This is a fascinating watch, it’s such a great insight into filmmaking.
I’d advise anyone to watch this and the theatrical cut back to back, you’ll learn so much about the process, rearranging scenes, editing, etc.
Pros:
- Compared to BvS: the script is much more structured, coherent, and simple. Also, this film doesn’t try to have any political depth or social commentary, which is a plus because that requires a filmmaker with subtlety, and Snyder is no such filmmaker. Finally, it doesn’t make any major mistakes like the Martha scene or Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.
- Compared to the theatrical cut: it does a much better job at fleshing out the characters. This particularly helps for Cyborg and Steppenwolf. It kinda turns Cyborg into the coolest character of the DCEU. Also, the editing of the action scenes is much better.
- I love that it has a big, epic tone. The storytelling feels like it takes a lot of inspiration from Lord of the Rings.
- Some great character moments, particularly with Alfred (I also liked Flash running back in time, the killing of Steppenwolf and Aquaman’s scene with Vulko ). There are actually quite a few laughs in this, more so than you’d expect from a Snyder film.
- The score is good (ignoring the overplayed WW theme).
Cons:
- It looks kinda hideous. There is an artificial and fake feeling to most of the scenes. The way it’s directed and shot can only be described as cheap and a visual overkill.
- Casting. Some of the main actors aren’t competent enough to star in a film like this. As long as they keep Momoa, Gadot and Miller, these films will always feel like discount Avengers films.
- It kinda drags, there are some scenes that could’ve been cut or shortened in order to improve the pacing. This is one of the things the theatrical cut does way better, even if it’s much more bland as a cut.
- The Flash still runs and acts like a moron. It particularly stands out in this cut because his Looney Tunes-esque antics are cringeworthy and don’t fit here, and his character still feels very barebones.
- Like BvS, the setting up of future films feels very clunky and forced.
- Though nowhere near as bad as in BvS, I once again noticed some painfully overwritten and forced dialogue.
In short:
Is it better than the theatrical cut, or BvS? Yes.
Is it a good movie? Not by any metric.
3.5/10
Round 3 of Gareth Edwards proving he’s a great visual director that doesn’t know how to breathe life in his scripts. Its best asset is easily the worldbuilding, combining influences from other science fiction material to create a new world that feels fresh. The technical execution is also really well done, with its cinematography and CGI being among some of the most visionary stuff I’ve seen since Avatar 2. Unfortunately, the sci-fi concepts this is working with are stale, it’s all stuff you’ve seen before and the movie doesn’t know how to put its own creative spin on it. Add to that a bunch of characters that aren’t written in the most compelling way (as well as bland, understated performances that will keep everyone questioning whether JDW is actually a good actor), and you have a movie that’s already pretty dull from the start. Now, a big saving grace of Rogue One and Godzilla were their strong climaxes, however that’s not the case here. Instead, The Creator starts to rush to the finish line, which leads to the big emotional beats not hitting the mark. It’s like the pacing of this movie is constantly either rushing or dragging, annoying my inner Terence Fletcher in the process. Overall, while I’d love to champion this as the savior of original science fiction, there’s not much more originality here than a typical franchise film. I don’t want to call Edwards another Zack Snyder, because I think he’s certainly more talented, but he’s suffering from the same problems and doesn’t seem to learn from his previous mistakes.
5/10
Just another movie that was "saved" by Netflix but should have just died in production hell instead.
The story goes nowhere and totally ends up nowhere with no explanations or whatsoever.
With a good end, it could have been saved.
The first movie since Max Payne (coincidentally, also a Mark Wahlberg movie) where I wanted to run out every single minute of the 149 overblown minutes it played. It was incongruent, had forced comedy, and the stereotypes for the transformers are grating to say the least. As a Fab of the cartoons, I can't believe this soulless slosh found the light of day.
Well, to be fair it was well acted, the music was great and I very much liked the comedy aspect in it. It was also nice to see people actually fighting back, for once, and NOT behaving like a dumb bunch of helpless chicken.
Other than that, the plot had many, many holes and the final twist actually ruined the whole story for me. It was also very inconsistent about which "laws" these shadows had to follow - sometimes they were doing the same things as the people on the upside, but other times not... however it fit the plot in that moment, it seems. 'Us' tries very hard to be deep and stuff, but it really is not.
However, while it is not as great as I had wished it to be, it also not the worst horror movie I have ever seen. So, for a horror movie night it's OK to watch but don't expect too much, I guess.
I was a bit disappointed that it was more about the Minimalists, especially the two men who travel around the world to spread the word, rather than the actual Minimalism philosophy which I was very curious about. It's feels just feels like an introduction and now I'm teased I guess I have to do the reasearch myself if I wanna know more.
Better than other reviewers made it out to be. Enough unique elements to not blur in with other action movies.
Total waste of time. :(
Script is full of nonsense.
I like the movie but it actually gets silly rather than better when it becomes a horror movie. I mean the band of vampires saying "F you guys, we're outta here" and suddenly just blowing up.
Edit: guess I didn't like the which came first, the chicken or egg story.
Really good movie with an awesome cast until the ending....that was a dreadful ending
Beautiful cinematography somewhat diluted by a primary school level narrative. Now if only we could drag the target audience away from their computer games to watch this.
this movie didnt age well at all!
Going into this movie, I had a faint idea as to what it would be like. I was so wrong. After watching the trailer and reading the synopsis I personally thought of it as a revamped 'The Day After Tomorrow'. If you don't know what that movie is about, it is basically about a father who's trying to get to his son who's stuck in another city while a natural disaster hits. It is still one of my favorites. After watching 'How It Ends' though, I can say that it is firstly nothing like it and secondly far from being as good as I initially thought it would be.
The first few minutes were quite impressive. It had a good setup — not too slow and not too rushed — and what a good movie needs: likeable characters. Personally, I liked the cast a lot, but thought that their performance was only average. It was hard for me to feel the character's chemistry throughout.
After that 'promising' beginning, I wanted answers more than anything. Instead, I got a long, long, long journey through the U.S. with some minor obstacles and a lot of side-stories of characters I barely even knew. Those stories were touched but never really told and after a few minutes the main plot scared them away, never to be seen or heard from again. That resulted in characters appearing and vanishing in an instant without a huge impact on the main story.
So, the whole mid-section felt like a filler. A large portion of the movie was a filler. I wasn't bored, but also far from being satisfied. The few effects and action sequences that the movie had were fine but nothing special. Dialogues felt weak but not unnecessary or forced which is a good thing.
About 85 minutes into it, I was still waiting for something big to happen. I thought the movie (with the way it presented things, creating mystery as to what's going on and such) would soon hit its high with a big finale and a mind-blowing conclusion. But guess what ... that's when it ended. That's when I knew I wasted almost two hours of my time. The movie is titled 'How It Ends' and yet it doesn't even have a real ending. Why? How? What? No answers, no nothing. The whole time you're wondering what's going on, but you'll never get the answer. You'll never get a real conclusion to what's really going on. I'm disappointed and so will many others.
Score: 46 / 100
Fargo completely shits the bed in its third season. While the show puts together an impressive cast that includes Ewan McGregor, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, David Thewlis, and Carrie Coon, the characters are some of the most repugnant and despicable of the series, and no fun to watch. The story follows a parking lot mogul named Emmit Stussy who gets into a deadly feud with his twin brother over a stolen inheritance; meanwhile a mysterious businessman named V.M. Varga quietly orchestrates a hostile takeover of Stussy’s company and manipulates Stussy into betraying those closest to him. There’s no one to really root for, and there aren’t too many laughs either. The tone is quite macabre, more so than in past seasons, with a very pessimistic outlook. Still, there are some exciting and intense scenes and twists as the criminal plots and investigations unfold. Series creator Noah Hawley has said that Season 3 of Fargo may be the last, and hopefully it is because it’s slidden so far downhill that it’s just not enjoyable to watch any more.
