Horns

A reasonably faithful, but mostly good adaptation of the book. I was a bit worried about Daniel Radcliffe, but he was fine in the end and handled Ig in all situations, and I was also curious to see what the somewhat unbalanced Alexandre Aja would do for me. In the end I have to say that Horns has a very good atmosphere, it's entertaining and quite suspenseful... and if nothing else, it features Juno Temple, gorgeous as always. The only thing that disappointed me was the slightly off finale – even some TV series have better ones. But whatever. (04/19/2020)

I guess I have some kind of disorder, but when I see Daniel Radcliffe somewhere, I immediately think of a wand, a scar and round glasses, but that's a subjective problem. Horns isn't a bad horror movie, I'd definitely say it has an unexpected twist, even good execution. The premise kind reminded me of The Crow, as there is also a form of revenge for a beloved girl who was murdered. In the end, I decided to give it an average rating – the film isn’t that bad, but it’s stuff we’ve seen elsewhere before, and the ending in the woods didn't really appeal to me. (09/06/2015)

I never saw Horns during its premiere, and I was disappointed about that. The idea of exposing a person to brutal social pressure and mental suffering to such an extent that they are unable to bear it in a rational way and unwillingly transform into a supernatural being from another (dark) world was already masterfully portrayed by Bulgakov in "The Master and Margarita." In my opinion, such a concept has great potential, but the director and screenwriter managed to completely squander it through their hard work. In many comments, Daniel Radcliffe's involvement in the main role is discussed. Although his performance is not Oscar-worthy, it didn't bother me, and his presence eventually became one of the few positives that can be said about Horns. Horns could have been many things, ranging from dark fantasy to a horror comedy (let's remember how excellently The Witches of Eastwick turned out). Instead, Alexandre Aja created a didactic morality tale full of sentiment, permeated with religious symbolism, and using the most clichéd genre tropes. I could partially forgive him for that if he hadn't been so literal and pathetic, and if he had been more sophisticated and imaginative. This is a disappointment. Overall impression: 25%. (07/12/2021)

Merrin becomes just a shadow of its book counterpart, and not even Juno Temple can save it. Daniel Radcliffe proves that he is a capable actor who can easily rid himself of his British accent to truly give everything to the role. He is more than tolerable, and even though I thought he was a bad choice, I am ultimately satisfied. I am less satisfied with the excessive use of CGI effects and the fact that Alexandre Aja couldn't extract true horror from the book adaptation. (10/13/2014)

Horns is a great creative trip that combine hardly combinable genre positions with ease, while even managing to make fun of their sacred clichés (the priest’s advice, gay cops). Alexandre Aja is not just a great horror director, but also a lover of dramatic stories with a romantic dimension who can skillfully juggle our favorite pulp genres. And this is his freshly original and hard to imitate wet dream, in which, by the way, Stephen King will also find something to make him happy. (03/30/2015)