Cold Skin

2017

Adventure / Horror / Sci-Fi / Thriller

33
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 52%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 61%
IMDb Rating 6 10 8890

Synopsis


Uploaded By: FREEMAN
Downloaded 140,188 times
October 01, 2018 at 03:56 PM

Director

Cast

Ray Stevenson as Gruner
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
925.9 MB
1280*534
English
NR
24 fps
1hr 48 min
P/S 3 / 37
1.72 GB
1920*800
English
NR
24 fps
1hr 48 min
P/S 2 / 40

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by rykskelton 8 / 10

Unique

Very good. Not sure how it's going to reach it's target audience (as I merely stumbled across it, thinking it was something entirely different than it is). If you like, moody, atmospheric, solitary, creature features, then this is for you.

Reviewed by ostialy 6 / 10

tower defense shot on camera

What starts like an naturalist's adventure ends up a rather different genre. just like in a tower defense game the creators of the movie show us multiple rounds of enemy atacks with characters' weapons being upgraded every round and enemy count rising. the ending is abrupt and senseless

Reviewed by Harrison Tweed (Top Dawg) 9 / 10

Outstanding film, almost exactly to the detail from the debut novel by Albert Sánchez Piñol

This film will not be for everyone (hence the disappointing low rating). For starters, it's almost an exact adaptation from the Spanish (Barcelona, Spain) award wining debut novel (translated to 37 languages) by Albert Sánchez Piñol, and directed almost perfectly by Frenchman Xavier Gens.

It is not your typical big-screen huge budget Hollywood action blockbuster with A-list actors, and thus should not be compared (as other reviews have) to The Shape of Water. Instead, it's an artistic piece shot extremely well that was written by a Spaniard and presented by a Frenchman - definitely no Hollywood here.

The directing, cinematography, landscape, vfx/sfx and score where outstanding - near perfect. The actors (never heard of either) performed exceptionally well and were very convincing.

Yes, there were some avoidable obvious plot issues, which was disappointing considering how great the rest of the production was. However I'm thinking that it was an editing issue and cutting scenes to get the length down to 108 mins, of which considering the slow pace, I'd be complaining on the length, yet it didn't feel that long. It could also be a screenplay adaptation issue from the two novice writers - they did squeeze in as much as they could from the novel, but maybe should have cut certain scenes shorter to fill in the blanks.

I've read some reviewers had questions about certain things that happened. Some of those issue are answered if you stop and think why this happened and/or dig a little deeper into the meaning. Others, you will need to read the book. I did, and have nothing to question, but do understand how others who didn't read the book would have questions.

A very impressive film, unlike any other I have seen, and needs to be appreciated for what it is, and how is was shown. Would I recommend it or see it again? Absolutely. Had better screenwriters adapted the novel, this would have been a perfect 10/10. But still is a well deserved 8.5 rounded up to a 9/10 from me.

Read more IMDb reviews

11 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment