> Expected a very little, but delivered very hugely.

The first word I said after the watch was 'unbelievable'. That means the movie is not bad, but how come I missed it for this long. This is the best dark-fantasy movie I have seen recently. But earlier, I thought it would be like the movie 'Tusk' which made me a little uncomfortable to watch. So in the end, what's the difference between the tusk and/or the horn. Both come in a pair and animals have it to defend themselves from the threat. When I watched that movie, I lost interest in this. Yep, it is a silly reason and now I feel bad for that.

This movie dominated by the British cast, especially for having Daniel Radcliffe and Juno Temple I thought it was British film, actually it was not. It was a Canadian-US jointly produced, adapted from a book of the same name and directed by 'Mirror' director. The story was so good, not genuine, though explored the theme very well. For every few minutes later, the narration was taking a turn and that made the plot to get lot tighter before heading for the concluding part.

Maybe this the best movie of Radcliffe that I've seen after his goodbye to 'Harry Potter' movie series. I don't think he's a chocolate boy type, but this kind of movie suits him well. I think he should get muscles for more movie like this, but his height is another negative factor. The film was entirely shot in Canada, the photography was great, music as well as performances. Even those settings like woods, tree house feels kind of wet English and Scottish atmosphere that fits for a devilish mythical charactered movie like this. I regret for reviewing it so delayedly, but anyway I did it and over it, so I hope you watch it very soon as well if you haven't seen it yet.

7/10

Really good watch, would watch again, and can recommend.

Trigger warning: rape and murder.

It's in the premise, but certain information sources hide some things more than others.

Some movies are hurt by trying to be too many things, but this finds a wonderful balance between a murder mystery and religiously mythical. I think it is that they compliment each other. Regardless of why Daniel Radcliffe's character has been imbued with horns, the powers he gains serve toward revealing the mystery. I never felt like there was a dead spot where the story wasn't moving forward or we were re-hashing all the details: they do a good job of keeping the relevant information at the fore front and refreshing the information on pace.

Why it is a great premise, it is awfully sad one, but I do feel it helps humanize Daniel Radcliffe almost immediately, and he retains his like-ability throughout the film just for the shear insanity of his situation.

It is also a lot of fun to see how the power of the horns affect the different townsfolk.

I was looking forward to this film going into it, based on a highly entertaining book, but ultimately it was just okay.

Well shot and directed, Daniel Radcliffe is the best thing about it, but it lacked the punch and dark humour of the novel. Juno Temple's character feels painfully underwritten, as do most of the 2nd tier characters. The worst part is it takes itself way too seriously for such a silly premise. There is some destructive chaotic fun, but not enough of it. The creature design for the finale is very cool, then the film just sort of stops rather than giving a satisfying wrap up.

Could have, should have been much better, maybe that's my fault because I was expecting more. Still watchable, even if not memorable.

Horns is an ambitious story and you can link it to several other stories, Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes, King’s Needful Things and even the comic-book come TV show Preacher come to mind although more in spirit than directly related, the film-makers must be applauded from making something that is neither comic-book based, a sequel nor a remake, although the source novel, which is different to the film, was written by a comic-book author, so they didn’t stray too far of the tired path. The cliched murder mystery immediately knocks off a point with it’s frankly TV afternoon movie plotting and the so obvious killer sign-posted way before the conclusion, even with the huge red-herring mixed in and the teen romance sort of gave the film a not quite-sure-what-it-is tone.

Daniel Radcliffe as usual gives his best and certainly cannot be accused of playing safe with the type of films and roles he chooses. Without him you cannot help feeling the film would have been weaker. Most of the supporting cast is up to their roles although they are definitely overshadowed by Radcliffe with only the reliable towering David Morse going round for round with his diminutive co-star. Hilariously Heather Graham seems to turn up in a bit-part so you know she’s going to rock up later in the film.

The cinematography and setting caused me some problems with some scenes appearing to have been shot very obviously on a sound-stage which gave the whole proceedings and am-dram vibe, which if no sound stage was used is a huge failing. But the biggest problem overall as previously mentioned is the tonal mess Horns gets into, is it a religious black-comedy, a parody of horror and teen angst or just silly? The longer the story goes on the darker it gets the less funny anything is. Was there scares or laughs to be had – as a viewer I felt like a pin-ball firing off the buffers and pins and never settling down. As I’ve noted before the murder-mystery was simplistic and felt so tacked on I was only half caring about who murdered Radcliffe’s girlfriend, the real drive was the angst and raw emotions of Radcliffe’s Iggy. The very premise of his slow evolving from man to demon was promising and looked like fun but then the ball was fumbled and romance and murder-mystery got in the way, including some long pointless flashbacks on the romance which I could not figure out why we were seeing or how it drove the story forward.

Overall Horns has to be disappointing as a film, not for what is was but for what it could have been, nevertheless the makers have to be applauded for putting something different up there on the screen.

_Horns_ was my introduction to Joe Hill back when I first received a Kindle as a gift, and I found its premise to be wickedly delightful, with the writing witty enough to back it up. Years later, I'd forgotten most of the key details of the novel, and decided to give the film adaptation a shot - and, to my absolute joy, it stands as one of the finest book-to-film adaptations of a property I have seen in some time, taking what I adored about the central idea of the of the text, and expanding it, as well as treating almost every element of its design with absolute class. _Horns_ is Hellaciously good.

It cannot be understated that _Horns_ feels like a labor of love; director Alexandre Aja, whose reputation for injecting true fun into his works makes him a well liked director of mine, really infuses his work quality all throughout the film. The core here relies on Daniel Radcliffe's Ig Perrish's gained confessions; these scenes stand as the highlight of the film, being both devilishly funny, and unsettling as characters lay out their desires, often flip-flopping between the two in a hilarious juggling act. They're immensely well acted bits to boot, as you can really study the exact moment that a character surrenders themselves to the "devil on my shoulder" concept, and gives in to their innate confessions, and desires. These are great character moments, with some being immensely plot progressing, and some just plain fun.

That's how a lot of _Horns_ feels; everything just feels imbued with a charming touch. Take, for instance, the flashbacks to fill in how Ig and Merrin know one another; these scenes could easily feel like narrative stoppers (and do, in many films), but here they have a genuine emotion to them, and are reflected back upon by other characters. You've got the rock music that plays during some of the more sinful moments. You've got Daniel Radcliffe ordering atrocities committed to a delightfu degree. You've got some uncomfortable moments as the murder night is pieced together. While some of the effects in these moments are a bit low grade, they hardly mar what are otherwise some fantastic moments.

The film's also rife with great thematic ideas, like the snakes conferring upon Radcliffe, the devil motif, the protectionist cross, and even just the horns themselves; the film constantly feels like it evolves its central premise so it never wears thin. There are red herrings and twists, although few are really gasp-worthy, and ultimately, the ending does feel a bit too deus-ex-machina (er, devil-ex-machine?). But, it's thematically fitting for what has occurred, and still satisfying as a whole.

I really, really enjoyed _Horns_; it's one of those movies that just does a tremendous amount to a tremendous degree. Good acting, direction, writing, and set pieces, with only a few singed bits here and there. Horns doesn't require a confession to admit how damn good it really is.