Darling (2015)

That was an excellent one.

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

This film was just too pretentious for me to really get into in any meaningful way. I felt like it was trying way too hard to be some kind of quirky, black and white art-house movie and wound up putting more effort into this contrived style rather than making a movie with any substance. Director Mickey Keating — who also directed Pod, which I reviewed recently, which has literally all the same main characters minus Sean Young, as well as the same music composer AND same cinematographer — definitely knew what kind of mood he was aiming for, but he forgot to put any deep thought into things like dialogue or getting a strong performance out of his characters. I'm not entirely surprised, since Pod had the same issues for me — a good shell of a movie but no substantial filling."Darling" (she is given no other name), played by Lauren Ashley Carter, is a mysterious young girl who is tasked with watching an old, beautiful apartment in the heart of New York City while its wealthy residents are away. She is warned that a previous caretaker threw herself off the balcony, and there is talk of the apartment itself being haunted. Throughout the short time that she is house sitting we watch her descent into madness before her tragic end.** SPOILERS! **I guess my biggest issue with this movie is, as I mentioned, the fact that Keating's focus on style and mood seemed to trump his effort to build a meaningful character with Darling. He had this great opportunity to delve into the topics of gentrification, urban isolation, the trauma of possible sexual assault, and mental illness, to name a few, but he seemed to prefer to simply have a pretty girl stare blankly into the camera. We really never get to know much about her aside from studying every facet of her face since she probably stares into the camera for half the damn movie runtime. I had high hopes when the movie opened up with some impressively stark shots of the city — it's a rare treat when a movie seamlessly blends genuine terror and character development with an abundance of aesthetic beauty — but alas, all I got were some cool upside down shots of skyscrapers and enough shock cuts to make me never want to see another one again in my entire life.All of the mentions of a paranormal side of things — the apartment being haunted, the previous caretaker committing suicide, the mention by her date that a conjuring of the devil was once attempted in the building — are all sadly glossed over, despite the fact that they could have been interesting additions to the plot if they were explored a bit more. It does what many other greats before it have done — blurring the line and making us wonder what is truly paranormal and what is a product of spiraling into madness — but it just doesn't do it nearly as well.The murder of her date was unexpected, and somewhat shocking to witness — him gasping awake unexpectedly and the subsequent suffocation with the plastic bag were particularly hard to watch. But ultimately, like most aspects of the movie — I mean, come on, it's broken into chapters for some inexplicable reason — I felt like it was trying a bit too hard.Then the ending just gets plain cheesy, with her talking to Madame on the phone, hinting again at her past trauma, and saying "I think I'll become one of your ghost stories now" *eye roll*.Overall, YAWN. Pretty to look at? Sure. But I would have preferred it spend more time making me think — or, hell, scaring me — than repeatedly juxtaposing her blank expression with a strobed shot of her screaming face.

Darling follows a woman as she moves into a new house where she slowly, and violently, goes insane. I watched this movie on Hallowe'en night, unsure exactly what I was getting into. I'd been curious about it, but never did I expect this. Let's start with the performances. They're good. The supporting cast is fine, but nothing to write home about. The shining star in all this is the leading actress, Lauren Ashley Carter. Right from her opening scene she was fantastic. The way she delivers dialogue in particular was great, and although she didn't talk much, watching her perform was a treat. The story itself is subtle and engaging. There's a level of mystery that surrounds the entire atmosphere of the film. Not only that, but the character of Darling herself is very interesting. As the movie progresses you as the audience begins to realize that this isn't the beginning of this woman's struggles, but rather a continuation. It's clear that Darling has had a troubled past, and the series of new events unfolding before her in her new home set her mind off in the direction it seemed to have been heading already. Not only that, but Darling acts similarly to a real person in her situation. She begins to fear herself and what she's becomes, and expresses that in scenes that are both very powerful and a little on the hard side to watch. Now, let's get into the most effective aspect of the film: the horror. This is an unnerving and genuinely frightening movie, and I don't say that often. I've been unsettled by a few horror films, but Darling takes the cake for being actually scary. The movie briefly shows images and scenes that are assumed to be Darling's thoughts, and while some people would call this a cheap horror gimmick, I say otherwise. The imagery shown is often somewhat unnerving and vague, and only processing each image for a short second just adds to that. No, they aren't jump scares, there isn't a loud sound to go along with each one, nor are they all that sudden. They become a regular occurrence, but the director Mickey Keating knows exactly when to use each one. Furthermore, there are a handful of scenes that are just plain hard to watch, made all the more effective by the character we have now come to care for. It's a movie you have to see for yourself, but trust me, there are some genuinely unnerving scenes, one in particular involving a bathtub. Overall Darling is not only horrifying but also well-acted and well- written, with an interesting story and great characters. In the end I'd definitely recommend this movie.

Wow! I really admire how they put together this film. The complementary interaction between the sound effects - those harsh, dissonant sounds - and the fuzzy, almost dulled cinematography (interspersed, of course, with those terrifyingly epileptic flashes) really makes for the perfect horror atmosphere. The editing is brilliant. I have a bit of an issue with the pacing of the film overall. The first thirty minutes were kind of dull, despite the jumpscares, and I almost decided to skip over it entirely. The acting, however, is fantastic. I didn't recognize Lauren from Jug Face and Pod, so when I saw other people pointing it out, I found that made sense. Her skill is very obvious in these movies (even in Pod, which was not great to be honest). Looking forward to any other projects she'll be in. The plot is ambiguous, as some people have mentioned, but I think it worked for this film. Darling herself is so mixed up in her mind that nothing comes across as the truth to the audience. Not being able to figure out any concrete answers is a part of how uneasy this film can make you, in my opinion. (And adding to that mysterious eeriness is the scene in the middle of the credits! Really left me wanting more.) Ultimately, I found this to be a very well made film, a clear labor of love in the name of horror, dependent on the actors' performances and the conceptualization. Something like this is very divisive: you either love it, or you hate it. And I really loved it.

The first part (I only watched it for 30 minutes, got grossed out by graphic stabbing scene) was good.Great acting and camera work.I'll go back, see the rest another time! I only learned Sean Young in is the movie as "Madame" after I researched to the movie on WWW.IMDb.Com.I doubt "Madame" as the landlady seen at the start of the movie in the opening scene with Lauren Carter (the star of the movie who played "Darling," and did a great job!). Sean Young was a great beauty when she was a young girl in Bladerunner (1982) and No Way Out (1988), and is only in her 50's, probably is still good looking. The landlady I saw was not, but who knows? Maybe Sean had a lot of makeup on or fell on hard times. I only saw about 20 minutes of so of the movie (until the part where "Darling" violently stabs a guy she picks up in a bar.....nice "regular guy" type guy who didn't expect to be murdered!).I saw this movie in a strange movie house for experimental movies called "Zoetropolis" located at 315 James. St. in Lancaster PA USA, and had just come from a terrible dinner I ate (and paid $60 for at the Lancaster Arts Hotel very near the Zoetropolis location (which movie house is in an old industrial building and doubles as Yoga teaching place!).The candy I bought before the movie at the Zoetropolis for $3 was also terrible, and the after taste of the bad dinner didn't go away.All this made it hard to watch the movie and give it a chance. I was jumpy, and couldn't stomach the slasher stabbing scene (I'm a retired 72 year old movie actor, and never got used to the modern slasher horror movies the younger people love so much and can't get enough of ....Nightmare On Elm St. and all the movies which came after that for decades!).I really did like the opening of the movie, which reminded me of Woody Allen's Manhattan (1980) movie showing New York City (Manhattan) in black and white outdoor scenes on a wet day, the office and apt. buildings, etc. etc. Great images.I also liked pretty Lauren Carter. She plays "Darling" and does a very good job.She is very pretty, very big eyes like an old time "Keene" drawing of orphan girls with big eyes.She is very short (only 5'1") and the photographer didn't hide that well, or try to hide it at all.She might become a pro model is the short stature doesn't get in her way, or if she can sell employers on shooting around the fact there is not much of her there.She is very pretty, and has good curves in all the right places. There is a frontal nude scene from the waist up, and she looks very good in that. Could do nude modeling and glamor modeling if she wanted to, and use that clip in her portfolio.I was reminded of Anne Paillard (of France), the famous fashion model (tall and skinny) who became a movie star of fame when she was chosen to play "Nikita," the French govt. paid assassin working for the govt. in the movie titled "Le Femmme Nikita" (1992 or so).Lauren Carter carried the entire part of the movie I saw (about 30 minutes, maybe 30 minutes) and did a very good job. She was a one man band, and that is very hard to pull off....but she did it! I saw the movie at the wrong place (the Zoetropolis Movie Theater located in an industrial building in Lancaster PA at 315 James St.). I went outside to the "lobby" of the Zoetropolis to sit down and recover from the stabbing scene, but the man who sold me my ticket earlier told me to get out of the lobby because a big Yoga Class was going on...in the lobby. About 10 girls, a lady teacher, and a single man...the ticket salesman.