Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews15
lauralmhs's rating
I really enjoyed this movie! I watched it last night (alas, on the small screen) and came in to work this morning recommending it to all my co-workers.
The Walk recounts the remarkable true story of Philippe Petit's no-less-than-legendary tightrope walk between the towers of the World Trade Center in 1974.
I was just a teenager when this remarkable exploit took place, literally above the heads of early-morning Downtown office workers, and only vaguely remember the way it happened, but watching this movie brought to the fore the background story of how Petit first became enamored of the Twin Towers and the immense planning that went into this stunt. I would imagine that few who know of Petit realize that he had quite a retinue working behind the scenes with him, so this movie is their story as well.
Being a New Yorker (and one who works Downtown, no less), what I found so amazing in the retelling of this tale was the nonchalant way that Petit and his cohorts, during both the planning and execution of this feat, managed to access the upper deck of the World Trade Center virtually unchallenged while it was still in the very midst of being constructed! Anyone who works Downtown today (in the sad aftermath of 9/11) will marvel at how lax security was in those innocent times.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt did a fabulous job in this role. He is so charming and so engaging as the goal-oriented, indeed obsessed, but always good-natured Petit. You cannot help but get swirled up in his enthusiasm for his plan, which he and his accomplices have dubbed "The Coup" for the extraordinary headline-grabbing event that it turned out to be.
One of the things I loved most about this movie, in addition to the infectious élan of the protagonist, were the scenes of New York from 1974. Generally speaking, I do NOT care for special effects, but the CGI here was extremely authentic in the way it reconstructed New York from 40+ years ago. Considering how different this ever-changing city looked all those years ago, the effects were very realistic to the time. The scenes from the top of the WTC showing the streets below were nothing short of awesome and again, very realistic. Knowing Downtown as I do I was able to pick out many individual landmarks with which I am so familiar. I also loved the scenes - again, computer-generated - where Petit is narrating his story from the torch of the Statue of Liberty, with the 1974 outline of Downtown in the background, an outline which in reality is very different today since the advent of Battery Park City and World Financial Center (which were in fact built on landfill from the excavation of the WTC). This is my long-winded way of pointing out that someone did his homework in the making of this movie, and this New Yorker is thoroughly impressed with the finely detailed results!
This movie was downright thrilling! It was extremely suspenseful, to a point toward the end where I was watching it curled up in a tense little ball and peeking through my fingers - even though I knew it was going to end on a triumphant note - as Petit performs his death-defying (and police-defying, LOL) antics on the tightrope he has so painstakingly rigged.
Speaking of the ending, that was what I truly loved most about this movie. What I found so touching was the way the movie came across ultimately as a paean or love story to our beloved Twin Towers. It brought tears to my eyes.
In conclusion, a very entertaining movie. (Perhaps a tad too long, but still wonderful.) I only wish I had got to see it on the big screen where it deserves to be seen. It takes almost a suspension of belief to grasp that the central event of this movie really took place. But it did. Only in New York.....
The Walk recounts the remarkable true story of Philippe Petit's no-less-than-legendary tightrope walk between the towers of the World Trade Center in 1974.
I was just a teenager when this remarkable exploit took place, literally above the heads of early-morning Downtown office workers, and only vaguely remember the way it happened, but watching this movie brought to the fore the background story of how Petit first became enamored of the Twin Towers and the immense planning that went into this stunt. I would imagine that few who know of Petit realize that he had quite a retinue working behind the scenes with him, so this movie is their story as well.
Being a New Yorker (and one who works Downtown, no less), what I found so amazing in the retelling of this tale was the nonchalant way that Petit and his cohorts, during both the planning and execution of this feat, managed to access the upper deck of the World Trade Center virtually unchallenged while it was still in the very midst of being constructed! Anyone who works Downtown today (in the sad aftermath of 9/11) will marvel at how lax security was in those innocent times.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt did a fabulous job in this role. He is so charming and so engaging as the goal-oriented, indeed obsessed, but always good-natured Petit. You cannot help but get swirled up in his enthusiasm for his plan, which he and his accomplices have dubbed "The Coup" for the extraordinary headline-grabbing event that it turned out to be.
One of the things I loved most about this movie, in addition to the infectious élan of the protagonist, were the scenes of New York from 1974. Generally speaking, I do NOT care for special effects, but the CGI here was extremely authentic in the way it reconstructed New York from 40+ years ago. Considering how different this ever-changing city looked all those years ago, the effects were very realistic to the time. The scenes from the top of the WTC showing the streets below were nothing short of awesome and again, very realistic. Knowing Downtown as I do I was able to pick out many individual landmarks with which I am so familiar. I also loved the scenes - again, computer-generated - where Petit is narrating his story from the torch of the Statue of Liberty, with the 1974 outline of Downtown in the background, an outline which in reality is very different today since the advent of Battery Park City and World Financial Center (which were in fact built on landfill from the excavation of the WTC). This is my long-winded way of pointing out that someone did his homework in the making of this movie, and this New Yorker is thoroughly impressed with the finely detailed results!
This movie was downright thrilling! It was extremely suspenseful, to a point toward the end where I was watching it curled up in a tense little ball and peeking through my fingers - even though I knew it was going to end on a triumphant note - as Petit performs his death-defying (and police-defying, LOL) antics on the tightrope he has so painstakingly rigged.
Speaking of the ending, that was what I truly loved most about this movie. What I found so touching was the way the movie came across ultimately as a paean or love story to our beloved Twin Towers. It brought tears to my eyes.
In conclusion, a very entertaining movie. (Perhaps a tad too long, but still wonderful.) I only wish I had got to see it on the big screen where it deserves to be seen. It takes almost a suspension of belief to grasp that the central event of this movie really took place. But it did. Only in New York.....
Darling is HORRIBLE! ....But in a good way.... Well, mostly....
Briefly, the story revolves around a rather odd young woman (whose back story we unfortunately know nothing about) who takes a job as a house- sitter in an old New York City mansion reputed to be haunted.
I ordinarily hate blood and guts in my horror, preferring my horror to be of a more "psychological" nature. (I would rather have a "horror" movie get into my head and work on my nerves than have it punch me in the stomach and work on my viscera.) But although this movie has gore aplenty, I can almost overlook it (not easy in this case) in favor of the aspects of the film that got to me on more of a cerebral level.
I've always maintained that what you DON'T see is infinitely scarier than what you do see, and this is why I give this movie pluses as well as minuses. I would give is a much higher rating if it had toned down the gore factor. As someone who has always had a taste for horror, I can honestly say that this movie had tremendous potential, but alas it was just too gory for my tastes.
That being said, what I did like so much about this movie is that it has elements of many of my favorites: It is reminiscent of Rosemary's Baby in its setting, Carnival of Souls in the internal isolation of the protagonist, Psycho in its black & white format, The Haunting in its creepy use of sound effects and lighting, and The Innocents in its raising of the question "Is it her or is it the house?" Moreover, it fits right into the current trend in horror movies whose strength lies in their sense of tension and foreboding. One scene in this movie where a door slams in a deadly quiet bedroom nearly gave me heart failure. I know that doesn't sound terribly exciting, but THAT is the kind of horror I love!
Even though I feel that Darling borrowed from many of the greats, I still feel that it was something very unlike anything I've ever seen before in its minimalist, stylistic, artsy rendering: The flashing lights and hallucinogenic imagery (which you are actually warned about after the opening credits, something I've never seen done before in a movie), the music (sometimes just eerie, at other times spine-tingling), and the editing (spliced with lightning fast, almost subliminal scenes of horror). Honorable mention goes to the lovely, ghostly, "haunting" images of New York City which pepper the film.
There are scenes from this movie (some gory and stomach-churning, others just plain creepy and genuinely frightening) that will be indelibly etched in your memory.
Although I was, for the most part, impressed with the basic artistry of this film, my biggest gripe is my feeling that the movie can't decide what it really wants to be. It's almost like two movies in one, straddling the line between two sub-genres of horror: slasher/gore horror smack dab in the middle, sandwiched between two slices of strictly psychological horror toward the beginning and again at the end.
Another fault I found is that while I have no problem with "open-ended" movies, or movies that leave the viewer wondering, there were just too many unanswered questions to the plot, chiefly concerning the identity of Darling's oh-so-unfortunate victim. Was he just some random pick-up that the protagonist was merely "projecting" onto, or did he have an actual history in her past? Was the house really haunted or is our star just a psychopath, or both? I actually viewed it twice, thinking that I would glean more the second time around, to little avail.
Oh, a word about the acting. There are few characters in the story, and little dialogue, but the movie is carried by the excellent acting ability and facial expressions of the lead. There is a scene where she opens up a door to a hitherto forbidden room, clutches her hair and screams in horror - at what, we don't know, but I thought that scene was great! There is another scene at the end where you can almost see the circles darkening under her eyes as she grimly contemplates what she ultimately does (which I won't give away, but suffice to say I also loved the scene where she tells the owner of the house over the phone that she's going to become her next ghost story. Chilling!)
Despite the aforementioned (not insubstantial) gore factor, I was pretty impressed with Darling and would love to see more movies like this from this director.
Briefly, the story revolves around a rather odd young woman (whose back story we unfortunately know nothing about) who takes a job as a house- sitter in an old New York City mansion reputed to be haunted.
I ordinarily hate blood and guts in my horror, preferring my horror to be of a more "psychological" nature. (I would rather have a "horror" movie get into my head and work on my nerves than have it punch me in the stomach and work on my viscera.) But although this movie has gore aplenty, I can almost overlook it (not easy in this case) in favor of the aspects of the film that got to me on more of a cerebral level.
I've always maintained that what you DON'T see is infinitely scarier than what you do see, and this is why I give this movie pluses as well as minuses. I would give is a much higher rating if it had toned down the gore factor. As someone who has always had a taste for horror, I can honestly say that this movie had tremendous potential, but alas it was just too gory for my tastes.
That being said, what I did like so much about this movie is that it has elements of many of my favorites: It is reminiscent of Rosemary's Baby in its setting, Carnival of Souls in the internal isolation of the protagonist, Psycho in its black & white format, The Haunting in its creepy use of sound effects and lighting, and The Innocents in its raising of the question "Is it her or is it the house?" Moreover, it fits right into the current trend in horror movies whose strength lies in their sense of tension and foreboding. One scene in this movie where a door slams in a deadly quiet bedroom nearly gave me heart failure. I know that doesn't sound terribly exciting, but THAT is the kind of horror I love!
Even though I feel that Darling borrowed from many of the greats, I still feel that it was something very unlike anything I've ever seen before in its minimalist, stylistic, artsy rendering: The flashing lights and hallucinogenic imagery (which you are actually warned about after the opening credits, something I've never seen done before in a movie), the music (sometimes just eerie, at other times spine-tingling), and the editing (spliced with lightning fast, almost subliminal scenes of horror). Honorable mention goes to the lovely, ghostly, "haunting" images of New York City which pepper the film.
There are scenes from this movie (some gory and stomach-churning, others just plain creepy and genuinely frightening) that will be indelibly etched in your memory.
Although I was, for the most part, impressed with the basic artistry of this film, my biggest gripe is my feeling that the movie can't decide what it really wants to be. It's almost like two movies in one, straddling the line between two sub-genres of horror: slasher/gore horror smack dab in the middle, sandwiched between two slices of strictly psychological horror toward the beginning and again at the end.
Another fault I found is that while I have no problem with "open-ended" movies, or movies that leave the viewer wondering, there were just too many unanswered questions to the plot, chiefly concerning the identity of Darling's oh-so-unfortunate victim. Was he just some random pick-up that the protagonist was merely "projecting" onto, or did he have an actual history in her past? Was the house really haunted or is our star just a psychopath, or both? I actually viewed it twice, thinking that I would glean more the second time around, to little avail.
Oh, a word about the acting. There are few characters in the story, and little dialogue, but the movie is carried by the excellent acting ability and facial expressions of the lead. There is a scene where she opens up a door to a hitherto forbidden room, clutches her hair and screams in horror - at what, we don't know, but I thought that scene was great! There is another scene at the end where you can almost see the circles darkening under her eyes as she grimly contemplates what she ultimately does (which I won't give away, but suffice to say I also loved the scene where she tells the owner of the house over the phone that she's going to become her next ghost story. Chilling!)
Despite the aforementioned (not insubstantial) gore factor, I was pretty impressed with Darling and would love to see more movies like this from this director.