I don't know... those first ten minutes are a disaster. It’s that classic American trope: close-up on Navojac, close-up on Filipovic, close-up on Navojac, close-up on Filipovic. And what are they actually doing? Just staring intensely at each other. It took me an hour just to recover from that, and right when I was finally getting into it—boom, it's over. Honestly, compared to most Hollywood films lately, this one's a bit of a letdown.
Maybe even use a Polaroid: 60 sets of 25 photos plus some extra gear. The gear includes: a marker, paper, and a portable scraper. Use the marker to number the shots (the worst part of the whole job), then on the paper, write instructions like 'flip through them like a deck of cards while actually paying attention' and, obviously... put on some music. And there you go—done in a minute!
The thing is, this guy put out three different vibes in three separate posts:
Post #1: "Yeah, I'm interested." Post #2: "I'm filming, I'm incredibly horny, I know how to make the perfect indie flick," and all that. Post #3: "America is way too small for my vision."
Give me a break... he got exactly what was coming to him.
From what I can see from the sidelines, maybe 10% of people actually telling you the truth. The rest? They're just there to mess around or be polite.
Besides, dustyscout53 knows all about this—he could tell you how it went down at that swampy blog reading back in the day... if I remember right, everyone showed up with their own little crowd that would cheer loudly at first and then head out for beers. To be fair, dustyscout53 is the only one who stands out from that pack—he actually knows how to write.
dustyscout53 said:Let's clear some things up here—it’s obvious the industry types are totally against this kid filming his own stuff. Of course, they think they're helping by talking back to him. They know all too well how much it hurts when talent goes unrecognized. Because they've been there... slamming their heads against the wall. Oh, yeah, making movies. But they didn't get the girls. And nobody was even watching those films. Even though they were convinced they were pure genius. Even though they watched plenty of movies and read tons of books...
Oh, boy... Life's funny, isn't it? (c) Straight up
DARSTUPRO said:Look, I’m not making this movie for fame, money, or some validation of my "talent." I just do it because I love it. That's it.
And hey, Mom and Dad will be proud. If they aren't, maybe a chicken might drop dead. If not that, at least your friends might respect you more. And if even that fails, well, you could always use the cash. Or if all else fails, you'll have just enough left to grab a DVD spindle so you can burn a new one.
DARSTUPRO said:Besides, America is way too broke to fund my visions anyway.🤣
Just like Iceman telling Maverick: cut the bullshit.
Look at the cops watching me. I fired up the player, popped the movie in, then shut it down ten minutes later. There’s just no way I’m sitting through a Terrence Malick flick on a crappy DivX rip. Honestly, I don't even know why I downloaded it... I'll just wait for the theatrical release. 😉 As for being bored—I'm counting on it.
Honestly, critics are just like barbers or butchers. You find one guy whose style you actually dig, and you stick with him. For me, it was always Roger Ebert. He had this way of breaking down a movie's structure—like explaining why a certain film *could* have been something else entirely, but chose not to be. I just loved following his train of thought.
With so many movies out there, you need someone to guide you through the noise. Someone you actually trust. That’s really all there is to film criticism.
Scott Long71 said:Živorad Tomić isn't really a film critic, since he thinks every single movie is good or great. It's nice that a guy enjoys movies that much, but for that level of pure hype, there's usually something going on outside the actual films.
wow, I haven't seen this much bias packed into a single thread in a long time (a little historical context never hurts, especially since we always seem to ignore it anyway...)
ironcrane7 said:For me, it was specifically Rachel Weisz. Her acting wasn't even bad this time, she was just... annoyingly try-hard. Someone like Kristin Scott Thomas—more charisma, less sensuality—would have been a much better fit.
I don't know about that. They would've ended up with some modern version of 'The English Patient': less pathetic, maybe, but way more melodramatic. So fancy now. 🙂 To me, the movie is really Fiennes. He was great, even if he did fall back into that cliché role of the man destroyed by love. I think he was better in 'End of the Affair' than in 'The Constant Gardener,' but honestly, his performance here might actually be his best work. Not that I want to waste any breath talking about 'The English Patient.'