A potentially great film being held hostage by its PG-13 rating and its messy, all over the places screenwriting.
By PG-13 I don't simply mean its visuals/goriness, but most importantly its dialogues, themes, and storytelling it tries to raise. Let me explain.
First, the dialogues.
The film opens with murder and Batman narrating the city's anxious mood. We get a glimpse of noir in this scene, but it soon falls flat due to a very uninteresting, plain, forgettable choice of words Batman used in his narration. Mind you, this is not a jab at Pattinson - Pattinson delivered it nicely. But there is no emotion in his line of words - there is no adjectives, there is no strong feelings about how he regards the city full of its criminals.
Here's a line from the opening scene. "Two years of night has turned me to a nocturnal animal. I must choose my targets carefully. It's a big city. I can't be everywhere. But they don't know where I am. When that light hits the sky, it's not just a call. It's a warning to them. Fear... is a tool. They think I am hiding in the shadows. Watching. Waiting to strike. I am the shadows." Okay? Cool. But sounds like something from a cartoon. What does that tell us about you, Batman?
Compare this to a similar scene uttered by Rorschach in Watchmen. "The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood. And when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. All those liberals and intellectuals, smooth talkers... Beneath me, this awful city, it screams like an abattoir full of retarded children, and the night reeks of fornication and bad consciences." You can say that Rorschach is extremely edgy (he is), but from that line alone we can tell his hatred towards the city, and even more so: his perspective, his philosophy that guides him to conduct his life and do what he does.
Rorschach's choice of words is sometimes verbose, but he is always expletive and at times graphic, making it clear to the audience what kind of person he is. Batman in this film does not. His words are always very safe, very carefully chosen, which strikes as an odd contrast to Pattinson's tortured portrayal of Batman as someone with a seemingly pent up anger. His choice of words is very PG-13 so that the kids can understand what Batman is trying to convey.
And this is not only in the opening scene. Throughout the film, the dialogues are written very plainly forgettable. It almost feels like the characters are having those conversations just to move the plot forward. Like that one encounter between Batman and Catwoman/Selina when she broke into the house to steal the passport or when Selina asked to finish off the "rat". They flow very oddly unnatural, as if those conversations are written to make them "trailer-able" (and the scenes indeed do appear on the trailer).
Almost in all crucial plot points the writers feel the need to have the characters to describe what has happened, or to explictly say what they are feeling - like almost every Gordon's scene in crime scene, or Selina's scene when she's speaking to Batman. It feels like the writers feel that the actors' expression just can't cut it and the audience has to be spoonfed with dialogues; almost like they're writing for kids.
Second, the storytelling.
Despite being a film about vengeance-fueled Batman (I actually like that cool "I'm vengeance" line) we don't get to see him actually being in full "vengeance" mode. Still in the opening we see Batman punching some thugs around. That looks a little bit painful but then the thugs seem to be fit enough to run away and Batman let them be. Then in the middle of the film we see Batman does something similar to mafias. Same, he just knocked them down but there's nothing really overboard with that. Then eventually in the car chase scene with the Penguin, Batman seem to be on "full rage mode", but over... what? He was just talking to Penguin a moment ago. The car chase scene itself is a bit pointless if not only to show off the Batmobile. And Batman did nothing to the Penguin after, just a normal questioning, not even harsher than Bale's Batman did to Heath's Joker in The Dark Knight - not in "'batshit insane' cop" mode as Penguin put it.
Batman's actions look very much apprehensive and controlled. Nothing too outrageous. Again, at odds with Pattinson's portrayal that seem to be full of anger; he's supposed to be really angry but somehow he still does not let his anger take the best of him. The only one time he went a bit overboard that shocked other characters is when he kept punching a villain near the end of the film. But even then it's not because his anger; it's because he injected some kind of drug (I guess some adrenaline shot). A very safe way to drop a parent-friendly message that "drug is bad, it can change you" in a PG-13 film.
And all that supposed anger... we don't get to see why he is angry and where his anger is directed at. Compare this to Arthur Fleck in Joker where it is clear as sky why Arthur would behave the way the does in the film. I mean we know his parents' death troubled him, but it's barely even discussed, not even in brief moments with Alfred (except in one that supposedly "shocking" moment). So... where's your vengeance, Mr. Vengeance? And what the hell are you vengeancing on?
Speaking of "shocking" moment... this is about the supposed Wayne family's involvement in the city's criminal affairs that has been teased early in the film. Its revelation was very anticlimactic: the supposed motive and the way it ended up the way it is, all very childish. If the film wanted the Wayne to be a "bad person", there's a lot of bads that a billionaire can do: tax evasion, blood diamond, funding illegal arms trade, fending off unions, hell, they can even do it the way the Waynes in Joker did it: hints of sexual abuses. But no, it has to be some bloody murder again, and all for a very trivial reason of "publicity". As if the film has to make it clear to the kids: "hey this guy's bad because he killed someone!" Which COULD work if the film puts makes taking someone's life has a very serious consequence. But it just pales to the serial killing The Riddler has done.
Even more anticlimactic considering how Bruce Wayne attempted to find a resolve in this matter only takes less than a 5 minute scene! It all involves only a bit of dialogues which boils down to how Thomas Wayne has a good reason to do so. Bruce somehow is convinced with that and has a change of heart instantly, making him looks very gullible.
And of course the ending is very weak and disappointing. First, Riddler's final show directly contradicts his initial goal to expose and destroy the corrupt elites. What he did instead is making the lives of the poor more difficult, very oxymoron for someone supposed to be as smart as him.
Second, the way Batman just ended up being "vengeance brings nothing and I should save people more than hurting people" does not get enough development to have him to say that in the end. Again - where's your vengeance? And how did you come to such character development if nothing is being developed on? And let's not get to how it's a very safe take against crime and corruption that closely resembles Disney's moralistic pandering in Marvel Cinematic Universe film.
Last, the visuals.
I'm not strictly speaking about gore, though that also factors in the discussion. The film sets this up as a film about hunting down a serial killer. But the film barely shows how cruel The Riddler can be to his victims. Again, back to the opening scene: we get it, Riddler killed the guy, but it does not look painful at all as it looks Riddler just knocked him twice. The sound design is very lacking that it does not seem what The Riddler done was conducted very painfully. Riddler then threw away his murder weapon, but we barely see blood. Yet when Gordon arrived to the crime scene, he described the victim as being struck multiple times with blood all over. What?
Similarly, when Riddler forced another victim to wear a bomb in his neck. The situation got pretty tense, but when the bomb eventually blow off, we just got some very small explosion like a small barrel just exploded, not a human being! I mean I'm not saying we need a gory explosion with head chopped off like in The Boys, but it does not look like what would happen if someone's head got blown off. Similarly when another character got almost blown off by a bomb - there's no burnt scar at all.
Why the hell are they setting up those possibly gory deaths and scars if they're not going to show how severe and painful these are? At least not the result - we don't need to see blood splattered everywhere - just how painful the process is. Sound design and acting of the actors (incl. twitching, for example) would've helped a lot even we don't see the gore, like what James Franco did in The 127 Hours or Hugh Jackman in Logan. In this film there's almost no tense at all resulting from those.
I'm not saying this film is terrible.
The acting, given the limited script they had, is excellent. Pattinson did his best, so did Paul Dano (always likes him as a villain), Zoe Kravitz, and the rest. Cinematography is fantastic; the lighting, angle, everything here is very great that makes a couple of very good trailers - perhaps one could even say that the whole film trades off coherency for making the scenes "trailer-able". The music is iconic, although with an almost decent music directing. And I guess this detective Batman is a fresh breath of air.
But all that does not make the movie good as in the end it's still all over the places and very PG-13.
Especially not with the 3 hours runtime where many scenes feel like a The Walking Dead filler episode.
If you're expecting a Batman film with similar gritty, tone to The Dark Knight trilogy or Joker, this film is not for you. But if you only want a live-action cartoon like pre-Nolan Batmans or The Long Halloween detective-style film, well, I guess you can be satisfied with this one.
Absolutely disappointing rehash of the first trilogy. Disney had a real opportunity to do something new and exciting with this ipr but resorted to rushed writing with an extremely compressed story that makes no sense and fails to make anyone care for the characters or events. Emo Kylo is an outstanding metaphor for the whole deal.
Great episode, but it didn't feel like Black Mirror. It's missing the sci-fi element, the dystopian topic, the futuristic technology aspect.
Tumblr gifs make this movie look way better than it really is.
What a great movie! What movies should be like. This needs to be viewed in theaters! Highly recommend.
I fell asleep during this movie and then realized I needed to wake up two more times to sync with reality
This movie isn't as bad as everyone made it to be. It's so much better than Fantastic Four and you're an idiot if you even think of comparing them to each other.
The fact that the main stream media is telling you not to watch this movie tells you everything you need to know — it's a must watch for everyone!
If you ever needed a lesson in not listening to reviewers and making your own mind up about a movie, this is it. The Suicide Squad is brought to life by David Ayer in this summer blockbuster. It is 2+ hours of hard hitting FUN, with incredible portrayals of comic book favourites. Will Smith IS Deadshot, Margot Robbie IS Harley Quinn, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje IS Killer Croc, Jai Courtney IS Captain Boomerang... and The Joker??? I WANTED MORE!!! Well the biggest compliment I can pay to Jared Leto is that I didn't think about Heath Ledger once, it was a completely different yet interesting portrayal.
In this fun action flick, the bad guys are sent to take down a greater evil. Critics of the big bad in this movie seem to have completely missed the point. The big bad in this movie is merely a plot device, to help us get to see our protagonists form as a team. If anything the real villain of the piece is the one who forms this team of misfits. Amanda Waller is portrayed DIABOLICALLY by the incredible Viola Davis and the part where she turns on and guns down her own employees is SHOCKING . Complaining about the villain in a movie where the protagonists are bad guys is akin to complaining about the villain in Deadpool... THAT'S NOT THE POINT OF THE MOVIE!
This movie leaves you with a thirst for more of these characters, and some shots such as when Will Smith is stood on top of a car and gunning down henchman after henchman after henchman look like they have just been ripped out of a comic book and put on screen by the wonderfully talented David Ayer.
If you are a comic book fan, or a DC movies fan, heck even if you are just an average movie watcher... watch this movie! It is SO MUCH FUN!!!
UPDATE: Just seen the Extended Edition and I really enjoyed the new scenes. This extended version doesn't change the nature of the movie in the way the Ultimate Cut did for BvS but I found it let's the movie breathe a little and solves some of the editing problems people complained about. I still love the theatrical release but my recommendation is to watch the extended version of this movie!
Great movie, I loved it. And the less you know about it before watching, the better.
Having been around for the 1st top gun I was afraid about this one. But it did not disappoint I heard people say it's better than the original... Well it definitely is!! The casting of Rooster is amazing. Also seeing Val Kilmer again brought a tear to my eye. What a movie and the music of Hans Zimmer is epic as always!!
What is a woman? You are either Male, Female or Hermaphrodite the rest is made up. You either have a penis or a vagina... If you cut of your penis and take hormones you are still a male with a cut off penis that's taking female hormones. Two of the chromosomes (the X and the Y chromosome) determine your sex as male or female when you are born. They are called sex chromosomes: Females have 2 X chromosomes. Males have 1 X and 1 Y chromosome. If there are extra chromosomes its very rare and a defect. What is this clown world? You can't argue with facts...
I have nothing against transgenders but let's keep it real! It's the same when I would identify myself as a male cat while you clearly see a human female. And I can't expect anyone to change reality and enter my imaginary delusional bubble and call me a male cat. Just because you feel like something doesn't make it reality. Just like Martina Big isn't a black woman, Dennis Avner isn't a tiger and Rodrigo Alves isn't a Ken Doll. But again if you are a male and you really want to live your life as a female go do what makes you happy! Live your life as a transgender! But don't claim to be something you are not just because you feel like it.
I really wanted to quote this:
Matt: "I want to understand reality and get to the truth."
Professor Dr. Patrick Grzanka: Yea, I'm really uncomfortable with that language "getting to the truth" because that sounds deeply transphobic to me and if you keep going we are going to stop the interview. The word truth is condescending and rude"
This movie is legendary. someday it'll become a classic. I don't know why someone is complaing about why they didn't get to explore more of Oppenheimer's character, or what he was. I think that person needs to rewatch this movie. Scene are not snippets, It is complete and well integrated. Yes, they covered a lot ground. Could it have been a miniseries? of course! but saying that this movie fails to integrate different aspect, is completely false. Even character whom had small screen time, did perfect. I think everyone needs to hit theatre, so Hollywood makes more fucking movie like this. which delves deep in character and dark part of human chatacter. Not everything is Pink and happy. I think, you must watch it in theatre decide for yourself. I think I have spent all my penny well. Thank you Nolan.
Damn. Just got back from watching Hereditary and I don't think that I've uttered "Holy shiiiiiiiit" under my breath so many times during a single movie. This movie took creepiness to the next level and really delivered as a horror flick with minimal "jump scares". I'd definitely recommend watching this with a nice big audience because it's without a doubt an "experience" you won't forget.
Dunkirk by Christopher Nolan was just a fabulous experience. I definitely enjoyed the movie quite a bit from start to finish, and usually war movies aren't really my cup of tea (at least not anymore). However, cinematically, the entire movie is just a masterpiece. As a big movie buff, I could appreciate how meticulously crafted the whole movie was. It's so hard to create a movie like this within this genre while trying to remain "minimal", but Christopher Nolan accomplishes it in every sense of the word.
He seamlessly interweaves 3-4 different plot narratives/timelines, while using minimal amounts of exposition. He gives the viewer such a sense of a looming and foreboding threat, while never even having a Nazi soldier on screen at any time. He tells us "so much with so little" and allows the viewer to take in the conflict of each situation (and there are a lot of them) rather than point it all out to us. In that sense, you really feel like you're getting into the mind of each one of the soldiers/main characters when they are contemplating some very crucial decisions that literally determine life and death, for not just them, but many other men as well.
Nolan gives us continued development, closure and solid endings in each one of the tiny subplots that he sets off from the beginning. It's definitely a joy seeing how all the different plotlines intermingle with each other at the end especially with the civilian aspect added in. And, most importantly, he accomplishes all this in less than 2 hours (and by a damn good margin as well).
If you appreciate amazing direction, cinematography, and vision within a movie, this will be an absolute joy. It could definitely get Christopher Nolan that elusive Best Director Oscar come Academy Award season. I watched Dunkirk in 70mm, but, honestly, I couldn't really tell the difference, especially without being able to do a side-by-side comparison to a regular version. Overall, it didn't seem too different from the usual XD or IMAX type presentation at my local big theater. Still, the movie is a visual treat lending heavily to more practical effects that gives a nice sense of realism to it all.
Anyways, this gets a solid 9/10 from me, coming from a war movie curmudgeon. Watch it, and you won't regret it.
The best scene of this movie is when they rate their business cards.
It's an objectively well made and well acted movie that I really enjoyed. The plot is well structured, fast paced, and dialog well written.
It has the moral imperative to end sex trafficking but it's not through heavy handed guilt tripping, but through telling a true story about a man who made personal sacrifices to do the right thing and courageously go into danger to be a genuine hero. I think anyone who has any sense of altruism will leave this movie inspired to take action against this truly heinous evil that is real and happening now. Go see this movie.
Horrifying that this is actually happening in the world. And mind boggling that more people are affected by slavery now than when it was legal.
It also sickens me that they had to battle for 5 years for this film to be shown.
Quite interesting and pretty astonishing that some of these 'experts' simply avoid or can't answer this simple question, at least the dictionary has the answer..
What Is a Woman?
- An adult female person.
What Is a Female?
- A person bearing two X chromosomes in the cell nuclei and normally having a vagina, a uterus and ovaries, and developing at puberty a relatively rounded body and enlarged breasts, and retaining a beardless face; a girl or woman.
- An organism of the sex or sexual phase that normally produces egg cells.
I had to shift this up my viewing priorities because he said the LGBTQ community gets triggered too easily and it triggered the LGBTQ community. Get it while it's available!
Meh, I expected more. I guess we should not believe in everything the critics say.
WHY WOULD YOU CANCEL THIS GREAT SHOW??
I can see it over and over again! One of the best movies I ever seen.
Nothing to say, mind-blowing movie! Please sit and prepare yourself to a messed up brain!
Very disappointing. This movie didn't need to be made, and it didn't really add anything.
This is a masterclass in how to portray subjectivity. I was absolutely immersed in this character and could feel the amazement, horror, and divided feelings that he was going through. The directing was phenomenal and deserves much praise.
Be warned Midsommar is not a horror movie, it's an art film covered in a thin veneer of gore. It is not scary, it's not frightening, just long with a few gross-out gore scenes sprinkled in.
The movie spends most of its run time showing you scenes of people eating, drinking or singing. These are really pretty scenes mind you, the cinematography is on point, but they are also excruciatingly long. The movie could easily be trimmed by 30 minutes without affecting the barebones plot at all.
The horror element is supposed to be the cult rituals but most of them were so absurd that I and the rest of the (few) people in the theater laughed instead. There was especially one scene with a bunch of nude older women that was downright hilarious, although I very much doubt that was the intent.
If singing Swedish people frightens you then this is a must watch, otherwise don't bother.
Laughed 0 times, chuckled about 3 times. It was just boring from start to finish.
The episode is boring, and flash back would have been better for a simple duration of 15 minutes to 20 minutes only, without going into many details that take up the episode time, which we have been waiting for a whole week.
I can't rate the episode more than 3/10