UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Horror >

Sight

Sight (2008)

May. 20,2008
|
2.9
|
R
| Horror Thriller Mystery

Jeffrey leads a quiet existence. Living in constant fear of being labeled a psychopath, Jeffrey constructs a complex world of denial. He is haunted by the spirits of the vengeful dead, which he can see while no one else can. After meeting Dana, a beautiful young woman who shares his "sight", Jeffery finds comfort in knowing someone shares his affliction. But his comfort is short lived. Dana suddenly goes missing and Jeffrey is left alone to find the answers.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

talkingpenguin3
2008/05/20

There are many points in this movie that make no sense and/or confuse the viewer to no end (until the end). As it starts out, Jeffery meets "Dana" out of sheer coincidence and after first meeting and talking this woman gives him a fake alias "Dana" being the name of her aunt. Question, If you're going to mislead someone, would you give them the name of someone you know and could possibly point the person you're misleading back to you? Though it's planned by "Dana" she doesn't know that Jeffery killed her uncle till close to the end (obviously) but, why is the only evidence a Rosary? Also, why did she mislead Jeffery from the very start if she didn't know he killed her uncle till close to the end? Also, on Jeffery's quest for answers, if anyone has watched this film, I believe that he takes a cab back to his uncle's place and tells the cab driver to wait for him, he goes into his uncle's house, takes a shower but never goes back into the cab. I won't rag on this film due to low budget production, but I will rag on it due to the fact I had to turn on the subtitles just to understand what they were saying in the movie. Most of the time, the actor's volume in their voice was so low that I thought they were just mumbling to themselves.

More
Nywildcat1
2008/05/21

When I watch a low budget movie, I don't compare it to the same standards that I would to a big budget Hollywood epic. I completely understand the lack of funds, so I don't necessarily have a problem with poor lighting, bad acting (you get what you pay for), etc. What I look for most is story. Is it at least well written? With "Sight", I would have to say yes and no. The storyline is interesting at first (man who can see dead people meets girl that can, too). Only to end up a messy, convoluted mess that at some parts don't make sense. For example: When Jeffrey relays the story of the first time he saw his mother's ghost, he was so scared he trips and impales himself on a wooden stake from a fence (you're left to wonder if that really happened). He has other confusing visions like that throughout the movie too. Jeffrey also sees ghosts everywhere, but doesn't really interact with any of them. His seeing ghosts can almost be considered superfluous to the plot (except for the ending that involved Dana's father). Now I know that in can be argued that the filmmaker's point was to throw red herrings at you to make you think whether or not he was telling the truth about his abilities, are these actual memories, or was he just hallucinating? But they throw so much at you, that after awhile, you just stop caring. And, of course, there was the usual "twist" ending.This movie had a lot of potential, and really could have been an interesting little indie film had it had a few more rewrites and underwent a little more editing.

More
froose
2008/05/22

I watched this movie to completion because I sat in utter disbelief at how awful it was... like watching an accident in slow motion. The acting, editing, sound editing, special effects... EVERYTHING was terrible. Every performance was underwhelming and for the most part seemed improvised. The absolute worst part, though, was the sound. There was clearly no post voice-over work done with the actors, so it relied on sound that was captured by the initial shoot. This left it mismatched with the sound effects/score which was WAY louder that the dialog forcing me to continually adjust the sound between conversation and 'action' sequences.I won't even get into how inane the story/writing was... there is really no point in discussing it seeing that the movie misses the mark on every other aspect of the production.Definitely skip this waste of time.

More
EEBrown-1
2008/05/23

I think this movie was pretty good for a low budget Philly movie. It contained some basic elements as twists, who done its, and so forth. These elements keep you guessing, causes you to wonder and be confused, as well as makes you jump at times. There is an artistic use of lighting, as well as the volumes of voice. Then there was the purposeful absence of facial expression when called for. All the makings of a decent flick. Everyone wants to be a critic.The movie was good enough to be selected by one or more film festivals and get a distribution deal, which is a lot more than what some of you critics can boast about. So there.

More