Shout by k p
Did you all give high ratings to make a point? Half way through the movie I could not keep my eyes open. Seriously... 8.7 / 10 in IMDB. Crazy!
loading replies
I’m with you. Had to split into 2 viewings because I fell asleep after first hour. Don’t feel like you’re the only one would thought it was kind of dull. :thumbsup_tone2:
Cheap cop out way of writing an ending. The intended effect Safdie was going for was everyone will wonder, “why all the gentrification themed - non-magical realism 9 previous episodes?” They’ll think he’s a genius but realize theres little rewatch value. For this ending? Nah. Safdies character was cringe, the episodes were cringe. Stone and Fielder made the experiment slightly watchable but I see this series as sealing Safdie for me as having gone beyond his expertise. It seems he was given an opportunity by the studio with the seed of an idea that never really grows up - rather it just evaporates.
loading replies
@katurian In all due respect, you are misattributing what i said about Safdie as a personal jibe without absorbing the context of the rest. I will attempt to explain, although these comment reviews never go well when someone is insulted by what I said about a person. So, if you can for one moment while reading this try to separate yourself from whatever attachment you have to him. Whether you see him as a generational hero of some kind, or as the bringer of "realness" based off Good Times and Uncut Gems - try to not be defensive and turn on your critical brain. Safdies character, as this reality show producer, one with a past, likely doing things on the shady side as we see in episode 3 when he picks up the girl at the bar -is so overplayed it throws the show off balance. The show was off balance from ep3 onwards and with no magical realism to boot, tossing Nathan on a ceiling with his inevitable end was not bizarre - it was dumb, bad writing. That's the point you should take away from my review.
Blake Snyder, a screenwriting author, would call this 'double mumbo jumbo', where the writer(s) attempt to throw in multiple angles. Here its social commentary, sarcasm, cinema verite and then suddenly out of nowhere, magical realism. It's bad writing. You can disagree with me on that but it makes the last episode the only one worth watching.
There are these extended 30 minute sequences of Safdie, by himself, drunk, depressed, on the road, in his room - sequences that have zero rewatch value. You couldn't pay me to rewatch those scenes. They do not fulfill any promises of what storytelling is. There is no closure to his character. We never quite really are shown why to even care about his character to justify his screen time. And all the while, this rather interesting plot-line behind him with Emmas character and Fielders character is the point. So without you being defensive, if you can give me a clear concise way to understand why Safdie's screen time in earlier episodes mattered, I'd be open to admit I'm wrong. Again, it's not that i'm singling him out. It's that he singled himself out and didn't steal the show, just weighed it down.
