Sunrise (II) (2024) User Reviews

A solid '5'.... Excruciatingly slow at times

[carnagecarney · 5/10 · 20 January 2024]

Sat down to watched this tonight and was very excited at both the premise and, the both Guy Pierce and Pettyfur were starring.

While production is decent, acting is very good (with some dialogue & scenes being excellent) - this is Guy Pierce, after all, even great acting cannot salvage what is ultimately an extremely boring movie overall.

The title of the movie is also very confusing not to mention the story itself. There are a number of plot holes which leave the viewer asking obvious questions, for which, there are no answers in the themes nor in the dialogue to explain.

All of this while trying not to fall asleep at what are some extremely long, completely unnecessary & repetitive scenes. Excruciatingly long camera pans of objects such as a chain, wind up just being utterly boring instead of building tension or fear

Outside of Pierce's acting or a desire to take a nap, I would skip this one entirely tbh. 5/10 for the acting & cinematography.

A waste of phenomenal acting

[manuelasaez · 3/10 · 20 January 2024]

Let me start off by saying that the only thing this movie has going for it is the acting. That's it. Nothing else about it will be acclaimed, thought of fondly, or even remembered a few months from now. It's one of those movies that you're not sure why it even exists. It says it's a horror movie, but was it really? I am fully convinced that this movie started off as a slow burn drama, some executive read the script and said, "You know what this movie needs? Vampires!". That's the only plausible explanation I can think of for such a thoroughly unremarkable film.

I felt absolutely no fear or even the slightest inkling of it during its entire runtime, and some segments felt like an afterthought, as if the film was finished when someone else came in with their asinine ideas and decided to make this movie something other than what it originally was. As a slow burn, small town drama, this might have worked. The acting was PHENOMENAL, so much so that, had it not been as good, I would have turned the movie off 20 minutes in. But every single actor played their role perfectly, and kept me invested in what little story there was to be invested in.

Whoever decided to turn this movie from a drama to a supernatural horror film really ruined what little this movie had going for it. They decided to include a vampire, but this vampire can walk in the sun, has no super strength or speed, is brooding in an unlikable sort of way, and just doesn't do anything that could be considered vampire-like aside from drinking chicken blood. It's really a shame that this film couldn't decide what it wanted to be from the onset, and picking the more fleshed out genre could have made something out this mess. What we do get, however, is ideas that appear shoe-horned and out of place, to the detriment of the entire picture.

I gave this movie 3 stars for the acting alone, because the talent of the actors in this film is undeniable. But with such a shoddy script, no real horror elements, and some really sophomoric looking special effects, the film has absolutely nothing else going for it. It's truly a shame to see such talent squandered by the bad decisions of a few talking heads. Next time, try to pick a genre that makes sense, without trying to fit a square peg in the round hole of ideas for a movie.

Avoid this film. If you must watch it, do so for the acting. But be warned that nothing else about it will leave even a lasting impression.

The title has nothing to do with the movie

[violinjoe · 4/10 · 21 January 2024]

The title of this film is not the main problem. It's that it is taking itself far too seriously.

Too many plot points all trying to converge in one coherent way - blatant racism against blacks and Asians, somehow coupled with voodoo and vampires. It's just too much much to try and put in one film. Exactly what is "going on" with the whole Red Coat demon is never really explained, but by that point it becomes apparent the film isn't really even trying to tie up loose ends.

Far too many long, dark camera shots of people just walking around a room with no reason other than to fill time. Acting is good from Guy Pierce but how in the WORLD did they convince him to do this?

Not a great film but 4 stars because the story isn't terrible.

5 shots of a deer, Guy Pearce alone, and AWEFUL direction

[man2375 · 1/10 · 20 January 2024]

The story is a bit of a riff on the classic vampire tail with some Stephen King elements thrown in. Racist small town terrorizes newcomer Asian family. A stranger crosses paths with this family. He may be friend or foe. His status is not exactly made clear through the film. What is clear is that the direction is awful. What is clear is that script is thin and threadbare but there is enough to make a decent movie with if you have a good director and acting talent. The direction is terrible. At times the film seems to try to have David Lynch moments. What you are left with is a series of shots of dear throughout the film that only add more confusion.

The lead actor is also beyond wooden. He walks around the entire film with a dead stare, which you could argue is part of his character. Except he also acts that way during a scene with someone close to him in which great emotion is expected. Guy Pearce (the reason I saw the film) is his usual great. But he does a lot while given very little and in the end can't carry the entire film or make up for it's shortcomings.

In the end, I'm not going to say not to watch the film, especially if you like Guy Pearce, but do not expect it to be a good one.

Wait for Netflix because not worth paying money for.

[jjfoodiejj · 2/10 · 23 January 2024]

NEGATIVES: Too many illogical scenes, muted characters, and unanswered questions make this movie crash by the time you finish it.

Here's the list: -Why is the movie titled "Sunrise"? Sunrise serves no meaning?

-What is the point of repeatedly showing the wild buck?

-Why is the vampire called Red Coat? At first, I thought this was a monster movie and not a vampire movie because of that.

-Where is the original vampire? Retired? Dead? Moved on while leaving the Pacifc NW to Fallon?

-Why did the original vampire save Fallon while killing his wife? We see him willingly drink the vampire's blood.

-Why did Fallon wait 10 years to get his revenge? Why did he waste 10 years wandering around the forest and killing animals instead?

-Why did Fallon go to the Asian family? Why does he ask Edward to bring him fresh blood? Can't he get blood himself? After all, he's been killing off animals.

-Why isn't Edward scared of Fallon when he realizes the guy is a vampire? A normal person would tell his mom and run away.

-Reynold's daughter is a muted character who utters no words until the end of the movie. This is a waste of character development.

-How can Reynold's daughter die so quickly from a stab wound to the side with a small knife?

-Why does Reynolds abduct the Asian family at the end? To murder them? Then why doesn't he just kill them right away if he hate them so much? How will killing them allow him to steal their land?

-Why did Reynolds kill his chubby goon after kidnapping the Asian family?

-Why doesn't Yan seek FBI or State Police help to report her husband's death and racial threats? Obviously she's a smart, educated woman from the city who knows how to escalate matters.

POSITIVES: -Guy Pearce's usual, brilliant acting but I don't know why he even took this role. Waste of his talent. Ma Reynolds and Yan's acting are also good but the others are non-memorable.

-Cinematography is pretty good. Not an amateur movie.

CONCLUSION: -A very unsatisfying movie that could have gone somewhere had the Director bothered to do some tweaking and fill in many missing holes. It's OK to watch if you don't have to pay for it, but definitely not worth paying money to watch. Wait for it to come to Netflix or Amazon Prime or some other streaming service.

Divisive nonsense

[shaneb-72880 · 1/10 · 3 March 2024]

This subversive garbage from Northern Ireland, UK is not a vampire horror movie and has little to do with the US Pacific Northwest. It's tedious race-baiting that has very little to do with reality.

The sort of backward small American town depicted here does not exist. At least not that I've ever seen and I've lived all over the US including throughout the Pacific Northwest which has a huge disperse Asian population. This film is also insulting toward small town Northern Irish.

The character played by Alex Pettyfer is empty with no depth, although I'm guessing that's how it was directed and I'm beginning to wonder if Guy Pearce isn't overrated. He's played this type of role before in Brimstone, a better film then this one but not by much.

This is a badly produced film that is terribly written and poorly directed.

I was expecting to see a vampire horror film not a social science project with a political agenda.

They tried to make it mysterious and spooky, but it ended up being quite silly and unimpressive

[imseeg · 5/10 · 14 February 2024]

This is not a cheaply made B horror movie, because they honestly tried to inject lots of mysterious supernatural spirits into this story, but it all just didnt work.

The bad: the story. The story and the way in which it is directed are just not achieving the desired effect of drama and mystery. The opposite unfortunately is true, because this story ends up looking quite silly and without impressing me whatsoever.

Cheap mystery effects like fog and dark forrests and a gloomy monotonous soundtrack only annoyed me. That droning soundtrack did NOT stop. It kept on churning out the same doomy sound as if to make sure we viewers knew that this was one heavy mother of a story. NOT !

Not any good? I started watching this for Guy Pearce who is a marvellous actor, but because of this bad direction and silly story, even his solid performance didnt convince. Such a shame. Somewhere there was a good movie buried in there, but it didnt come to fruition.

The story (SPOILERS): a racist murderous criminal (Guy Pearce) kills foreigners who come to live in his town and in the end gets killed himself. And all sorts of mumbo jumbo about animal possesed spirits in between.

You find yourself yearning for some payoff, a jolt of horror, or even a significant plot development.

[nERDbOX_Dave · 2/10 · 6 May 2024]

"Sunrise" aspires to be a slow-burning suspense thriller, but unfortunately, the meticulously built tension fails to ignite in a satisfying way. While the film boasts ok performances, the pacing and underwhelming climax leave you feeling like you sat through a long build-up with nothing to show for it.

The film takes its sweet time revealing its secrets, and the suspense starts to wane with each passing scene. You find yourself yearning for some payoff, a jolt of horror, or even a significant plot development.

Unfortunately, the payoff never quite arrives. The big reveal, when it finally comes, feels underwhelming and will leave you feeling frustrated and shortchanged.

A slow, modern gothic vampire movie

[siderite · 7/10 · 22 January 2024]

For such a slow paced atmospheric movie, it was very short. The story is simple, yet brutal. A psychopathic redneck and his crazy mother rule a small American town with an iron fist, killing, blackmailing and generally doing bad stuff. The redneck has a particular issue with non-whites, so he goes out of his way to scare them off, run them off or just off them. Guy Pierce was great for the role. And here comes a mysterious stranger - who is not a stranger - back to seek revenge, that being Alex Pettyfer.

There is nothing more than that. The rest is just brooding people, angry people, stupid redneck people and weird creepy soundtrack. Like a very short, slow paced, low budget The Crow.

I don't know why this film is rated so low. Just because people expected action and got "this too shall pass"? Or because people were systematically abused and they didn't seem to be able to do anything about it, which made most watcher feel sick to their stomachs?

Bottom line: Not a masterpiece, but a film worth watching. The IMDb rating is just wrong.

Well worth a watch

[oscarthomas · 7/10 · 22 January 2024]

I was lucky enough to watch this film in the perfect setting a small cinema in Los Angeles. The film looks and sounds great, really nicely shot with performances that leave you feeling challenged. The music is an original composition and works so incredibly well with the narrative, it somehow imbeds itself and sets the perfect tone for the film. Because the acting is so good the darker scenes seem all the more dark. I really give the director credit for creating one world that's familiar and believable but also shocking and relatable all at the same time.

Alex Pettyfer and Guy Pearce hold the film together well, their characters are deep and somber which adds to the menace of the film.