Good concept, poorly executed.

best movie i've ever seen.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

...of Maya Deren, the Russian experimental filmmaker from over half a century ago. This little gem invokes a feeling of dread that is even visible and audible in the incredible silence of NYC (which is eerie for me considering it's the city in which I was born and I've lived very close across the Hudson. I've even been in one of the old mansions across from Riverside Park-I've always had a bit of a sixth sense & I had some strange feelings while walking past some of these townhouse mansions. When I worked at a video post-production house years years ago, I was re-creating video for a very wealthy man. Some of the mini DV tapes (yes, millennials-I'm an old bag...ha) were messed up & I had to go to his mansion to get original dailies & re-create some of his audio narratives. I felt nothing strange about his home, but while I was walking from & to the train there were a few old townhouses that gave me the willies. The house in this film is just like those other houses. Feelings of dread, impending doom, melancholy, and evil are imminent, and sometimes some people pass them by & feel something is off-kilter. We see two different lighting effects used in this film: in using black & white, regular neon white overhead lights, which appear dreary & institutional on film and fits in with the question regarding Darling's "mental health," and Film Noir-esque shadow & light style of lighting which is the obvious choice for a mystery, and for when the "protagonist(?)," Darling becomes the femme-fatale, or the antagonist. The chapters give notice to the invitation of a very dark and evil being-mainly, they are the steps in a demon possession. Apparently, people who lived/worked there were either driven "mad" due to an evil presence. The question I ask: Is there a singular demon in the house (yet refers to one's self as "Legion," which is a hallmark of a demon), or is the house, in the words of Stephen King in Salem's Lot, "inherently evil?" You could ask the same of King's The Shining. Technically, I believe it was shot nicely. The shots of the City, portrayed in silence, and as the girl sinks into an inferno, shots of the City have begun to be portrayed upside down. I like the often creepy ambient music; it invites mystery and dread, especially when it's discordant. One thing which I felt was unrealistic was when Darling stabbed someone in the dining room with a knife (in case you were wondering, stabbing someone repeatedly would get quite messy...especially every time she pulls the knife out of him, which causes an unbelievable amount of bleeding. If you thought Quentin Tarrentino's huge blood squirts & spurts, many times due to decapitation, were inaccurate & over the top (as some believe), it would be an incorrect assumption. Also, contrary to popular belief, there were no pools of blood, no blood spatter (except on Henry), and the rug was clean. We see her cleaning the dining room's wooden floor later, yet it appears there's nothing to clean. No blood stain(s) on the carpet, still, AND the chair cushion, although he was stabbed while sitting in that chair-stabbed several times so we as the audience who have at least half of the necessary brain power or training to notice that there should have been a crapload of blood all over the carpet & chair, which is an extremely obvious (to me, anyhow, since I was a Media Arts major in college) continuity mistake since I have a number of very good things to say about this film. Firstly, yes, it may seem silly when Darling stabs the dude to death (the one who returned to her the upside-down cross necklace, about whom she seemed to have suspicions) & then, after she kills him he comes back to life & attempts to cut off her air supply & she awakens to realize she'd only had a nightmare, but it's a phenomenon we've seen occur in countless films & TV shows. I see traces of David Lynch in this film, namely Eraserhead. I haven't looked up the director of this film, & have no idea if he has a similar MO as Lynch, meaning the director of Darling could've explained the reason behind the film and/or the film, itself. If he does have similar habits when it comes to certain films he creates & due to more research & studies his work becomes less sophomoric, the director/writer could become the David Lynch of the millennial generation (if they have what it takes to know what good filmmaking entails). From what I saw in Darling, I can sense the filmmaker's ability to create ethereal & ambiently creepy scenes. I think the issue here includes weak character development, work needed on editing the length of certain scenes & shots in which no characters are speaking and the time drags (if shortened, a good scene that had to end up on the cutting room floor could've been either included or extended. As a sophomoric film by an aspiring experimental director, I give it a 7.

The film is essentially a hodge-podge of classic 60s horror references and imagery mixed with modern-style jumps and scares to keep you on your toes. Does it always work though? No, it doesn't. While most of the jumps are well-coordinated and add an essential level of terror to the atmosphere, there were others that felt impatient and cheap, deflating the room of suspense and tension. I still give this 8 stars because the cinematography is incredible and Lauren Ashley Carter is a true star. The screenplay is also quite good, with the story broken up into several chapters for the audience to easily understand her descent into madness. Overall, this horror film made me and my friends scream as well as kept us up at night, which is the goal of the film.

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.

oh I was so disappointed in this. it was laughably predictable. the acting was overwrought and amateurish. how can washing your hands look so overtly dramatic? I'm quite prepared to deal with style over substance, but it sucks when there is neither going on. looked like someone watched some old French flicks and I thought "I can do that!" no sir, no you can't. I'd rather watch some old white zombie videos. I thought by having Larry Fessenden in it, it wouldn't be all bad. I was so wrong. oh Larry, what the hell? I guess the 60 seconds he was in it was probably the best part so there's that. avoid at all costs.