The Fourth Kind (15)

Film

Horror films

fourth_kind_movie_image_milla_jovovich_01.jpg

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>1/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>4/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Fri Nov 6 2009

'Do you honestly believe,' symapthetic psychoanalyst Dr Campos (Elias Koteas) asks his widowed friend and colleague Dr Abbey Tyler (Milla Jovovich), 'that your daughter was taken by members of an alien race?' Yes, it's alien abuction time again, with some ancient Sumerian mumbo-jumbo and Erik von Daniken-style 'God was an astronaut' tosh thrown in for bad measure. This time, however, the verifiable 'truth' of the events depicted is reinforced through the use of actual video and audio footage of hypnotised patients, plus interviews with the real shrink. As is traditional with tales of alien abduction – see also 'Communion' and 'Fire in the Sky' - these patients live in the middle of nowhere, in this case the tiny Alaskan town of Nome.

Despite the threat to her family and her sanity, the angry scepticism of the local sheriff (Will Patton) and the professional concerns of her fellow shrink (Koteas), Dr Tyler (Jovovich) is determined to continue her murdered husband's research. This study involves a group of disturbed patients who, under hypnosis, are struggling to recall something traumatic that happened to them in the early hours of the morning, following nightly visitations by a spooky owl. Are these strikingly similar stories and expriences evidence of alien visitation, or just the ravings of the psychologically disturbed?

Leaving aside the improbability of everything that happens, and the fact that the archive recordings are obviously faked, the decision by writer-director Olatunde Osunsanmi to inter-cut the scratchy 'found' material with the dramatised scenes is self-defeating. If the entire film had been staged as a spoof documentary, the grainy video and distorted audio might have retained some power. But by mixing the 'found' footage' with the re-enacted scenes  - sometimes by splitting the screen into two or four sections - Osunsanmi's tricksy formal device simply reinforces our disbelief and invites ridicule.
26

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

15

UK release:

Fri Nov 6 2009

Duration:

98 mins

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 4/5 (19 ratings)
  • I think the acting is credible along with what's supposed to be real footage but for me what makes this film or gives it such a great impact is the fact the end of the movie distinctly shows the picture of that little girl that was or is apart of our world and not on the missing persons list but seemingly abducted so for any critics of this film I believe we should first take the time out to do some investigating as well as using the information that is given by the subtitles at the end of the movie that explain the doctors mental condition to present day and the avoidance of the people that were supposed to be directly involved during those accounts and last but not least where is the child?

    michael Sat Jan 14 2012
    Report
  • I should have known what I was in for after reading the reviews! Why am I so intent on finding out for myself? Not a good film!

    Sarah Mon Mar 7 2011
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • This movie kept me hanging on because I thought it was real at first. The bad acting of the "real" psychiatrist and the fact that the "real" video fuzzed out whenever something unbelievable was happening clued me in pretty quickly. Even Will Patton was awful here. I can't believe people think it's real.

    Lee Fri May 28 2010
    Report
  • I'm one of those people who have seen too many films, that my brain doesnt understand real from fiction. I liked the idea of the film. I love the acting against the 'actual footage'. But what my brain cant get over is, is it actual footage. I have to see things to believe it. The fact is most of the 'actual footage' had too much interfience that my brain didnt believe that was real. From reading alot of reviews on this film, I seem to be the only one who doesnt think that the 'actual footage' is real. I want to believe it is, but like I said, I have seen too many films to know its all hollywood.

    kimmy Thu Apr 8 2010
    Report
  • The worst film I have seen in a long, long, time. White owl = aliens who speak "Sumerian" = rubbish.

    Sean P Tue Apr 6 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Again, I agree that it is always a good idea to make your own judgemnt on a film and take no notice of reviews. I thoroughly enjoyed this film and found it thought provoking and quite scary, especially with the real footage. Would recommend this film and think all the acting was pretty good.

    Lara Mon Mar 29 2010
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • i am about to watch it and will post again,i hate film critics myself,from time to time they are correct but i have watched some brill films that they have said rubbish and oppositly they highly recomended dony darko and i thought it was crap,basicly it is each to their own and it is much better to have lots of oppinions like this and get an average than listen to one jumped up suited ponse that is just giving his own enjoyment rating than seeing the good available for others,bit like the kind of pple who say a band is crap coz they dont like them when clearly many do, will post my thoughts on film soon

    ian thompson Mon Mar 1 2010
    Report
  • sounds like a good film, i like to watch people suffer.

    azazel Tue Dec 15 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • don,t give one

    bob Tue Dec 15 2009
    Report
  • Thought provoking but more the story of mental disturbance than abduction. Much more evidence and explanation required to make it believable. Is there any supporting documentarty evidence? Why were those involved not able to support it? Interviews with those involved would give it much more credibility. One was left feeling is this fiction or fact.

    Mac Thu Dec 3 2009
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star