I've been a horror fan for 40+ years, so my opinion of the genre is informed by an awful lot of experience. "Hosts" is by no means the worst film I've ever seen, not by a long shot. It's also not the best, either. Reviewers that state the former are engaging in unjustifiable hyperbole; reviewers that state the latter are probably shills for the film. If this was the worst (horror) film you've ever seen, then you haven't seen many films, and I wouldn't trust your opinions.
As for my take, this is definitely one where the first half falls into the slow burn category -- too slow, I think, as the film makers could have pared down the first 40 minutes by at least 10-15 minutes and still maintained a good build up to the pivotal scene. I thought the acting was serviceable, and the directing competent if not inspired. There were a few shots here and there that would make for pretty cool movie posters, but, overall, the cold glowing blue eyes thing doesn't hold the creep factor.
Where the film really falls flat is the script. The story is pretty well nonsensical and basically just serves as a vehicle to inflict a bunch of violence on an unsuspecting family. The possession angle isn't explored to any significant degree, we never find out WHY anything is happening, and the end of the film isn't satisfying in any way. The best scenes would have been much more powerful in a better film.
If I had to break down my review as to why I give it 4 out of 10, I'd say 1 star for the actors, who did well with a not-great script, 1 star for the directing / cinematography, 2 stars for that pivotal scene in the middle of the film, which could be truly shocking for less experienced viewers.
1 out of 1 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tell Your Friends