Horns_360P

awesome

😘

You would think that Daniel Jacob Radcliffe would be type cast, with a character like Harry Potter. However, that is not the case with the master pieces of a film called "Horns". I am not a large fan of horror, but this film is more of a murder mystery, that keeps you guessing on who done it, to the very end. Daniel Jacob Radcliffe character, girl, has been murdered and he knows, he didn't do it. For some reason he grows horns and sees everyone secret desires, which leads to him to the truth of finding the murder of his beloved girlfriend. Its one of the thoughts stories when you fall in love with your first girlfriend and you will be happy forever, well this one kind of ends that way. Note to self while watching this film, don't trust anyone, and stay focus on the main character, even though me might be weird to look at. This film show a good creative why of how evil is used to find good at the end.

The movie started off with pure brilliance, although Daniel Radcliffe was struggling with his American accent still he managed to pull it off amazingly. As the movie started it took off perfectly, the wit, the acting and the storyline. However, as the movie progressed things started to dwindle there was less of wit more of pain and suffering with a absolutely predictable revelation of what was going on. Ig, was in love with the Perrin, she loved him back but couldn't marry him. Why? because of reasons. Earlier in the movie they had shown that girl had cancer. And when Lee couldn't see Ig's horns, kaboom, he's the bad guy. Why? because he was the only one wearing cross and couldn't see his horns and where did the cross come from? when he killed Perrin and took off her cross. And boy was I right? LOL.It started so original but failed to conclude in the same manner.

First I want to say that the book frustrated me; not because of the story which I found to be quite interesting but the way it was written was not professional. I am no fan of Joe Hill but I did prefer the movie to the book. Daniel Radcliffe did a nice job as Igg and his talent as an actor is growing though I did find some scenes to be a little annoying - but that's just me. I wasn't bored at all with the film and it did keep me entertained. I give credit to the director and film crew who did a wonderful job piecing together the script from the book as I personally felt that the hard work creating a visual from the novel worked quite well.

DO NOT waste your time on this. I am a fan of the so bad it's good horror genre but I am also a fan of straight good horrors. This was neither. This could have been a bizarre, but interesting film- but instead it full on jumped the shark. What made it worst was the first 3/4ths of the film was interesting/good enough that I was enjoying it- and I continuously was curious what would happen next. What absolutely derailed this film was the last 30-40 minutes. It just gets really bad...and at one point I was slapping my hand to my forehead. I compare it to being 3/4th in to a really delicious steak and then someone throws sand in your mouth and makes you swallow. Don't really remember the good part of that meal, now do ya? This only gets a 5/10 from me because it started decent. I really would love to give it a 2...or a 1...I really don't want to even call this a film. Just don't torture yourself by watching this thing...unless your into that sort of thing.

I was very excited to go see this movie because I've been a Daniel Radcliffe fan for a long time now and the trailer seemed very promising. Well, that wasn't the case. It was one of the most stupid movies I've ever seen and trust me, I've seen a lot of them. The graphics were simply terrible and the storyline kept dropping to a mutual 'boring'. Frankly, everyone at the cinema hall was glad that movie finally ended. It was pure torture. Another thing I don't understand is how it's certified as horror, there is honestly nothing horror about this movie. It was so bad at the end that it was kind of hilarious. Don't waste your time, go see Annabelle because Horns isn't worth your money.

Since the Harry Potter series ended, Daniel Radcliffe has been successfully making an effort to break away from the mold. His first post-Harry role was the Hammer flick "The Woman in Black", and then he played a college-age Allen Ginsberg in "Kill Your Darlings". Now he stars in an adaptation of "Horns", by Stephen King's son Joe Hill.* I interpreted this story of a murder suspect who who sprouts horns and develops the ability to make people talk frankly about their past as a reminder that no one totally knows anyone. Or it could simply be a plain old thriller. Whatever the case, I found it one of the year's most interesting movies. It's no masterpiece, but I liked it. A couple of points for Gryffindor, one might say. *Hill is named after the executed labor activist.

The movies first 1/3 is very faithful to the book and I can live with poor casting choices. However what destroys the fantastic story by Joe Hill is the schlock horror and bizarre ending sequence which left a sour taste in my mouth and made me wish I hadn't bothered. Radcliff gives it a go, but the script is all over the place. I can't understand why they didn't follow and develop some sub plots that were in the book, and still managed a 2 hour movie with stuff that wasn't in the book and weakened the original tale. The book is essentially a love story with a twist on how others see and judge themselves and the others around them. The movie is some strange Christian tale of redemption and uber violence which seems to infest the majority of Hollywood movies. Avoid.