Air (2023)
in Movies ·
Personally, I think hiding the face works—it adds this layer of mystery and weirdness. It’s those kinds of stylistic choices that give a film its own unique fingerprint.
92 posts shown.
Richard Wilson4 said:I definitely plan on watching it, but I don't get "big screen" vibes from this one—feels more like a home viewing situation.
Ethan Davis34 said:The movie is depressing, sure, but it’s missing something... it feels way too realistic for its own good.
I mean, Gran Torino is similar, and honestly, I think it's much better than anything by Ott.
stormylynx4 said:The book is definitely worth reading regardless of whether you see the movie. I really liked it; you can truly sink into the personality of A Man Called Otto. At least for me, his motivations made perfect sense.
I liked the original, but not the American version. Rolf Lassgård *is* Otto; you don't even see the actor, just the man. Tom Hanks played the part somewhat like Forrest Gump, except while Forrest was a bit slow, his Otto feels almost autistic—just perpetually pissed off. He lacks what Rolf captured so well: a man who’s been beaten down by life but stays principled despite being a loner. He’s someone with a straight spine who lives by black-and-white rules, raised to value hard work, order, and people, only to find those things disappearing from daily life. Between Tom and Rolf, I’m voting for Rolf. He nailed it, whereas Hanks just felt like a grumpy, unemployed retiree who exists solely to annoy everyone.
To me, the American film was just okay—uninteresting, really, aside from the fact that Hanks wore some nice sweaters. The original was moving and made the characters feel real.
It just goes to show that Americans can churn out a commercial product without much depth, but they can't hold a candle to the originals.☕
ivanaj
Given how thin the lineup of actually good movies has been lately said:
Looking back at what we got through 2022 and the start of 2023—if you ask me—it feels like cinema is finally making a comeback...
Raymond Anderson4 said:Why is The Rock even being brought up here? He’s totally wrong for this kind of movie. If you check IMDb, there isn't a single project in his filmography that looks anything like this—and he’s done a ton of them. He sticks to action flicks and adventures, stuff like Jumanji or those movies with Reynolds... you know, Baywatch, Adam, etc., etc.
Kate Chase59 said:Did you actually read the book?
The movie captures certain little vibes—like how those kids sit on the newspaper in the car—but it doesn't really dive into the "why" behind things. It's like seeing the surface without the depth.
It’s a decent enough flick, but honestly, it misses so much of what makes the book such a masterpiece. The way Fredrik Backman wrote it was just next level.
ironharbor45 said:The Village has always been my favorite.
Aside from everything else being decent, I absolutely loved Brody's performance.
Patrick Martin said:It’s always the same formula—fake tension, cheap twists, all that mystery bullshit—only for it to end up being a total letdown.
He should probably just shoot a comedy for once and chill out. ☕
Raymond Anderson4 said:What are you even getting at?
His movies are diverse—that’s actually his strength, throwing out all kinds of different plots—it's just the execution that misses the mark sometimes. Still, he's got some solid work under his belt: San Diego, Glass, Unbreakable, Signs...
Btw, I don't really see this whole "living off past glory" thing or people pushing him just because of his old hits. If anything, his stuff doesn't get massive media hype; it mostly flies under the radar.
Patrick Martin said:he was fine before he started chasing the hunt—now he’s just lost
Patrick Martin said:hey man! if you’re gonna write "a man called this" instead of just saying A Man Called Otto, then honestly, go jump in a lake. you're asking for trouble ☕
goldenhound32 said:Have you seen the original?