Posts by goldenhound32

I have to say, I find myself agreeing with you on this one. It’s honestly baffling to me why there is such a relentless wave of negativity directed at this movie. I'll be the first to admit that "Donald Trump" isn't some modern-day "Lawrence of Arabia," but even so, it remains an undeniably entertaining piece of 👍
.
Plus, it features Johnny Depp.

In my view, she didn't act anything like a rabbit ☕

electrictrucker16 said:but beyond that, there are just way too many plot holes that never get resolved.

Yeah, precisely. It’s a bad movie simply because the logic is full of holes.

It's plain as day.

Five out of ten.

It seems everyone suddenly found themselves with nothing but time on their hands during the pandemic 😁

Benjamin Ruiz60 said:Hold on. If I were to go out looking for sources for a film that was nominated for 12 Caesars—how many did it actually win, three?—and was honored at the Cannes Film Festival, you could just look it up yourself. 😁

Good grief... I was asking for a source regarding your claim that "critics called this more Polanski than Polanski the pianist."

And imagine that—you're convinced that Ghost Writer and Venus in Furs are superior, yet you haven't even seen I Accuse. 😉

Where on earth are you getting this false assumption that I haven't seen it?

For heaven's sake, one of these days I might actually leave an impression on Impressionists.☕

Benjamin Ruiz60 said:Since the distribution ban in the States is preventing people from seeing it now, audiences will eventually catch up. They’ll seek it out later, and once they do, they’ll finally be able to judge the quality for themselves. The critics are claiming this is Polanski's finest work since Polanski the pianist.

Source?

I’ve been scanning through a few of the reviews lately, and honestly, the critics absolutely trashed the movie.

Imagine that. You’re standing there, absolutely convinced you’ve found his masterpiece—something even greater than *Polanski the Pianist*—and yet, you haven't even bothered to sit down and actually watch it. 😁

In my estimation, Ghost Writer holds a superior edge. Venus in Furs is equally compelling.

Coppola is a brilliant director, which is precisely why he was able to get away with filming such garbage.

What on earth does the lack of a distribution deal here in the States have to do with the actual quality of this film?

You haven't even seen the movie, yet here you are, lecturing me on 🙄"developing a sense of taste."

Honestly, I find the whole thing more amusing than anything else. It’s almost entertaining at this point.

I actually laid out all the specific issues with the film in a separate post—none of which have anything to do with the US.

Of course not.

Louisiana.

A few thoughts on the movie itself.

It’s entertaining enough, I suppose. It’s just a shame it's so incredibly dim-witted.

Let's go through this systematically, as my grievances come to mind:

1. What exactly is the objective of this commando blonde? I was under the impression her goal was simply to stay alive. But apparently not. She decides instead to hunt down the scum trying to kill her. And she does this entirely alone, deciding to storm the "nest" where an unknown number of armed individuals are hiding. It is profoundly stupid, even though up until that point, she displayed a level of competence you might expect from a character in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

2. Why did the individual part of that wealthy group board the train? He was supposed to be infiltrating the immigrants, right? I can't quite wrap my head around the logic there; perhaps someone can enlighten me.

3. Following the final confrontation, the wealthy woman dies almost instantly, yet our commando heroine just cauterizes her wound like Rambo in Rambo III and carries on as if nothing happened. As if those three puncture wounds—shoulder and twice in the torso—don't exist. A total failure in realism.

Of course, it isn't entirely bleak. There is some decent humor present.
The sequence involving the turtle and the rabbit is excellent; perhaps the best part of the entire film.
That elderly couple is actually quite charming.

1. Looking at the first post in this thread, it’s already obvious that everything regarding our beautiful country is going to be fake. Honestly, how pathetic do you have to be to go out and find a FAKE license plate for a car?

It’s truly absurd how easy it is for anyone to secure funding to make a movie these days.

Let me try to step into the shoes of someone filming a movie about a country they've barely even heard of. Let's say, Eswatini. My sole mission is to figure out what an Eswatini license plate actually looks like.

A ten-second Google search and I found it:


2. This second point is a bit more difficult, but the result is the same. As my colleague mentioned, "this end" was translated as "finish this."



I mean, couldn't the guy responsible just ask an American how to translate that? If you don't know any Americans, just hop on Facebook and ask a random person. They'll know better than Google Translate ever could. 👎

3. This is an even bigger failure than the translation issue. A cottage/villa. So, our heroine ends up at some isolated shack in the middle of nowhere. Can anyone show me a similar house in America? To me, this looks like a house straight out of the Midwest.

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:"This end" Google translated into American... 🙏 🤣

What else is there to say? Google Translate is basically the father of it all. 🙏

So, Karl Marx just dropped his latest record, "Radical Sick."

It isn't half bad, I suppose.

I’m struggling to wrap my head around certain tracks, though—take "Mund," for instance. I honestly haven't the slightest clue what the point of it even is.

Could anyone bother to share their thoughts on it?

And why shouldn't I?

Kevin Evans41 said:Look, I'm pretty sure most people just skim the body of a post and completely miss the subject line, so putting a
spoiler
warning right in the meat of the text is way more effective.
Quote:. As far as I'm concerned, my post is strictly for the folks who've already seen the movie.

goldenhound32 says: Well, I tagged it as a spoiler

I find it hard to believe anyone could actually overlook the title of the post I wrote.

I suppose I'm just too brilliant for my own good. 😁

I really shouldn't be talking back here, given that my last encounter with an insurance adjuster was sixteen or eighteen years ago. My memory of those proceedings isn't exactly sharp these days.

Heh, I suppose I can see the resemblance to an insurance adjuster, though it’s really just a matter of perception.

Kevin Evans41 said:Why are we even debating this just two weeks after the premiere?
By the way, Mother didn't just drop out of the equation halfway through; you clearly missed the mark because the whole point of the movie is something else entirely.

Well, I flagged it as a spoiler. As such, my post is intended solely for those who have already seen the movie.

To put it bluntly, humanity basically orchestrated its own downfall, leaving a machine to step up and shoulder the burden of restarting the species.

The logic follows that it cultivates embryos, waiting indefinitely for that one specific embryo destined to become the mother of all mankind.

Once that biological progenitor is finally identified, the machine’s purpose is fulfilled, leading it to effectively remove itself from the equation entirely.

And just like that, the narrative reaches its conclusion.

It was actually a solid film—remarkably well-rounded in its execution.