I just hope younger people realise there is no truth in this account of sharon tate's murder. while it has been said she had visions or dreams beforehand that is the only semi truth in this movie. facts are distorted beyond belief. it goes into some rubbish about how our decisions control our fate and we can somehow change that. this seem pretty disrespectful to her family also. makes her out to be a bit crazy. it's an okay movie but twists history way out of all proportion so should not be taken seriously.
175 Reviews
Oh hilary...
lizshotter-194015 April 2019
Life is tough out there for 90's stars. They had it all..awesome fashion, cool thin eyebrows, ecstacy and a ton of money. But what do you do when those lucrative tv show parts dry up? You get desperate And decide to exploit one of the most repulsive moments in American history. This is truly a horrific film, with hilary heavy breathing and trying to look gorgeously startled throughout, whilst cradling her prosthetic bump murmuring "I think those people are a threat to me and my baby". Sharon Tate was so much more than a murder victim, yet we always overlook her talent and contribution to fashion and films in favour of morbidly sifting through her (and her friends who always seem to be a footnote) murder. But this film goes much further by mashing up the worst horror cliches (I'm tired of seeing people in the mirror-gasp- turn around and no ones there) with deeply offensive notions that Sharon prophesied her own murder. Sharon tates family have been through so much, and the fact that they have to deal with trite schlock like this really makes me feel even worse for them. It means that theyre not allowed to heal, and it perpetuates the murder porn that permeates throughout our society and it's sick. Two stars as the music, whilst cliched, is decent.
The Haunting of Sharon Tate: They're all right, it really is THAT bad
Platypuschow22 May 2019
I was immediately struck how low both the IMDB and Metascores were, this movie is universally hated but it can't be that bad. Right?
Well it kind of is, bad and deeply inappropriate.
It tells the story, no sorry a "Remixed" version of the true story about the fate of actress Sharon Tate and how she fell victim to three members of Charlie Manson's "Family".
Movies about material like that just don't sit right with me. They're just inappropriate in my view, insensitive and just plain wrong. Remember they managed to make at least 2 movies out of 9/11!
Starring Hilary Duff it's an embarrassingly bad movie that honestly makes a mockery of the events that transpired on that fateful day. I don't agree with everyone saying Duff was terrible, she simply wasn't. The film itself however, awful on every level.
As the "Events" started taking place I found myself scratching my head in confusion and when the credits rolled I was angry for the victims in real life! This didn't paint a very flattering picture and made entertainment out of their demise.
Awful sick picture and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.
The Good:
Nope
The Bad:
Deeply inappropriate
Generic home invasion movie
Moronic ending
Well it kind of is, bad and deeply inappropriate.
It tells the story, no sorry a "Remixed" version of the true story about the fate of actress Sharon Tate and how she fell victim to three members of Charlie Manson's "Family".
Movies about material like that just don't sit right with me. They're just inappropriate in my view, insensitive and just plain wrong. Remember they managed to make at least 2 movies out of 9/11!
Starring Hilary Duff it's an embarrassingly bad movie that honestly makes a mockery of the events that transpired on that fateful day. I don't agree with everyone saying Duff was terrible, she simply wasn't. The film itself however, awful on every level.
As the "Events" started taking place I found myself scratching my head in confusion and when the credits rolled I was angry for the victims in real life! This didn't paint a very flattering picture and made entertainment out of their demise.
Awful sick picture and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.
The Good:
Nope
The Bad:
Deeply inappropriate
Generic home invasion movie
Moronic ending
Who Thought This Would Be a Good Idea?
Neon_Gold20 May 2020
First off this was painful to watch as nothing happens in this movie. 90% of this film is just like meandering around a house doing nothing.
It can't commit to anything because it's a real life story so everything has to be explained away as oh it's just a dream.
It probably wasn't the best thing to write a film around as people are obviously going to be offended.
And Jesus Christ the end, I had to laugh. It was so stupid. It made the movie even more pointless.
What annoys me even more is the filmmakers knew they were flogging a dead horse because they had to put scenes In slow motion to extend the run time and I'm guessing that's why they included random real life news footage So they could pad it out.
It was lazy and boring and I wouldn't waste my time with it.
It can't commit to anything because it's a real life story so everything has to be explained away as oh it's just a dream.
It probably wasn't the best thing to write a film around as people are obviously going to be offended.
And Jesus Christ the end, I had to laugh. It was so stupid. It made the movie even more pointless.
What annoys me even more is the filmmakers knew they were flogging a dead horse because they had to put scenes In slow motion to extend the run time and I'm guessing that's why they included random real life news footage So they could pad it out.
It was lazy and boring and I wouldn't waste my time with it.
What a Steaming Pile of Crap!
danocaster5 April 2019
Horrible ten cent fictionalized version of the Sharon Tate murders in 1969 is the worst possible thing imagined. As if the real life murders weren't bad enough, this movie changes the outcome and turns it into a low rent slasher film. I expected Roman Polanski to fly in on Bat wings and vanquish the mighty Manson family. I realized, however, that I had been conned. As someone who has seen nearly all the major Manson films, that I was suckered into this hoping that it would interesting. Forgetting reality for a moment, how does the movie play as a thriller. Terrible. The camera work bips and bops around like Uncle Jim just got his new camcorder. The acting is awful but in fairness to them the dialogue is so bad that Meryl Streep would have had trouble with it. Really though, this is exploitation of the worst kind, taking a monumental event in history and turning it into a complete sham.If people really do turn over in their graves then Sharon Tate must be rolling now. Watch it if you must but expect full and complete garbage of the worst order!
In Bad Taste
Cheshire_Cat_Grin1 July 2019
Who ever thought that this movie would be a good idea? My sympathies go out to Sharon Tate's family. I'm sure Farrands wouldn't appreciate it if someone in his family was brutally murdered and the event was dredged up and publicly thrown back in his face in the guise of an "entertaining" film....all for the purpose of making more money. This movie idea is highly inappropriate and cruel.
Distasteful yes, but also badly made
dcharold6 April 2019
I don't have a dog in the fight about whether one should make a movie like this about a real person, so I was happy to give it a go. But it does feel exploitative, in part because it is so incredibly bad that you cant help but feel it was disrespectful. If you are going to make a movie about a real person who was brutally murdered at least have the decency to make a good movie, not this amateur hour rubbish. Watch the trailer. See how bad it seems? Well, believe me, the trailer has been skillfully edited to make it look 20x better than it really is.
An unremarkable horror film exploiting a real-life tragedy
MG_846 May 2019
Daniel Farrands' latest film tells the tragedy of Sharon Tate, one of 5 deaths in an infamous real-life mass murder committed by the members of Charles Manson's cult. The release comes close to the 50th anniversary of those events.
I entered hoping for a fact-based biopic of Sharon Tate and what happened that night, giving life to the people that were killed and showing us who those people were during their short lives and final days. What we actually get is a rather dull sensationalistic take on the facts, used purely to create a horror film off the back of the tragedy. Had I seen his previous film based on Amityville murderer Ronald DeFeo (which I watched after this and is better executed while feeling narrowly less exploitive), I would've know what to expect - a mostly fictional horror story based on real victims of a real tragedy.
While it uses the real life events as an influence on the characters and story, there's clearly a lot of artistic license used and the result is a sub-par horror film that leaves a bitter taste in the mouth due to its exploitation of the real tragedy that took place. There was an opportunity to pay respect to the people that lost their lives, but unfortunately we get a forgettable home-invasion horror film with a particularly odd plot point, which feels absurd for a film which wants to give the impression that it's a fact-based biopic.
I can appreciate why Sharon Tate's sister was so against the film.
There's nothing particularly interesting about this film and it doesn't do justice to the innocent victims, nor reveal much of anything that we didn't already know. It invents more than it enlightens. Without revealing spoilers, Farrands could have easily made this horror film as a fictional story, with fictional characters, and the result would probably have earned slightly better ratings. But at its core it's a by-the-numbers horror with attempted jumps, moments of suspense, and cat-and-mouse chases, but it definitely does not give the impression (to me at least) that it wants to pay homage to the victims, nor deglorify Manson.
The acting is okay, but it's hardly top class, and Duff seems to fade in and out of using an odd accent in her portrayal of Tate. Some of the script feels unnatural, the characters are underdeveloped and some of the acting and dialogue is wooden. The story moves along at a decent pace, but it doesn't really offer enough to hold interest or build suspense, possibly because we know what's coming.
Farrands seems to have found himself a new niche, making films about real life tragedies, the next of which will be the murder of OJ Simpson's wife. Unfortunately, the tragedy of Farrands' new-found inspiration for his films is that they're exploiting these horrific real-life events for entertainment and profit.
I give it 1/10 due to the combination of it being an unoriginal and dull horror film, as well as an insensitive exploitation of the tragedy. Had it been presented as a fictional story, with fictional characters, it may have earned closer to 3 or 4 out of ten, but it still wouldn't have been anything special.
I entered hoping for a fact-based biopic of Sharon Tate and what happened that night, giving life to the people that were killed and showing us who those people were during their short lives and final days. What we actually get is a rather dull sensationalistic take on the facts, used purely to create a horror film off the back of the tragedy. Had I seen his previous film based on Amityville murderer Ronald DeFeo (which I watched after this and is better executed while feeling narrowly less exploitive), I would've know what to expect - a mostly fictional horror story based on real victims of a real tragedy.
While it uses the real life events as an influence on the characters and story, there's clearly a lot of artistic license used and the result is a sub-par horror film that leaves a bitter taste in the mouth due to its exploitation of the real tragedy that took place. There was an opportunity to pay respect to the people that lost their lives, but unfortunately we get a forgettable home-invasion horror film with a particularly odd plot point, which feels absurd for a film which wants to give the impression that it's a fact-based biopic.
I can appreciate why Sharon Tate's sister was so against the film.
There's nothing particularly interesting about this film and it doesn't do justice to the innocent victims, nor reveal much of anything that we didn't already know. It invents more than it enlightens. Without revealing spoilers, Farrands could have easily made this horror film as a fictional story, with fictional characters, and the result would probably have earned slightly better ratings. But at its core it's a by-the-numbers horror with attempted jumps, moments of suspense, and cat-and-mouse chases, but it definitely does not give the impression (to me at least) that it wants to pay homage to the victims, nor deglorify Manson.
The acting is okay, but it's hardly top class, and Duff seems to fade in and out of using an odd accent in her portrayal of Tate. Some of the script feels unnatural, the characters are underdeveloped and some of the acting and dialogue is wooden. The story moves along at a decent pace, but it doesn't really offer enough to hold interest or build suspense, possibly because we know what's coming.
Farrands seems to have found himself a new niche, making films about real life tragedies, the next of which will be the murder of OJ Simpson's wife. Unfortunately, the tragedy of Farrands' new-found inspiration for his films is that they're exploiting these horrific real-life events for entertainment and profit.
I give it 1/10 due to the combination of it being an unoriginal and dull horror film, as well as an insensitive exploitation of the tragedy. Had it been presented as a fictional story, with fictional characters, it may have earned closer to 3 or 4 out of ten, but it still wouldn't have been anything special.
Just when you thought it could not get worse,
charvelstrat815 April 2019
Then this movie is made about the Manson murders that is so far removed from the official story that one feels like they did some of that 1969 LSD!
if i could have i would have rated this a negative 8!
ABYSMAL is being kind!
Disrespectful
Andrew_M191127 December 2019
This movie isn't all that good to begin with but the amount of disrespect in this film is unbelievable. We see characters based on real innocent people get murdered multiple times because it's "fun". The way the director handled the situation is awful telling Sharon Tate's real sister it's "his" story and it's not her choice. He seems like a really person. I rather not see a pregnant woman and her friends get murdered time and time again just because it's a horror film.
"Is All that We See or Seem but a Dream Within a Dream?"
JohnnyRatesALot6 September 2019
Warning: Spoilers
That quote by Edgar Allen Poe appears in the opening of this film for a reason. It's very sad that many people are completely oblivious to what Daniel Farrands, writer and director of this remarkable film, was trying to convey. Many people have been giving the film negative reviews without much thought.
First of all, unlike what many people assume, this was NOT an attempt to exploit nor be insensitive to the Tate Murder victims. Nor was it a cheap attempt to turn the tragic Tate Murders into a slasher horror movie. The truth is in fact the exact opposite.
Daniel Farrands wanted to portray the Tate Murders on a much deeper, spiritual, literary, and emotional level than many of you think - while also being faithful and respectful to the victims. The title should give you a hint, but many people unfortunately overlooked it.
According to Farrands, the entire film actually takes place in Purgatory. From the moment Sharon Tate and Jay Sebring pull up to her house, she and all her friends are earthbound spirits. It's as if they are in a loop or a dimension trying to make sense of such a senseless crime. A small hint is when Sharon asks, "Did you know Cielo means 'heaven' in Spanish?" Sharon's "visions" and prophetic dreams are actually memories of how they all died. So in spirit form, she felt empowered and compelled to take control this time and to have upper hand of the Manson family. It's a very powerful and wishful portrayal of what "could" have happened that tragic August night.
When Sharon and her friends finally regain control, "survive", and walk towards the afterlife, she stops and sees the bodies of her friends and herself. She realizes they've been dead all along and been living in an alternate reality. Now aware of what's happened, she cradles her baby in her arms and is finally able to move on. So yes, the plot plays out on a much deeper, literary, and philosophical note in which Farrands envisioned for the victims. I honestly do not understand the hate this film has been receiving; it really baffles me.
I was aware long before that Sharon Tate had premonitions of her and her friends' deaths before they happened, and I'm so glad someone finally put it into context. Farrands had nothing but positive, pure, and respectful intentions for the victims and wanted to portray their story in a spiritual and personable light.
I and many people who DO understand the film find it to be a very emotional, suspenseful, effective, and unique yet faithful take on the Tate Murders. Hilary Duff's acting is very powerful and determined, and she conforms into the role of a modern Sharon Tate very well. The pacing is great, the actors have great chemistry together, and the soundtrack creates the perfect mood. Also very importantly, Farrands truly captured the ruthless horror and terror attached to this crime exceptionally well throughout the film.
Farrands is really a perfectionist director and he pays attention to detail, right down to exactly what the victims wore that night. He also had so much respect for the victims that he excluded the names of Manson's two female followers for the end credits and used their fictitious cult names instead. That should show you the degree to how much he wanted to have this film focus solely on Sharon Tate and her loved ones, stay true to that focus, and give them the respect they sincerely deserve.
So the next time you bash and hate on a great film, please be fully aware of the plot's true nature, the maker's intentions, and what they're trying to do. In this case, writer and director Daniel Farrands had the best of intentions and wanted to do nothing less than pay a unique, in-depth, and spiritual tribute to the lives of Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, Wojciech Frykowski, and Steven Parent - and the remarkable people they were.
Excellent film.
First of all, unlike what many people assume, this was NOT an attempt to exploit nor be insensitive to the Tate Murder victims. Nor was it a cheap attempt to turn the tragic Tate Murders into a slasher horror movie. The truth is in fact the exact opposite.
Daniel Farrands wanted to portray the Tate Murders on a much deeper, spiritual, literary, and emotional level than many of you think - while also being faithful and respectful to the victims. The title should give you a hint, but many people unfortunately overlooked it.
According to Farrands, the entire film actually takes place in Purgatory. From the moment Sharon Tate and Jay Sebring pull up to her house, she and all her friends are earthbound spirits. It's as if they are in a loop or a dimension trying to make sense of such a senseless crime. A small hint is when Sharon asks, "Did you know Cielo means 'heaven' in Spanish?" Sharon's "visions" and prophetic dreams are actually memories of how they all died. So in spirit form, she felt empowered and compelled to take control this time and to have upper hand of the Manson family. It's a very powerful and wishful portrayal of what "could" have happened that tragic August night.
When Sharon and her friends finally regain control, "survive", and walk towards the afterlife, she stops and sees the bodies of her friends and herself. She realizes they've been dead all along and been living in an alternate reality. Now aware of what's happened, she cradles her baby in her arms and is finally able to move on. So yes, the plot plays out on a much deeper, literary, and philosophical note in which Farrands envisioned for the victims. I honestly do not understand the hate this film has been receiving; it really baffles me.
I was aware long before that Sharon Tate had premonitions of her and her friends' deaths before they happened, and I'm so glad someone finally put it into context. Farrands had nothing but positive, pure, and respectful intentions for the victims and wanted to portray their story in a spiritual and personable light.
I and many people who DO understand the film find it to be a very emotional, suspenseful, effective, and unique yet faithful take on the Tate Murders. Hilary Duff's acting is very powerful and determined, and she conforms into the role of a modern Sharon Tate very well. The pacing is great, the actors have great chemistry together, and the soundtrack creates the perfect mood. Also very importantly, Farrands truly captured the ruthless horror and terror attached to this crime exceptionally well throughout the film.
Farrands is really a perfectionist director and he pays attention to detail, right down to exactly what the victims wore that night. He also had so much respect for the victims that he excluded the names of Manson's two female followers for the end credits and used their fictitious cult names instead. That should show you the degree to how much he wanted to have this film focus solely on Sharon Tate and her loved ones, stay true to that focus, and give them the respect they sincerely deserve.
So the next time you bash and hate on a great film, please be fully aware of the plot's true nature, the maker's intentions, and what they're trying to do. In this case, writer and director Daniel Farrands had the best of intentions and wanted to do nothing less than pay a unique, in-depth, and spiritual tribute to the lives of Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, Wojciech Frykowski, and Steven Parent - and the remarkable people they were.
Excellent film.
Interesting take
emilymurphy-5326511 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
There's a lot of reviews saying the situation is being exploited but are alright with all other movies of this type. It tells a story, and in a different way. The ending stays the same, those saying it was altered, clearly didn't understand the concept of the movie.
I appreciate some people will not understand the basis of the movie but I thought it was ok. The acting was good and it still got across the terror of Helter Skelter and ultimately still showed the murders.
I wouldn't watch it again but I wouldn't put anyone off watching it
Waste of time
jeffkragh5 April 2019
It is an absolute waste of time, it is predictable until it annoys one. It's bad acting and an even worse story. I can by no means recommend others to waste their time on this piece of amateur movie. That this at all can reach final production and publishing can simply wonder me.
The Haunting of Sharon Tate review
JoeytheBrit28 June 2020
Those who aren't offended by the vicious 1969 murder of Hollywood actress Sharon Tate and her friends serving as source material for a cheap, speculative horror flick will probably be bored to tears by writer/director Daniel Farrands' hamfisted effort. The decision to "re-imagine" the killings in the way that this film does is astoundingly misguided.
Confusing, even the movie doesn't understand itself
leopard-595724 January 2020
This movie starts ok for the first 15 mionutes of so and is easy to follow and lets you think that it will be a good movie to watch but its like driving an electric car from New York to California, it just won't make it and doesn't just fall a little short of the distance but it's a long way off and one which i could not bear to watch again. The idea is poor too, i don't know what they wanted to accomplish with this movie but i am sure they didn't achieve it, the whole execution is so poor, its like making a cup of coffee and using salt instead of sugar and vinegar instead of milk, it's just a wholly bad idea, tastes crap and something you would not put yourself through again, Stay away from this movie, stay sane, stay healthy. I'm sure if Manson had the ability somehow, he would kill the people who made this movie also.
Trash.
Lovesick665 October 2022
Sharon tate was eight and a half months pregnant when strangers entered her home after midnight, shot stabbed and brutalised the people she loved in front of her. After begging for her life she was stabbed 16 times. Sharon died calling out for her mother while her unborn son died inside of her. Those are the facts. Here's another one: this film is a waste of time and brain cells. Sharon tate and her family have already suffered enough. As if her highly publicised death wasn't horrible enough now you've got trash bag directors like Daniel Ferrands making trash bag films that add nothing to her legacy. Sharon once again is just a murder victim not a human being. Rest In Peace Sharon Tate.
Disgrace
asliceofsamcro-2308530 September 2019
This was literally the worst movie I've watched in a very long time. In my opinion it was in very bad taste, I am very surprised that this movie got the go ahead for production. A movie like this is suppose to tell the story of the deceased so that their story can live on. What they did to this movie was completely disrespectful. They twisted the story up so much I learned nothing about Sharon Tate and her horrific story. Really feel that if Hollywood is going to make a film based off someone's life they should keep to their story so that the viewers are able to see the story as it was indeed or how the story unfolded. The fact they took a story like Sharon Tate and tried giving it a happy ending is just out in left field.
If you're going to make something this controversial it needs to be bloody good - this wasn't
jtindahouse9 April 2019
On the surface 'The Haunting of Sharon Tate' could seem like a very insensitive movie to make. As I was watching it I kept wondering how writer/director Daniel Farrands pitched this to studios and the cast to get them on board. Then the end of the movie rolled around and I realised how he'd done it (I won't spoil anything). The way the film ended was probably the best thing this film had going for it because at least it gave it somewhat of a purpose. The problem is the rest of the film is so poorly put together a lot of people may not make it to the end.
The first thing that strikes you about this film is how incredibly out of place Hilary Duff is. Both as a casting choice and in terms of her acting ability - terrible. To be fair the whole cast is pretty ordinary, but her in the lead role is the most distractingly bad of the bunch. The film also has a very strange style of direction. Some scenes are filmed in a very bizarre way that doesn't seem to add anything to the film (although thinking about it now perhaps this could play into the ending of the film which I again won't go into details on). There are some action sequences though which are unforgivably bad, like the scene where a car backs up and hits a fence. You'll understand what I mean when/if you see it.
There were a couple of genuinely creepy moments though. All the scenes involving the Manson girls were quite unsettling and the way the final sequence played out was quite disturbing. It does help the filmmakers that this was based on actual events though to be fair, which adds a degree of horror to what you are watching. For the most part though 'The Haunting of Sharon Tate' is a poorly constructed and ill-advised venture that would best be avoided.
The first thing that strikes you about this film is how incredibly out of place Hilary Duff is. Both as a casting choice and in terms of her acting ability - terrible. To be fair the whole cast is pretty ordinary, but her in the lead role is the most distractingly bad of the bunch. The film also has a very strange style of direction. Some scenes are filmed in a very bizarre way that doesn't seem to add anything to the film (although thinking about it now perhaps this could play into the ending of the film which I again won't go into details on). There are some action sequences though which are unforgivably bad, like the scene where a car backs up and hits a fence. You'll understand what I mean when/if you see it.
There were a couple of genuinely creepy moments though. All the scenes involving the Manson girls were quite unsettling and the way the final sequence played out was quite disturbing. It does help the filmmakers that this was based on actual events though to be fair, which adds a degree of horror to what you are watching. For the most part though 'The Haunting of Sharon Tate' is a poorly constructed and ill-advised venture that would best be avoided.
Can I rate LESS THAN a star??!!!
dorotbl30 August 2019
OMG - Less than high school level acting, tedious, superfluous dialogue, boring script, horrific cinematography!!! Had to stop watching it was such a waste of my time. An obvious self indulgent effort by .... what WAS her name??? ..... Hillary Duff?!!! OMG AWFUL!!!!
Loved It!!!
Hawkeye11067026 July 2019
First off I have to say a huge congratulations to Hillary for taking on the role of Sharon Tate and playing it with such emotion. Daniel Farrands knew exactly what he was doing when he put this movie together and should be very proud of his work. With the crap movies that are out there today this movie should have gotten more notice and for better reasons. Yes it is a very sensitive subject matter but I commend them for having the balls for making a film about it. Give it a chance with an open mind. This film isn't about glorifying her death, This is more about the after life and living in purgatory.
Why so much hate???
AppaloniaR25 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
It wasn't that bad geez. I actually was quite moved at the end it was good actually I think people are just on the bandwagon about this because it's about Sharon Tate. The story shows what the poor victims went through and how it would have been if they had of seen the disgusting Manson freaks coming. Unfortunately the wrong people died... I wouldn't exactly say it's Oscar worthy or anything. Give it a try at least people after all have their own opinions and views.
The movie wasn't that bad!
Serenity300021 April 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Ignore the negative reviews. Trust me, I've seen worse. This movie doesn't claim to be a documentary or a remake. Spoilers...its how we all wished the real life events would have ended with survivals alive. Think, what would have happened if Sharon Tate and her friends would have survived Charles Manson? The acting was okay and a decent movie to watch. I gave it 4 out 10 stars.
Complete Waste of time
danielstorm199320 April 2019
This movie was really disrepectful to the remains of Sharon Tate and Roman Polanski. Dull acting and a pointless script. I know money is good, but wow Hilary Duff should really think twice before getting involved in this project.
Well I'm screwed up
woodslasher7 April 2019
Being a ghost hunters,I figured a haunting I STUPIDLY agreed to watch this with my wife sooooo. I am trapped for 2 hrs the best thing about the movie is the nights shots of The city and the credits meaning it's over ....
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
