Entrance

source: Entrance

Not a movie for those with short attention spans. For some reason, quarter of the way through, I started fantasizing about Naomi Watts. I guess something about this reminded me of Mulholland Drive? Don't ask. Maybe it was the "artistic" feel throughout the movie, or the experimental twist of genres, the almost found footage feel, who knows, but the fact that it's considered a thriller may be a bit confusing for some, unless of course you fast-forward to the ending. Now, while being slow and steady, doesn't make it a bad film, I just don't see it being for everyone. Especially not one I think most fans of typical thriller/slasher flicks are looking for. It's mostly a look inside the main character and her daily life as a barista who seems relatively happy and normal until her beloved canine goes missing. Then paranoia kicks in, seemingly small, insignificant events happen and she has a going away party. Boom. Problem I had with this was there were a lot of drawn out, continuous shots, which, although framed excellently considering all the movement with one camera, made it difficult to remain focused on the story. For example, when she's out putting up fliers for her missing dog, they took at least two or three separate scenes to shoot it when it could have been just as easy to do it in one and get back to the story. I also couldn't see how the title fit in, but that's a different matter. Anyway, worth a view, just don't be expecting high anxiety, driven, tension; there are some good money shots for those blood-lusters out there though.

The story line is given as such: "ENTRANCE is about the limits of our perception, how the things lurking on the periphery of our lives can lead to horrific conclusions; about how she fell out of love with the city, but it wouldn't let her go." WOW! Sounds deep and enchanting. For about an hour we watch Suzy (Suziey Block) go through the boring routine of her life, fixing coffee, going to work, feeding the dog...up until he goes missing. It was sheer boredom. We get clues she is being stalked and can't wait for him to attack her so we can watch something besides paint dry. Things start moving at about an hour in a manner that questions if the wait was worth it. I didn't think so. Guide: No nudity. Brief sex scene.

The review by VideEmbolism for this was totally accurate. If you can watch an hour of film and all you missed was the disappearance of the main character's dog, what else is there to say? Let's see the description: ENTRANCE is about the limits of our perception, how the things lurking on the periphery of our lives can lead to horrific conclusions; about how she fell out of love with the city, but it wouldn't let her go. Beyond a shadow of a doubt this description was the best piece of writing from anyone connected to this movie. I have no idea how anyone invested in it. I saw the main actress was an executive producer and thought she could have paid some film students or ONE writer for something more. Maybe it's an artistic film that has an eerie or creepy setting? Nope. I read Stephen King gave this positive reviews. Perhaps he was multi-tasking and writing at the same time. Talk about a guy that can't get his own to film adaptations to work despite being the best-selling author. Perhaps cinematography? Camera angles light? A good soundtrack? No. No. No. I gave it one star for ending. Even the dog actor apparently quit about halfway through the making. It's awful with virtually no redeeming qualities.

I can sum up this movie in 2 words. It Sucked!!! A total waste of time... The main character is a 20's something girl, who shares an apartment with another woman in an undisclosed city. She's slightly paranoid, has obvious anti social behavior, owns a dog and lives with a roommate who always seems to go out of town on the weekends. If I were a professor teaching "Film Making" I would definitely use this flick as an example of "How NOT to Make a Movie". This movie lacks the following basic criteria: 1. Plot, 2. Character development, 3. Meaningful dialog, 4. Transition, 5. Relationships 6. Action, 7. Sensible climax. Bottom line, you would derive more pleasure from watching paint dry.

This movie was absolutely incredible. I couldn't believe that anybody was idiotic enough to greenlight this turdfest. I have never seen a worse movie, and I doubt I ever will. There is zero plot, zero suspense, and absolutely no reason to be interested in what happens to any of the characters. If crap like this passes for movies, I could make an Oscar-winner. I would like to say that there is one tiny, insignificant mote of worth to this movie, but there simply isn't any. No doubt this movie is continually being shown in hell or by the CIA as a superior method of torture. I would gladly choose death over having to watch this movie again.

What a time waster......and I actually sat through the whole thing. Shame on me. I can't believe that this film actually made it to production. The plot was terrible, the acting horrific and there was really no proper storyline. I am the first person to embrace independent works of art but this never captivated me at any time during the entire work, The ending was neither here nor there leaving the viewers with an unsettling feeling as to "what is the purpose of all this?". This movie exudes that empty feeling that one gets when they watch the season finale of a series on TV with the exception that they don't really care one way or the other.

at first this title sounds fresh and promising,i only joined IMDb to warn people,there are films out there that are (arty) and can be interesting,this is not one of them,me and my future wife got crisps and dips and settled down to watch what sounded like a good film ,sadly this was 45 Min's of a woman making coffee and leaving to go to work,then the film picks up when her pet goes missing,that drags on for ever,then add some cheap fake blood and devastatingly poor acting,and then some end credits ...naming and shaming the people that owe you over an hour of your life back,honestly i really was gutted that i planned a evening around this movie,

There are a lot of shills on this board giving this high marks. That's one thing I can say. Are you all friends and family of the filmmakers? To those of you discussing the masterful composition of shots: where? Shots go on for far too long to get them up to feature length, everything could and should have been trimmed drastically on both the head and tail ends. This is essentially a student film. I say this, having been a film student myself and able to recognize the repetition, non-existent pacing and lack of plot that passes for a senior year project. The fact that it took four people to write this is shameful; I wouldn't have advertised the fact that even with four 'writers' working on this there's essentially nothing happening at all. The lead is not a very good actress, she's not compelling to watch and her line delivery is pretty bad. There's a bit cribbed from Fatal Attraction where the lead switches a bedside lamp on and off post empty sexual encounter to symbolize her alienation, my response to this was a resounding 'who cares?' Shot in and around Silverlake and Los Feliz, the only fun to be had is spotting your local landmarks. I'm sure there were lots of excited story discussions in just the right tone of voice so that the other diners knew they were making a film over glasses of red wine at--hmm. I'll take a guess and say it was at Alcove on Hillhurst, though Intelligentsia probably got hit hard too. The 'shocking' ending doesn't make it any good, so don't count on it saving the day. It was probably conceived of as a short and should have stayed that way. How do you rebar two people together? Another rip, this time from a Friday the 13th film, by the way, though I can't remember which one. And I don't know too many hipsters who keep an axe in or around their houses, either. Maybe the killer brought it with him to the party in the back of his Prius. Laughably bad. P.S. It's a blue heeler, not a blue 'healer'. Did you want me to think your protagonist was stupid as well as utterly boring?

The first and only IMDb review I read for this movie said to go into it blindly, so I did without even reading the rest of the review. Going into it blindly is the best advice anyone could give. And if you read the rest of this review, don't worry I won't expose a thing. I won't even tell you what genre this film is (because as far as I can tell it isn't any genre). I'll be honest and say I hated the first 12 minutes because it seemed indulgent & pointless. Also I'm not really a fan of hand-held camera work. But luckily I have a tolerance/attention span of exactly 13 minutes because that's when a story began to develop. And ultimately I realized even those "pointless" 12 minutes had a point. It sets up a very subtle yet pervasive metaphor, the soul of the whole movie. Slowly, so slowly that you might not even notice (which I'm sure was the filmmakers' intent) the film starts to get under your skin. And although the only quantifiable storyline for the first 40 minutes is a girl and her dog, it's done so convincingly and, yes, suspensefully that I was hooked. And that, my friends, is all I will say about the plot because you shouldn't expect anything more. Now a few notes about technique... The directors did something very interesting by never taking the camera off the lead actress throughout the whole movie, not once. Also the camera would sometimes run long, continuous shots without cuts. While this method may sacrifice momentum and some viewer interest, it adds tremendous realism, almost like a documentary feel. And we begin to connect with the heroine even though she doesn't say much. And of course the difficulty in staging the rest of the action while always keeping her in the shot must've been no easy task. The final 22 minutes is a very impressive achievement, all done in one continuous take with a lot going on, and I mean a whole lot. People have called this film "experimental", but there's no experiment about it. This is a fully finished product with a great style, a novel approach, and certainly the most memorable ending I've seen in ages, ending on an image which I can't decide if it's chilling, hilarious or beautiful.