How Old Was Zac Efron When He Filmed 17 Again
The worst film ever? Really? Get a life and stop complaining all the time.
After reading some extremely negative reviews on here (you know the ones that state this is the worst film they e'er watched in their lives) I tin can't assistance myself to wonder how many movies those people watched in their lives? I gauge just a dozen and so it could have been the worst motion-picture show they ever watched. I watched a dozen chiliad movies, if not more, and then I tin can easily say this wasn't that bad. In fact I enjoyed this movie. It might exist a bit wearisome but it fits the story. It's very minimalistic, with a very small bandage, but the story is interesting to follow. I thought Zac Efron did a good job playing his grapheme. Credits to the make-upwards artists that made him look like that. To exist honest I wouldn't pay whatsoever attention to those attention seeking reviewers that scored Gold with the lowest possible rating. Those people should try to lookout more movies, be more objective or just get a life and terminate whining almost every unmarried thing they can in life.
28 out of 36 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A little deadening and tedious at times just builds to a fun catastrophe
Zac Efron hasn't been in much lately. I suspect he'south probably merely working on other projects and doing other things with his time. Merely 'Gold' was non the type of picture show I expected him to come back with. At least information technology looked kind of interesting and so I was excited to bank check it out. Here are my thoughts.
The pic starts out very slowly. There are only two characters and neither of them are very interesting. At this point I was worried this could be a very slow and slow film. Then it gets to the plot though and things starting time to become a footling more interesting.
The matter that bugged me most about the film was that it made no sense. Efron's character stays to guard the aureate, still no 1 has ever found it earlier now. So why are they worried someone will miraculously find it in the next 5 days in the absolute middle of nowhere? I had problem getting past that plot-point.
A large portion of the movie is just Efron'south character past himself trying to survive. For a motion picture to become away with this you have to be impeccable, otherwise yous volition lose your audition fast. 'Castaway' was strong enough to pull it off (only) - and even then it took a volleyball to carry it through. 'Aureate' isn't quite every bit potent. The eye of this film can get a petty boring.
The brand-upward used on Efron'southward face up was very well done. It didn't seem particularly consistent (I could be wrong on that but information technology felt similar every time nosotros cut to a new scene he looked different to the last), but it did look very painful and quite realistic.
The ending of the movie is a fleck of fun. I like it when films aren't afraid to practice something a bit different in terms of concluding their picture.
This is a very somber film. At that place are exactly zero laughs attempted. It doesn't accept away from the motion-picture show, merely information technology is worth noting. 'Gilt' isn't a film I will scout again. It had its moments and was mildly enjoyable at times merely probably not one I would get out of my way to recommend. 6/10.
28 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Most Fell Asleep Watching This!
The premise was okay. Ii guys find a massive gold nugget (that looks nothing like a gold nugget). But the acting and everything else was subpar. I watched it till the end and parts of it didn't make sense. The parts of it that did make sense weren't really enjoyable. By the mode, who thought casting pretty boy Zac Efrom as a prospector in the outback was a skilful idea? The unabridged movie was but ridiculous!
45 out of 73 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One-half proficient, half bad
Gold (2022) had a promising start and overall has demonstrated solid production value, although the washed-out wait got sometime fast.
While the acting was perfectly fine, as it gets closer to the end, information technology starts to wear on you. This isn't actually a human being nature report, more like a semi-survival picture show full of stupid decisions. The only homo trait hither was greed. Nothing more than that. In a future like this, you would think people would've still bet on survival over pointless death.
The resolution is obvious from the start since this is what would happen in a existent-life state of affairs. They added a little "twist" at the end, but information technology barely connects, since it means nothing for the viewer or the characters, and rather solidifies the bulletin the film is trying to push.
The whole story relies on our master graphic symbol not being too bright, and it's fine. The problem is that we barely know anything virtually the globe and the characters. Frankly, in that location are no characters going through arcs, people meet issues in a non-so-bright futurity, and never alter. This was probably intended, and probably realistic enough, only fifty-fifty a couple of flashbacks establishing motivations or attitudes would've been slap-up. Peculiarly since the acting was good.
Every bit it is, Gilt (2022) is an ok semi-survival film but feels very shallow and does not connect the viewer to what these "characters" are going through. In that location are also some things that make little sense, like why Virgil didn't simply go out when he got the Stranger'due south loot. Since one can walk there on human foot, he could've given it a endeavor, it'due south non as a centre of nowhere as they said it was. I guess greed is an answer to anything in this, but the introductory scene (and the burial scene) suggested some sort of dignity or reliability in Virgil, before long to be gone, again, greed. Also, it is unclear when Keith got dorsum since neither he nor the other Stranger was afflicted by the dust tempest. I guess I'one thousand nitpicking, but I'd withal adopt Virgil to switch into survival way at the end, there is greed, but people even so have survival instincts.
Overall, the film leaves a bad taste, which is intended simply feels empty on details, which is not. It's not long, merely I can't wholeheartedly recommend it, more than similar 50/l.
27 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Greetings from Iran, I'g going to help you make up your heed
After watching the new and utterly disappointing Matrix and Resident Evil films, I was beginning to lose hope in the picture show manufacture, when this movie came along and proved to me that at that place are even so excellent directors out there who can take a unproblematic idea and plough it into "gilt". (pun intended)
I enjoyed this movie from start to finish. I have always liked survival movies, especially the ones which involve trying to survive in the desert. The motion-picture show does an excellent task by not providing any sort of back story. You have no idea where the main character is headed and why (he refers to his destination vagely as the chemical compound), or what's going on in the world for that matter. Information technology makes you think of a post apocalyptic world, a Mad Max kind of globe, but never gives you any clear hint as to what's really going on. While a bit weird, that'southward completely ok with me, considering it helps you focus on the main plot; i.e. Trying to survive in the desert, which was admittedly enjoyable.
The shots were all beautifully taken and the accompanying music added to the mood. The ending came every bit a big surprise. The only real complaint I have is that it concluded abruptly, but I totally get why they did it; because they were focused on making a moral point, and you can't assistance but think about that moral point the entire fourth dimension the moving-picture show is playing, because information technology's so in your confront.
If you savour survival movies with the desert every bit their setting, you're in for a hell of a ride, merely if yous don't similar such tedious-paced movies, you're going to observe this movie excruciatingly tiresome and wearisome, so know your likes and dislikes before watching this moving-picture show so as not to waste your time or crtiticize such an excellent picture unfairy just because you didn't know what yous were going into and were not familiar with your likes and dislikes.
If y'all're looking for action, horror, romance, science-fiction or a fast-paced movie, look elsewhere, because that's not what you lot're going to get from this motion-picture show.
I promise you lot're non giving me thumbs down but because I immensely enjoyed this movie, because I clearly told you about what this movie entails, and hopefully, now you can brand up your heed.
29 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What did I just watch?
Alert: Spoilers
In a nutshell, unknown man #1, in an unknown state, at an unknown time, working for an unknown company, heading to an unknown location, for an unknown reason, is picked up by unknown man #2 , then break down in an unknown barron/desert/outback land. Homo #1 finds a golden nugget which is bigger than first appears, tries to move it, can't, deliberates with man #2. Man #2 goes on a 4 twenty-four hours journeying to selection up an excavator, meanwhile man #1 "protects" the gold, fights off wild dogs, a crazy adult female, kills the crazy woman, buries the crazy adult female, digs up the crazy woman, moves the crazy woman, burns the crazy adult female, buries the crazy woman, survives a sandstorm, gets impaled with a stick, meets crazy woman #2 (crazy adult female #one's sister), gets rid of crazy woman #2, gets eaten by dogs. Human being #ii returns, waits till human being #one is dead, tries to have gold for himself, gets killed past an arrow from unknown person. (crazy woman #two most likely) The End.
THAT IS LITERALLY Information technology!
This is by far, the virtually boring film I have ever watched in my entire life. It was painful to endure, and I only watched it until the stop because the outcome of the gilt was what kept me somewhat interested. I suspect Zac Efron was merely cast in order to hook people in, and no doubt cost 75% of the upkeep. But in reality they could take cast whatsoever B or C listing Histrion, or indeed a completely unknown person, and still would have given the film the exact same boring result. Its really non a good moving-picture show in my stance. Highly not - recommended. 3/ten.
43 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
ABSOLUTELY PAINFUL TO WATCH
Alarm: Spoilers
1 hour xl dragged like information technology was 3 hours or more. How any major actors would consider doing a film like this is beyond me and I have worked in the entertainment industry for over 40 years.
First of all the opening scene shows vultures in a tree, so, there are NO vultures in Commonwealth of australia unless I have been blind all my life. 1 review on here mentions coyotes, there are NO coyotes here either. The dogs who attack the camp are similar zip I have always seen or heard of here. If there are dogs like that they would certainly non exist left to roan near a compound which I am presuming is a mining compound he was heading for. Dingos certainly roam the outback but goose egg looks like these wild dogs.
For a while I thought the story may be set in the United states just so I noticed at that place were driving in a right hand drive vehicle. As for the sand storm scene, Efron's grapheme gets a tree branch in his right side, a scene later information technology's in his left side, then it returns to his right side and when he tries to finish the claret it'due south in the left side again. How could the Director allow such a major error every bit this to be in the final print?
Zac Efron, this movie and your atrocious makeup puts y'all at the bottom of the butt in film making. What happened to that excellent star from The Greatest Showman?
16 out of 24 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Australian gilt and American fool'southward gold
"Gilded" is a pic nigh two drifters who are travelling through the Due south Australian desert and they stumble across the biggest gilded asset ever found. They hatch a program to protect and excavate their bounty with i man leaving (Human being #2/Keith, played by Anthony Hayes) to secure the necessary equipment to pull it out of the world. The other man (Man #one/ Virgil played past Zac Efron), remains on the spot to secure the boodle. I cannot even imagine what Virgil (Zac) went through to persevere extreme oestrus conditions but to hold onto what he thinks he needs. I liked the plot every bit you can give your own interpretation to the facts of this movie. What is the value of the biggest clamper of golden in the world if you are in the middle of the desert, dehydrated, sunburnt and you lot kind of know you volition non survive? What would y'all exercise? This pic conspicuously shows the everlasting greed and the lengths people will go to secure themselves a fortune. And I loved the cinematography, digitally enhanced or not. Was but awesome. And hither nosotros also see a different Zac in a character that he never played. And he succeeded as he put down an crawly interim performance. The story is concise and you kind of know what the other guy his plan will be. Simply never mind, this is a very practiced movie and deserves to be watched.
29 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Don't really sympathise why people said this moving-picture show is proficient I found it quite boring and predictable
Warning: Spoilers
I watched it and the motion picture was actually slow. Also the main hero was stupid to not talk to the sister, since he already figured out that he was being betrayed (the guy gold him that he is fixing the pipe and afterwards he told him that information technology was already set up style before. So he is lying), I couldn't empathized with him since he was a jerk and killed the ladyd. Waste of time .. Salve your time folks. The ending was stupid... waste of a movie yes the guy watches waiting for him to die simply the guy that waits for him to die gets killed with a arrow out of nowhere an it ends.. worst ending to a moving-picture show.
20 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Got thirty mins in
What a snore fest. Turned information technology off after 30 minutes. There'southward nix at all interesting about this. Irksome characters, zero story. Go watch pigment dry out and relieve the effort of sitting through this garbage.
52 out of 93 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Worst pic I have seen in my life!
Starts Off Bad, But Wait, it Gets Worse... one Star. I would give 0 Stars, but the rating system won't let it.
1 60 minutes and 36 minutes in a desert watching a human being endeavour and so survive, is that something to watch?
All the x star scores is from friends and family unit of the iii actors involved in the movie.
If the writer/managing director got funding for this, information technology is a good example of someone completely wasting time AND MONEY on boring, bromidic trash like this.
37 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fight for SURVIVAL. (Extreme "makeover" of Zach Efron's face)
Dour, painful and raw portrait of Zach Efron, who accidentally finds lots of gold in the midst of a huge desert and who is determined to protect his new plant treasure come up hell or loftier water. The blistering sun and man eating coyotes being his worst enemies. Or is greed his worst enemy?
The good: terrific extreme makeover of Zach Efron's face up. You lot have never take seen him this ugly and repulsive. Great acting operation as well. This is basically a i man movie, with only iii other small supporting roles. That's all.
More than good: however slowburning in nature this story might be (nothing much happens), in that location is all the same a suspense edifice upwards in strength, the suspense beingness IF and HOW Zach Efron is gonna survive the desert.
Non whatsoever bad? If I have to be really disquisitional, there are a few plot turns that I could rationalize to pieces, but on the whole, this story made sense. And it is a tough cookie! Quite impressive.
Not a happy terminate. Not a happy film. Those folks who want to be merely entertained, better move on to Spiderman and the sorts...
18 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
a death triangle of patience...
Watching over a mesomorphic mountain of gilded in the australian desert outback country. A twisted story nearly greed and gloathing gilt like rex midas of the by.
Hot dominicus and delirious minds, its litterary gold fever. A small cast survival thriller, a story that desmond bagley wouldve chuckled over and wilbur smith would nod near. The production shows the harsh dried out hell of australian desertlife, where the flies are kings and the snake and scorpions are the warriors. Neatly filmed and acted, the makeup squad gone bananas, and most stuff stashed like a good ol' madmax stage.
If youre able to sit down and look for things to happen, youll exist rewarded, i did. A modest recommend from the grumpy old homo.
24 out of 45 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Had such high hopes- instead massive borefest!!!
Warning: Spoilers
I really really wanted to like and bask this motion picture. Sadly, information technology offers no backstory, explanations, flashbacks, or informative clues of ANY kind. Efron is travelling to the Compound out in BFE of the outback. Why is he going? No real explanation. What has happened to the world at large? No explanation. Why does he seem to exist a naive moron? Why does he act the style he does? Why do other people speak so cryptically which confuses more than enlightens? No explanations for annihilation. Then, but when you regret wasting your time watching it, but are glad it is about to finish...something even dumber and unbelievable volition happen and rub salt in the wound...repeatedly.
It had a dandy premise and promise.smh.
11 out of 16 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Excellent production
However, despite the fantabulous endeavour and story ,information technology, in my mind was unsatisfying.
The bleak decolourised done out look is a bit of a cliche these days and fabricated it visually bland, especially in the kind of landscapes it was filmed in. That was the intention I suppose, but The Good , the Bad and the Ugly desert scenes ( in colour) were far more effective in conveying mood and intensity.
Not a commercial moving-picture show and might but appeal to males, lone, alienated desert freaks.
Only an opinion.
46 out of 81 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
No goldmine
Very different picture... didnt expect it to be every bit skillful as it was.... I was engrossed the whole time merely could see why others wouldnt be. Zac efron is a very good actor didnt charge per unit him in erlier stuff but this shows his talent 7/x.
19 out of 28 institute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A dingy little gem of film
Original indie "Gilt" shows what can be done with raw talent, a striking setting & little upkeep. In a vaguely post-apocalyptic globe, tough loners Zac Efron & Anthony Hayes head for different reasons into a arid African desert... where they chance upon a huge rock of aureate. Hayes goes for an excavator while Efron stays to baby-sit the find - fighting dehydration, wild dogs, nomadic Susie Porter, snakes, scorpions, sand-storms et al. While information technology'south a hard, visceral & gritty spotter, Efron's functioning is outstanding, matched by Hayes' direction (he ALSO wrote it - simply, notwithstanding steeped in articulate messaging). Major props to both Hayes & Efron for making this dingy little gem of a film.
six out of 8 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gilded FeverLESS
Such a shame for a moving picture produced hither in Commonwealth of australia. Poor narrative, poor product design and poorer cinematography. The colour grading of this film aka the desaturation looks cheap which underpins a stench of desperate film making. Be warned, this is 90mins y'all'll never get back and you'll offset looking at your phone within the commencement 10mins. Truly.
xv out of 25 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The greed of gold...
Alarm: Spoilers
Accolades to Zac and the crew for indelible such a project set in the harsh arid mural of a dystopian earth (mainly the Aussie dessert outback), where fifty-fifty Bear Grylls would not accept survived. How they managed such a shoot had me more than intrigued than the movie itself.
The story could accept been told in short form, just nosotros had to endure a whole feature to sentry Zac go loony merely for a chuck of gold; the mother lode that will not role from the earth. Simply still I was intrigued in observing mental disintegration under the scorching sun with pesky flies and a scorpion for companion. Non to forget those hungry wild dogs waiting for some man burger.
Nevertheless, hats off to Zac Efron who gave the performance of his life. One of his best, without having to say much (thank you to the post-apocalyptic brand-up). To superlative information technology all off was the effective cinematography that actually got into the sunburnt mind of the protagonist. Maybe next fourth dimension he will non forget the sunscreen foam.
29 out of 60 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Trailer is Much Better than the Picture
There's ii reasons why this picture went straight to streaming - for Zac Efron to accept a paid holiday, and the other reason is this movie a steaming pile of B/S
I'thousand certain 99% of budget went to Efron, the cast and crew was paid with Monopoly dollars.
When was the last time yous read 'make-up was expert' - NEVER.
Management, other cast members, cinematography, script - everything else was atrocious. Typical for about Australian productions.
Don't waste matter your precious time.....
26 out of 50 constitute this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tiresome burn
Starts off well and ends disappointedly.
Zac is very good throughout the movie, it has a similar feel to Tom Hanks in Castaway.
Sadly there's no Wilson to proceed Zan visitor.
The terminal thirty mins is a terribly slow burn.
fourteen out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fools Gold
Having tried to lookout man the recently released The Tourist, I didn't think annihilation could be as bad as that.
Male child was I wrong.
Once again we have the writer directing their own poorly written script, pregnant in that location is no 1 to correct or bespeak out mistakes.
From the very opening scenes when the photographic camera lingered on ants, I correctly suspected this was a written and directed by the aforementioned person flick.
The pacing is wrong, with the scenes waiting for the viewer to realise how much trouble the director has gone to get it looking right. The lack of dialogue is probably supposed to make the film more than brooding but instead makes it unrealistic.
The "twist" was visible from the beginning of the film, so in that location was no surprise.
It would announced that the streaming services are drastic for content, and are earthworks around in the clay to produce what they call gilt, merely is only fools gold.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Best watched with fast forwards
This has to be the virtually boring pointless movies of the year. Nothing like people, animals and...other tings(dont desire to put in a "spoiler"), that appear in the center of the desert out of nowhere. If you lot want to sentry Zac wander effectually looking thristy and dirty for 90 minutes...enjoy. The end of the movie is moronic. Don't waste your time. How anyone could find annihilation redeaming most this film is baffling. No wonder it grossed $2700 in its opening weekend...yes...twenty seven hundred dollars. And those movie goers probably felt ripped off...
v out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Zac goes solo
Warning: Spoilers
Not much under the sun only 1 huge gilded nugget, that'south about all in this movie. Zac Efron is busting his chops trying to break away from "High School Musical" but flying solo isn't his strongest asset. 2 drifters driving through the Aussie outback dessert detect the biggest chuck of golden nugget e'er. When they realize that they need a excavator to remove it Zac volunteers to stay behind a protect it.
The next hour and and then is but Zac fighting the harsh dessert elements, scorpions, snake'due south and wild dingo'due south. Though information technology moves at a decent stride the action merely isn't enough to concur your attention. I found myself checking the time left or trying to focus on this movie. There are all the same some actors who could have ran with this movie and added something to information technology but for Zac Efron it was a ok performance. He needs a bandage to smoothen and allow him to dig deep for a performance which going solo every bit he does here doesn't allow him to do. He adds nothing new which is sad considering his star potential.
Greed played the biggest part in this film and with the action being wearisome causes it to become very predictable. I knew within minutes how this movie was going to finish though I was as well correct on the ending also. I gave it 5 because I thought Zac did give it a hell of a become and to me tried his all-time. The rest of the cast was simply there. If this were a star vehicle for him information technology wouldn't have done much to boost his star only could have opened door's for bigger roles.
Decided to add more to this considering as I thought almost information technology you tin can't even compare information technology to recent movies like "Castaway" of *I Am Legend". In "Castaway" Tom Hanks had a whole jungle to piece of work with, a sea of nutrient and a cave for shelter. In "I Am Legend" Will Smith had a whole urban center, enough food for a army and a apartment for shelter not to mention a domestic dog for company. What did Zac Efron have besides a blazing lord's day, miles of sand, almost no food and water. It was just 90 minutes of watching a man slowly die. The body couldn't even perform with the amount of food he did take and a heat index through the roof.
Giving it v star's is a stretch but I gave Efron the credit for tackling such a part that to me did nothing to boost his star status. Salve yourself the time and skip this one as information technology's nothing interesting under the sun just a guy slowly dying and zippo more.
2 out of 2 establish this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
what a waste of my time
Starts off okay, for what nosotros've seen on this genre, but so it drags out, never builds up to anything, and it'south just plain horrible and bad, and annoying at some points for how non-sensical information technology is. I thought information technology was gonna be practiced and I can't believe I wasted an hr and a half of my life watching this 127 hours wanna be crap.
5 out of 7 plant this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6020800/reviews
Post a Comment for "How Old Was Zac Efron When He Filmed 17 Again"