RedDave2 wrote:How do you enjoy a movie more yet not think it's better?
tin_robot wrote:I thought the most disappointing thing about it was that it ultimately has nothing to say.
davyK in 2021 wrote:Once Upon A Time in Hollywood. Enjoyed this. Leo and Brad are great in it. And how Pitt keeps that washboard at his age...deserves an oscar for that alone. There is something gratifying about that final sequence that is hard to explain, just as the cinema sequence in Basterds is. And there's a nod to it in Hollywood. Being able to strike out at cunts from the past mines something in my psyche at least. Not as punchy and snappy as a Q film but still excellent. This alternate universe genre is very enjoyable. Will be a shame when Q makes his 10th.
EvilRedEye wrote:Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny - I think this is the worst one. I was honestly quite bored for a lot of it. People have made note of the 2 hour 35 minute runtime - you might think they overstuffed the plot or something but they didn’t, it’s just flabby and needed the extra half hour leaving on the cutting room floor. What’s worse, it’s the expensive actions sequences, usually involving CGI that are the most flabby - it feels like a real waste of resources. It’s one of the most expensive films of all time but absolutely doesn’t look it. A lot of the CGI is as dull and unengaging as Crystal Skull. The plot is also lifeless and dour. I simply don’t understand why they made the film. You could slag off Crystal Skull but at least it is reasonably effective at justifying revisiting the characters (even if some of the execution could have been better) and giving them what could easily have been a final sign off. I honestly regret that this was made.
Kow wrote:Tarantino would probably make a better second location director, hemmed in by a proper director. He can make some decent scenes, but most of his movies are tedious slogs. I'd still point to Deathproof as not only Tarantino's worst but one of the worst films I've ever seen. There is literally nothing redeeming about it. It's hard to reconcile such a pile of tripe with any decent director, let alone a supposed Hollywood auteur.
Bollockoff wrote:Honestly I've never understood funny whip crack man.
regmcfly wrote:I'm with ERE, he pretty much nailed It that the editing is that hyperkinetic modern style that doesn't fit Indy. It's not quite Bohemian Rhapsody, but it sucks.
Again, I'd like to be an editor in another life.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!