Film was ok, but all the whispered dialog was distracting.
598584
Having read the book and after looking forward to the movie for some time, I was disappointed that I just couldn't connect to the characters and the story as I had hoped I would. I like both starring actors, and they performed very well, but I felt there was some kind of distance between me and the story. Eddie Redmayne's mannerisms as Lily were offputting, sort of like how some trans people I know try to act "feminine" but it doesn't quite come across. If only they would realize that they just have to act like they normally do--not all women are extreme examples of whatever "femininity" is supposed to be--with the fluttering eyelashes, downcast gaze, hands hanging in midair with nothing to do. But, what bothered me most was the actors talking in whispers throughout the movie. What is that about? I've noticed it recently in TV shows, too. It seems to be an acting technique that's become popular, but it bugs the heck out of me. I know of no one in real life who whispers whole conversations, but actors seem to think it's called for to signal important, tender & sorrowful situations. I wish they'd just speak in a normal voice--maybe I was so distracted by the whispering that I couldn't enjoy the film.
190890
I enjoyed the acting of Foster and others but her love interest and religious exploration in the movie I  consider distracting.
4863964
don't get me wrong, I loved the movie. However, I am half-deaf and had to crank the sound up. Most of the cast sounded like they were mumbling.
2729995
Good cast, good acting, some good special effects, but the story was just so-so. The "scary music" was so overpowering it distracted from, rather than enhanced, what was happening (or about to happen) on the screen. Also, I wonder if the editing left out a scene related to why they went to the house -- was it really a trap? If so, why did the guy who told them about it want to send them into that hell? Anyway, it was watchable, but forgettable.
1034621
The story was ok, but I couldn't understand the dialogue.  I'm not sure if it was due to the accents or low gruff voices, but I could only follow about half the dialogue.
215800
Paid to Kill is a decent film with good dialog, decent acting, and interesting story. The picture is just OK to look at, but the audio is very noisy. The Glass Tomb started with below-average picture, which was very grainy and soft; therefore, I did not continue watching it.
2879226
I think the director was trying to communicate with the audience using visuals instead of dialog. The visuals do work, but it also makes the movie VERY long and drawn out.

The movie is subtitled, but also has spoken English segments but it primarily communicates visually.
1521537
"Half-Pint" from "Little House on the Prairie" dons a cheesy and uneven French accent while mourning the death of her much older husband and son, as she neglects her surviving child. When her daughter befriends a divorced artist, they form an unlikely friendship which turns to romance.

I had a difficult time refraining from wincing from Glbert's atrocious accent, which brings the film down a notch or two. The performances overall are okay, but the story is entirely too predictable. There was more chemistry between the daughter and the love interest - I just didn't get the feel that these two suddenly became soul mates. Gilbert's accent was just so distracting and annoying; the only actress to pull off a worse accent is perhaps Jennifer Love Hewitt in "The Truth About Love" which is another must miss.
2254411
Movie was ok...dialogue was hard to hear / understand, but doesn't matter.  The Amazon Fire kept scrambling the picture every 1/2 hour, so that was distracting and annoying.  We have had this same issue in the past with the Fire...don't know what the problem is, but it needs to be fixed!!

As for the movie, there was never a dull moment, but the story was convoluted.  Excellent special effects; acting was pretty good for this type of movie.
4004692
This film was just OK, could have been so much better!
3720560
It seemed at crucial times the sound/language was impossible to tell what was being said.  I read the book and they needed to cut back on some details to fit it into a movie - I just wish they would have cut back on the numerous rape scenes involoving Lisbeth and her guardian.
3740947
After watching this the only take away I can give is the narrator's voice is so overtly dramatic and annoying I couldn't make it the entire way through.
747890
The movie was just so-so for me. Not sure whether or not the sound was purposely done to extremes but it was annoying having to always have my finger on the volume button. Some dialog had to be turned way up to hear then BAM the gunshot or other action would be extremely loud and I would have to run the volume way down.
1277565
Gone, But Not Forgotten might have made a good book.  The concept for this story is interesting and well designed.  But the dialog in this film is amateurish at best. Kudos to the guy who played Drew's brother for being the most believable actor in the story. I found the Doctor fairly believable as well. Having said that, everyone's performance including the 2 leads looked like something out of community theater that forgot to rehearse before going in front of the camera. Every performance was weak! It's as if there was noone behind the camera directing at all!

On the technical side, the audio was particularly bad: Vocal overdubs that were totally sterile (no ambiance at all), dialog levels that changed from scene to scene, and a music bed that was disproportionately loud to the dialog.  I'm convinced that whoever did the audio post-production only did it to demo their own music.

Then there's the poor camera work and lighting. While the camera was steady and properly exposed, there was no thought given to camera position or lighting the set to make the shots more interesting. NONE! The scenic beauty of the location was never used to full advantage.

In every respect, this looks like a film student's first try at makking a home movie. How it gathered any nods at all is totally beyond my imagination.

All in all, this is a story I would like to see again with a real budget and a real crew and some real actors and some real post-production.
4550391
sorry, the pacing on this was terrible.  Wanted to much to love the movie.  And, to be honest, we needed subtitles. Missed about 1/2 the dialogue.
1127533
I had to read the reviews after watching this to find out what I had just watched.  The plot as described sounds like it might have been a good movie if I'd have been able to see what was going on in the dark and hear what was being said.  I had the volume up loud enough to disturb my neighbors but I still couldn't hear much dialogue.  I had no problems hearing all the sound effects and the horrible, monotonous "music" effects.  Maybe if a decent director was in charge of this, and real producers, and they could get a good sound crew and lighting technicians, then this might be a fairly decent movie.  I'm not going to hold my breath on that, though.  I certainly won't be watching this one again!  I'm ashamed to admit that I watched it the first time!
650772
Have you ever noticed how with all the movies you love, the ones you watch repeatedly, that even though you already know exactly what will happen before it happens (on this, your ninth viewing of the film), the whole sequence still remains excitingly suspenseful? I don't know if this movie becomes suspenseful after the first 48 minutes, but that's all I cared to watch. Everything seems rather or entirely predictable. Or, more accurately, simply not engaging. The performances are okay, but none of them are exemplary. The special effects are grandly spectacular, but without engaging characters and plot, they're no more than bright lights on the screen and loud noise through the speakers. The premise of the plot is as promising as anything on film regarding clairvoyance. But it just didn't deliver for me, or, as the hundreds of Amazon reviews seem to imply, a great many other viewers. This motion picture lacks subtlety.