmosphere, photography , and performances nothing bad to say, on the contrary is what gives an extra point to this film and somehow compensates the lack of rhythm because it can get a little bit slow at some points of the film but nothing to worry, at the end everything comes together. Not a movie for everybody, it is all about preferences ( I'm not trying to intimidate or discriminate anyone) and Sweet Sweet Lonely Girl has more intrigue that horror...DISTURBING is the accurate word for this movie. Do not expect typical scare-jump or monsters hiding beneath the bed, this film will leave a mark on you and keep you thinking about the end with as bitter taste in your mouth

A fairly 7 and enjoy!

I can't really comment on this movie, let alone give my review, because I don't know wtf I just saw, all I know it was really darkling loveliness, very much so , totally well written even though I have no idea wtf... lol, I can definitely say one thing, A.D. Calvo, this is his last film on his list of films but my first of his to see, I came here cause of the terrific! thespian Quinn Shephard; fell in love with the sweetness of an angel named Erin Wilhelmi in all her creepy lovely melancholic adorableness - just have to see it to actually believe this ending, what a ride, hella awesomely weird - I mean H.P. Lovecraft can't compose something this awfully creepy! But yet so cute all at the same time!

This atmospheric gem is comparable to the same-year film The Caretaker. Both are great bookends for scary-old-lady films made famous at first by Bette Davis. Creepy, artsy, with some sexual scenes but no nudity. No ghosts either.