I just watched this and came here in the hope a few others had seen it because it blew my mind. My goodness, what an awful awful awful plot.
Yeah thats a fair point, imo Guardians played to Pratt strengths which are mostly comedic. It seems the studios are trying to turn him into new Harrison Ford.
I swear there's a newish trend in hollywood over the last decade where they are openly making very stupid movies and the audience goes into the cinema expecting and wanting to see something dumb and meaningless. It's like some weird ironic shitting posting but using hundreds of millions of dollars.
I think the directors of the second Captain America film said that they were constantly wondering 'what would series like Honest Trailers have to say about this, and how can we fix that?' Maybe in this film the objective was the exact opposite?
I think the directors of the second Captain America film said that they were constantly wondering 'what would series like Honest Trailers have to say about this, and how can we fix that?' Maybe in this film the objective was the exact opposite?
I loved it. Like a more adult version of Inside Out with its themes.
I rewatched this last week, it's a pretty flawless film. And I reckon it's gonna age like a fine wine.
Holy Spaganoli!
I dont know these, but the original book tends to be more balanced and nuanced and offer a more complete story in my experience. (Assuming it's not a crap quality book.) So I find I'm usually at least somewhat disappointed by films if I know the book well, but enjoy delving into the story more if I watch the film first and read the book afterwards.
I'm the same as @entropy and @OleBoiii on this one. There are good bits to the movie, but overall it's too long, too slow, and too uninteresting. In particular -
Action and gore? Tarantino? In Death Proof, sure, but to my mind, Tarantino is know for his dialogues and the slowness of his movies, the way he drags out scenes, messes with the narrative, etc. All of which I feel are done to excess in Once Upon, to the detriment of the film's quality.
Gore, no. Violence, yes.
Little outburst of violence, sure, and often done in an overblown sort of way for comedic effect. But I would really not say that's dominant in his films. I mean, the 'casual viewer' (not sure who that refers to; not me I suppose, but it's not like I take notes while watching) might have thought the gun going off accidentally and blowing off the guy's head in the car in Pulp Fiction was really funny, but surely he/she wouldn't have come of that film thinking that that is Tarantino's defining feature. In that one, for example, it's dialogue before everything else, and that's also what people talk about most in my experience.
i agree, but isnt that based on the commercial success of pulp fiction / reservoir dogs and the iconic very violent scenes. people cutting people / people shooting people whilst saying cool things / religous things slowly and loudly in a cool way, with a cool soundtrack with songs youve not really heard before, but now feature in every single car ad.
Not sure how you mean this, but that doesn't sound very nice. I can't speak for @entropy, but I don't need violence and action to stay interested. Yes, the dialogues and cinematography are good, but the balance in narrative pace is lost here and a lot of material feels like filler. In my opinion. You can voice your disagreement with that differently, I think.
