User reviews

I think that most of the ratings for this movie are a little low. I found this movie interesting and it kept me wondering what might happen next. The acting was a little better than I expected, good enough to carry it along without wanting to turn it off. The only thing that irritates me is that I found myself thinking that Jenn's initial survival skills were a little lame.

Most of this film involves a woman trapped on an island, alone. Still, don't expect this film to be boring. The use of visual storytelling is quite impressive, and while it's not quite a masterpiece, it doesn't drag the way the premise implies it may.

Highly recommended for anyone who loves horror, or has a Castaway fetish.

The early parts of 'Sweetheart' reminded me a lot of 'Castaway' and it made me appreciate 'Castaway' a lot more than I ever did before. It's extremely hard to make a movie entertaining when you have only one character and the only plot device is your character trying to survive. 'Castaway' was lucky enough to have the extremely watchable Tom Hanks in the lead role - I could watch that man paint a house and probably enjoy it. 'Sweetheart' has Kiersey Clemons, who while obviously not on the level of Hanks, did a commendable job of keeping the movie watchable and pushing it through to the next stage.

This is a very dark film. A lot of scenes take place at night and it can be quite difficult to make out exactly what is going on a lot of the time. Also the film is very short. Coming in at just 82 minutes, they obviously didn't want to push things with what can be quite a slowly paced film at times.

If you're not enjoying the beginning of 'Sweetheart' I would suggest you push through it. The film does get better as it goes along. As some more characters come into the mix and we get more of a view of the monster - a very unique monster that I quite liked the design of - things certainly become a little more enjoyable. I was a little let down by the ending. I would've liked to see a little more creativity used, but that's not a major. I enjoyed 'Sweetheart' without ever really loving it. Worth a look, but don't go in with your expectations too high.

So let's think about the budget this movie had, about the actors, the surroundings, the plot, and if we add all of them, it comes off as a beautiful effort. It doesn't have to take too much in order to make a nice little gem for yourself, and as shown here, with a right direction, you can achieve lots of things.

Sweetheart was interesting from start to finish, did not focus on more details than it should, it comes off as those lovely first 15 minutes from I Am Legend, but manages to continue like such, without divulging too much and simply staying on the story. You get to see more and more, to stick some pieces together yet always pay attention on what's important, and this I do believe it is the beauty of a simpler movie: less is more.

Sweetheart is an great example of how horror/survival/in the woods/ monster movie should present itself, not just copy this one, but come forward with the material after it was properly put together and gone through every little step. I salute Sweetheart and also recommend to you Prey (2019), tad bit alike, both decent add-ons to horror.

Cheers!

I really enjoyed this but the creature design was like something out of Power Rangers or Guyver. Cheap rubber suit that wobbles and in one scene it looks like a puppet with a hand in it.

That's my only criticism. The setting was great, the acting was fine, the suspense was handled well with a good premise.

Don't rush to see it but if you've got time to kill give it a go.

I am sorry... but if you are going to watch a movie about an African-American girl scout or Corporal Nola Darling, against an over-sized Gill-man, you better stop the cinéphile pretense and realize you are going to watch just that, so put on your Jack Arnold hat with a feather "a la Guillermo del Toro", and leave the intelligentsia pose for latter, when you sit to watch Díaz, Martell, Brillante, Reygadas, Alonso, Encina, Tarr and the rest of the crowd.

Quite original, wet, salty, sandy and scary horror movie if you ask me, even if it loses impact and power when we finally see the fish-man, and it turns into a hand to hand match between the woman and the thing. It tries to explain everything, but it also leaves a few questions unanswered, which makes it more intriguing.

I am glad I saw it, on this umpteenth "quarantine" Sunday night.

It's not bad but it's not good either definitely a mediocre film. Yes it delivered some degree of suspense large in part due to the concept and topic but the big reveal looked like something crafted from the 90's and with a very miniscule amount of backstory revealed on every character which counts up to be 5 it all just unravels like a run of the mill monster movie. The actor wasn't bad she has better films in her repertoire as a co-star but she handled the role well enough. I would recommend this film as something to see on a rainy day but nothing here was amazing or great.

I don't know what the budget was for this movie, probably not that much as you never really see the "monster" but the story itself is well made with the right amount of suspense to keep you interested for the entire movie. They did a good job creating a malicious ambiance. Another example that you don't really have to have a big budget to make a decent horror/thriller. The cinematography was good and the acting of Kiersey Clemons was on top for this movie. Not much other characters but in this case you don't even need them. Surprisingly better then I thought it would be, certainly worth a watch if you like a bit of suspense.

Worth a watch just for the lead actress being able to carry this off with good style. Defo a talent on the rise here.