Sorry, this movie sucks

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Its a movies that shows how greed and stubbornness can ruin not only the person's life but it ruins the lives of everyone related or knows him. Wilfred james is a farmer who lives with his wife arlette and their 14 yrs old son henry he decides one day to take an action that would turn his and his family's life upsidedown just for a financial benefit and drag his son with him to aid him in this act. We see through the movie how this affected him and his son in an unforgiving destiny and how their minds were twisted out of guilt and the fear that the truth would be exposed. Thomas jane performance was amazing 9/10 Molly parker performance was not complete ( as the focus on the protagonist) 6/10 As for dylan schmid in my opinion he portrayed the character maybe much more better than it was written 9/10 Overall the movie is entertaining if you're a fan of the psychological thrillers thats a good one Thanks

"1922" tells the story of a despicable man and how he dealt with his life after murdering his own wife with his son's help. Throughout the entire film, I never felt bad for Wilfred. Beginning to end, I hated him. With the story being told from his perspective, I saw how the character cared for no one except himself and his son. THIS WAS MY PROBLEM WITH THE MOVIE. The story was pretty good and, at times, scary, the message was there but the movie was told from the eyes of someone I hate. If it was not narrated and had been told as a horror-thriller-drama kind of movie, it could have been so much better. The one aspect of "1922" that I can praise, good story and scary scenes aside, are the performances of Thomas Jane, Dylan Schmid and Molly Parker. They were amazing.Overall, "1922" had major storytelling issues but it is an okay film.

The times changing quickly did not make the Midwest a pretty place. The town where I grew up only existed because of trains needing to make stops every ~10 miles at the time, but the second the automobile worked its way into the picture, it made things sour, and *fast*. Roughly the same time this movie is set, there were a lot of unexplained deaths worked that their way into our history around that time, too. And a lot of girls sent to "vacations" or what have you. For my parents' generation, it was the loss of their children abandoning the area because there are no jobs there, at least not for the same college education they themselves reaped the benefits of.This is the horror (and thank the gods for no cheap jump scares) that is reality of that time, and is today for the suburban used-to-be factory towns in the same, but growing, surrounding regions....holding much of the same values. It all stems from people clenching to something that can't and won't come back, even if they themselves helping make that impossibility happen. It's the horror of desperation and seeing how far people will go just to keep things the status quo for themselves, regardless of the sacrifices they make, or rather, who they have to sacrifice around them to achieve their goal.

I'm not sure where all the hate is coming from on this movie. But overall it was a solid story. It kept my attention. The way the movie was shot was beautiful and it was written well enough that you get just enough information that keeps you holding on until the end.