MovieChat Forums > Wolves at the Door (2017) Discussion > Review for Wolves at the Door

Review for Wolves at the Door

posted 7 years ago by JigsawX (265)
9 replies | jump to latest

(Originally posted on fight-evil.com)

*This is my first-time viewing of the film*

The only reason that I sought this movie out was due to Elizabeth Henstridge, who plays one of the main characters in Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, a show I rather enjoy. And as it turns out, aside from Henstridge, this movie doesn't have much going for it. Dramatizing the events of the murder of Sharon Tate and company (purely hinted at until the end), Wolves at the Door is almost utterly run-of-the-mill. If you've seen Ils (2006) or The Strangers (2008), or hell, even The Purge (2013), you've seen a more enthralling and tense movie than this one.

Adam Campbell (Wojciech) has some decent scenes, and if you like the ascetic of someone dragging a sledgehammer across the ground, well, Wolves at the Door has that also. But aside from Elizabeth Henstridge, who does a decent job despite the shallow script, the best I can say is that occasionally good 60's songs play, such as “She's Not There” by The Zombies and “Lil' Red Riding Hood” by Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs.” There's nothing else though – this movie is otherwise empty. And while I wasn't fond of it that first time I saw it, I'm even less fond of it now. Not much here to recommend, folks. 4/10.

[–] cv1cv (470) 7 years ago

If you consider what you write to be "reviews", consider taking a university course on cinema. That's just a start, of course, but it might help you write more than a few shallow opinions about what you "like". If you have thoughts of being a professional critic, don't give up your day job.

[–] JigsawX (265) 7 years ago

I feel as though a collection of thoughts on a film can indeed be called a review, regardless of whether or not it's "shallow."

I appreciate your criticisms, but as I'm not even attempting to make any money off anything I write, nor do I intend to, I don't see what's wrong with writing up my thoughts as I please and share them with others.

Hope this finds you well.

[–] cv1cv (470) 7 years ago

Write all you want. But "a collection of thoughts" is not a review. Lots of people on this board write their thoughts, but they are not so audacious that they call it a "review". I can write a "collection of thoughts" about nuclear physics, but that doesn't mean I know what I'm talking about. Your use of the title "review" at best is misleading.

[–] JigsawX (265) 7 years ago

I entirely disagree, but to each their own.

[–] cv1cv (470) 7 years ago

Disagree and write your opinions all you want, but stop misleading everyone into thinking they're going to read anything more than what everyone else here writes. There's nothing "special" about your opinions. They don't have the insight and level of writing skill that a "review" has. Very few people have such inflated views about the value of their opinions as you do.

[–] JigsawX (265) 7 years ago

I have no idea where you get the thought that I think my views are special. I am one of many people who have seen this movie. Some may have liked it, some didn't. I'm not special, nor are my views. They are simply my views on what I watched.

And I don't use the same definition of "review" as you do, that much has been made clear. Sorry about that.

I'm just confused. Nowhere did I say my word is law. I simply posted a review of a movie on a movie site for people to read. Either they agree, disagree, or don't care. But nowhere did I say I have the right view on the film, or the ultimate answer, or anything like that.

My opinions are my own. I love some horror flicks others hate, and hate some others love. I've never once said that my views should be seen as the right ones, so I have zero idea why you think I conflate my views above others.

[–] cv1cv (470) 7 years ago

I could watch a movie, completely misunderstand what it is about because I don't have more than average insight into the nature of what good cinema is, and then write what I call a "review", but that doesn't mean it has the qualities of review. A review is based on the skill to have insight into cinema that goes beyond that of the average viewer, and it requires the ability to convey this insight. You have given no evidence of either. You are simply an average movie-watcher, just like almost everyone else who writes on these boards. Yet you presume to call your opinions a "review", which is insulting to skilled reviewers and other readers who see the word "review" and expect expertise that you clearly don't have. Calling it a "review" doesn't make it a review. This has nothing to do with whether you think your views are the right one. It has everything to do with a deceptive title to your posts. That's what reveals your inflated view of your opinions. Look around here. How many people call their comments a "review"? I'm sure there are a few other people who throw around that word without basis, but they are quite the exception. Most people just write their opinions without the need to tell everyone that their opinions are a "review". If you are honest in saying that you don't think your opinions are special, then why not just do what everyone else does? Write your opinions without the false use of the word. But I suspect you don't want to do that because that would not bolster your ego. So let's see what you do in the future.

[–] JigsawX (265) 7 years ago

The problem is that I have never used the term "review" the way you do. On IMDb, you can leave reviews on media, ranging from detailed and thought-out multiple paragraph essays to a few cobbled together thoughts on the film. IMDb doesn't distinguish between which are reviews and which aren't.

Never once, in all of my time posting my reviews (on here, and other sites) have I been told what I write aren't reviews, so it seems to me that there is simply a disagreement of definition of terms.

I am an average movie watcher. I write reviews. Just because you don't see them as reviews doesn't mean I should change my phrasing. I don't see calling my writings "reviews" as being dishonest whatsoever, for the exact reason that we see what constitutes a "review" differently.

Like I said, I've been writing reviews for movies for years, and you're the first to say they're not reviews. So maybe, in your view, I am "insulting skilled reviewers," but you are the first one ever to make that claim. Now, maybe a lot of people have the wrong idea of what a review is, but given that you're the first individual to take issue with my calling my thoughts "reviews," I don't really know what you expect.

I don't see my threads as deceptive, and like I said, no one else has either, at least as far as I'm aware.

I will keep calling my thoughts reviews because, unlike your experience, I've never had any issue with the term before. Am I the exception? Has everyone who I have used the term "review" to describe my thoughts on movies the exception? It's possible. But based on my experience, I see no reason to not continue describing my thoughts as reviews.

It has nothing to do with my ego, and everything to do with different definitions of how we see reviews.

Still, I do thank you for your lengthy explanation, and for what it's worth, apologize to you for expecting my post to be more than what it was.

[–] Ant1238 (908) 6 years ago

Woah cv1cv, you're a nutjob. The dude posted his review of the movie. He didn't claim to be a professional movie critic, but whether you like it or not, a collection of thoughts about a film is indeed a review. That word doesn't carry as much weight as you seem to think it does.

(And if your point here is to defend the movie for some reason, sorry, it sucked.)