simple question, and i'd appreciate a proper response. i would have rated it at least a 6, maybe a 7, but 4.7 is a bit harsh!
it was a good premise, decent acting, and whilst the ending isn't great, the twist that you discover with the whole zachary thing is interesting and i think makes up for it.
besides, that little kid scared the absolute *beep* outta me.
This film is absolute crap, like the retarded offspring of Gattaga and Pet Cemetary.
shareGodsend is a lot better then Hide and Seek.
They both had a similar premsie, but Hide and Seek had a Horrible ending!
Godsend had good performances, Hide and Seek had Horrid Acting.
Godsend should be atleast '5' Hide and Seek should be ay '4.2'
Dont bring Gattaca into this jollyrot - that film is class
shareIt really wasn't a very good movie...the story was kind of contrived, the acting was over the top for the most part and the ending was a cop out.
share[deleted]
I can see why not many people liked this film although I'd give it about a 6 so I don't get why it's rated so low???
Hide and Seek was awesome, I loved it!
"HOW MUCH BLOOD WILL YOU SHED TO STAY ALIVE?"
I was going to give it a 5, but Greg Kinnear's extreme blandness and over acting, plus Rebecca Romijn-Stamos annoying-ness encouraged me to go lower. The two main characters were superfical and empty and I didn't care a hoot about them. If a movie can't make me care about the people I'm supposed to watch for 2 hours, it's a failure as far as I'm concerned.
Life is never fair, and perhaps it is a good thing for most of us that it is not.
"4.7? why is this rated so poorly?"
'Cause it sucks. First of all, this movie was not even scary. Second, it made absolutely no sense, it just felt like it was all pasted together. And third, the mom screaming, "ADAM!!!! ADAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!" was getting extremely annoying and I wanted to shoot her. But yeah, that's about it.
"Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?" - Monty Python and the Holy Grailshare
I really hate directors that beat the audience over the head with the theme of their films, and go for the cryptic approach (Michael Haneke and Richard Kelly, the latter of which made ONE good movie {Donnie Darko} come to mind). I can't stand it. A movie can have a hidden meaning. But you can also get the hidden meaning across without making the whole movie about it. That's pretty much why I detested this movie, as it's a movie that only makes sense when you watch it with the commentary track on. That, to me, is a sign that it completely fails as a film. Spoilers in the next paragraph.
So basically their kid dies, and the parents take his DNA and clone it, and artificially inseminate her so she could have her kid again. OK my first problem here is, first off, why did the couple act as if the Adam clone was their first and only child? Also, the twist doesn't make sense. So basically Zachary looks like Adam and what not, and Zachary JUST SO HAPPENED to had died on the exact day as Adam, and was exactly 8 years and 1 day old just like Adam. Huh?!!?!?!?!?!?!?! Did Zachary have some kind of relation to Adam or something? Or nevermind, it's probably just lazy writing, as that just seems like a rushed way of capping the story with a twist.
"Have you heard what is coming to us all?"- Iron Maiden, When the Wild Wind Blows
I rated it a 5. The movie was alright but not good. Quite boring actually
share