At first, I thought that Walled In would be a pretty good movie. The opening scene was great but as soon as I heard the voice over, I was thinking that the movie might not represent the novel well. When a movie is based on a book written in first person, it's normally filled with voice overs of the narrator's constant thoughts. Sort of like Twilight.
It wasn't that good. Really. Twenty minutes in, I kept thinking how exaggerated and bad Mischa Barton's acting was. She kept reciting her lines awkwardly and it had no flow. The emphasis on her words made it feel like, maybe she wasn't listening and she's just saying everything randomly. However, towards the ending, her acting got better. But that's only because she was screaming most of the time and I gave her the benefit of the doubt that maybe her character, Samantha's just a bad liar.
The plot itself was confusing and it made the entire movie seem like the most interesting thing there was the building. They put in a million random shots that were left unexplained and then gave some kind of random solution at the end. An example of this is the mother's crazy talk to Jimmy's father. That was "answered" by the fact that she was talking about Malestrazza. But it still didn't answer whether or not she meant to put him there. I mean, it WAS his tomb. He WANTED to be there.
Were there any ghosts in there? Was Malestrazza psychic? I certainly don't know. Sam kept hearing voices and Malestrazza was really weird. It became hard to tell whether or not it involved ghosts or if everything was just gore.
Who the heck was Jimmy and what was he doing? First it seems like he's just an insane child, next it seems he's just the victim of his mother's insanity. Then, suddenly he's some kind of cruel mastermind and then he's suddenly just a teenage boy in love, again.
This movie would only be good for those who can overlook detail and like to think. Everyone else will just get confused or think it's lame.
It wasn't that good. Really. Twenty minutes in, I kept thinking how exaggerated and bad Mischa Barton's acting was. She kept reciting her lines awkwardly and it had no flow. The emphasis on her words made it feel like, maybe she wasn't listening and she's just saying everything randomly. However, towards the ending, her acting got better. But that's only because she was screaming most of the time and I gave her the benefit of the doubt that maybe her character, Samantha's just a bad liar.
The plot itself was confusing and it made the entire movie seem like the most interesting thing there was the building. They put in a million random shots that were left unexplained and then gave some kind of random solution at the end. An example of this is the mother's crazy talk to Jimmy's father. That was "answered" by the fact that she was talking about Malestrazza. But it still didn't answer whether or not she meant to put him there. I mean, it WAS his tomb. He WANTED to be there.
Were there any ghosts in there? Was Malestrazza psychic? I certainly don't know. Sam kept hearing voices and Malestrazza was really weird. It became hard to tell whether or not it involved ghosts or if everything was just gore.
Who the heck was Jimmy and what was he doing? First it seems like he's just an insane child, next it seems he's just the victim of his mother's insanity. Then, suddenly he's some kind of cruel mastermind and then he's suddenly just a teenage boy in love, again.
This movie would only be good for those who can overlook detail and like to think. Everyone else will just get confused or think it's lame.