Horns

Much of what makes Horns so impressive, and such fun to watch, is the film's ability to juggle a variety of genres.

Aja's film ends up being an fairly satisfying Halloween diversion, using those magical horns to overcome its flaws and transform itself into a decidedly dark, but weirdly sweet, ride.

It seems to have been made by people who couldn't decide if their film was a horror flick, a whodunit, or a "Hellboy" knockoff.

Horns has style to burn, but there's no there there.

This overly devout adaptation of Joe Hill’s sacrilegious text benefits from the helmer’s twisted sensibility, but suffers from a case of overall silliness.

Long-shelved, the final product never lives up to the promise of its contemporary-Grimm-brothers conceit.

When Horns thankfully concludes, relief sets in; this hellishly misguided effort concludes with an inferno and sequels are never sprung from the equivalent of a mouthful of ash.

The movie was god damn great. I enjoyed it more than any film nowadays. I believe that it is the most underrated movie of all time, because the critics were so low IQ to figure out its meaning. The concept was superb, and had a very deep meaning which was given in metaphorical ways all the time, but I guess some people who call themselves critics couldn't even be close to parallel the meaning and translated it litterally, word by word, like little kids. If you really want a good and deep movie, that will get will keep you thinking for some time this is the one. But in order to watch it you have to put aside all the religious "stereotypes" and look for its true meaning, the one that the creator of the moive wanted to pass to you.

Nie taki Diabeł straszny… Rogi to film specyficzny. Aktorzy odegrali swoje role wiarygodnie, ujęcia były ciekawe przez co film nie wydawał się nudny. Co chwila jakiś zwrot akcji, świetna muzyka oraz na prawdę ciekawa fabuła sprawiły, że Rogi oglądało mi się bardzo dobrze. Oczywiście nie jet to film Bardzo Dobry. Ostatnie sceny rażą słabym CGI, a film zaczyna się zbyt chaotycznie i od pierwszej minuty wrzuca nas w wir wydarzeń. Podobało mi się jak pokazano upadek człowieka, który szuka zemsty. Warto obejrzeć choćby dla samej muzyki. Polecam. 6/10

Horns is an interesting while uneven film that works sometimes. I thought the concept was good, but the execution in many scenes tried for shock value and fell short. Overall I'd say this is a one time rental. B-

Lets start with that this movie is based on the book "Horns" by Joe Hill (son of Steven King). I read the book first and I enjoyed it a lot, so I was looking forward to the movie. However, like a lot of movies that are based on books, this movie also failed horribly in repainting the story on film. I am still amazed how directors are able to do that; so basically you have the book (which is good) and the director only has to take that story and film it. He does not have to write the story, because the story is already there. Then, you have Alexandre Aja (director of Horns), who probably decided not the read the entire book, but only the summary and look at the result.... You probably think "Humm, people that have read the book are always grumpy when they make it into a movie", that is not really the case; the movie on its own is really crappy. The story itself is poor, Alexandre left a lot of the important stuff out, which resulted in a very incoherent story with a lot of holes. There is almost no character build up, so you don't care about the characters. The plot was very predictable and if you combine that with the poor acting (Daniel Radcliffe was not doing well, but compared to the other he did a decent job) this movie deserves at most a rating of 2/10

The story is poor, the dialogue is poorer, the acting is poorest, and the ending is downright ridiculous. Horns doesn't show the tiniest flash of decency and I find myself lost for words in describing how bad it is. Absolutely unimpressive and a shameful note on the resume of everybody who participated in the making of this film, Daniel Radcliffe included.