A low-cost high-quality suspense film, it is highly recommended to watch it a second time to clarify the details. This film is interspersed with real and fake scenes, the lines are complex, and the rhythm is also fast. This style of film is to lead the audience away, deprive the audience of the initiative to think, and finally let the audience breathe a cold sweat.
The main force in the details is at the last moment of the film. The repeated back and forth between the two rooms and the extremely tense background music resonated strongly with the audience to talk about the details.
The details of the film are very careful and interesting, and when I look back and watch it for the second time, I find many small foreshadowings buried by the director. For example, at the beginning, there was a huge painting in the corridor where the female lawyer just got out of the elevator and was about to knock on the door.
Another example is that the female lawyer took out the timer and started the countdown. She originally thought it was for the male owner to remind the court time, but finally found out that it was actually the female lawyer, reminding herself that she only had three hours to catch up with the real female lawyer. Get evidence from the male lead before you come.
In fact, it is also a trick between the film and the audience. The film is fast-paced and the speed of speech is very fast, which can easily make the audience lose their ability to think. Let the audience completely hand over their thinking ability to the director, and in the end, they are completely led away, and they feel that the film is unclear. In fact, when you take the audience's initiative back to think about the details when you watch it for the second time, you will still find some basic loopholes in this movie. Movies can have loopholes when they play tricks with the audience, but they also have to pretend that there are no loopholes to take the initiative, and they can also make the audience worship.
For example: Why not open the windows when decorating the room to pretend that someone has escaped; the female lawyer herself admitted that there were fake photos in the newspaper, but in order to leave this flaw for the male protagonist to see? If the male protagonist finds out about this, won't it make the audience even more suspicious?
It's not that I deliberately criticize the movie, but I expect the movie to be better.
Just like what the female lawyer said to the male protagonist: You just can't see the details! The male protagonist can't see the holes in the mirrors in the photos, and we can't see the details holes in the movies.
View more about The Invisible Guest reviews
