I no longer understand the world. I really think that can only fans of Daniel Radcliffe carried away with such positive outgrowths. I can understand that basically, he's a good actor who has unfortunately resorted to this film totally in the toilet. (I wish that he not thereby downgrades his career because he is too much more capable.) In this film, the potential was by no performer anywhere near scratched and the events are always foresee. I who sucks all cross border in to be a great movie fan for 25 years (from Mary Poppins to The Evil Dead), I must unfortunately connect the "Mies makers" here: this movie is illogical, not really exciting and concludes with an end which to shock the audience, but somehow langweilend target. I wonder just whether someone who finds this film great and spine-tingling moderately, probably dead falls in shock when the Exorcist (1973) or as regards ...? :-) Was that mean?
Conclusion: Only for someone great who has seen in his life still NOT a scary movie - and of course Radcliffe fans.
And what I need to get rid of again (because I see here for some time more often): I find it really "beneath the sod" if someone constantly negative reviews "unhelpful" rating just because it does not fit the opinions of others! This is really poor. Such people are probably the ones who always used to cast the first stone ... (brings sinners to silence!). Often negative reviews are extremely well-written and well-founded. Everyone has the right to his opinion, even if others do not go so compliant. Perhaps simply breath times and think before you click the button of anger or disappointment. It ultimately depends on the content / significance of a review, not whether it suits me personally. Thanks.
