The (literal) twist at the end was interesting but it sure felt like an hour and a half of pointless buildup.

penningtron wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:20 am The (literal) twist at the end was interesting but it sure felt like an hour and a half of pointless buildup.

I felt like aside from enjoying the excellent cinematography (although NZ does not entirely look like Montana), it provided a space to psychoanalyze the characters. Each character gradually cements their role (mainly despair) until our expectations are upset. It leaves me with lots of questions, did the outcome save Kirsten Dunst's character (I can't remember ever liking her acting so much)? Was Cumberbatch's character on an arc towards being less of a monster? Was Jesse Plemons character secretly relieved by the outcome? Is the kid a bad hat beginning a lifetime of horrific actions, or did he make the only play that could disrupt everyone's current trajectory (more despair)?

penningtron wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:20 am The (literal) twist at the end was interesting but it sure felt like an hour and a half of pointless buildup.

It might have been interesting, had it not beaten the viewer over the head from the very start.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:12 am

penningtron wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:20 am The (literal) twist at the end was interesting but it sure felt like an hour and a half of pointless buildup.

It might have been interesting, had it not beaten the viewer over the head from the very start.

This is one area where my film criticism falls apart: If the twist was obvious and predictable. When it comes to prediction I operate with a childlike suspension of disbelief. I saw Shutter Island and was all, "Wow, what a twist." Everyone else figured it out 15 minutes in.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:12 am

penningtron wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:20 am The (literal) twist at the end was interesting but it sure felt like an hour and a half of pointless buildup.

It might have been interesting, had it not beaten the viewer over the head from the very start.

I didn't see any particular twist coming but it was clear from the time the boy arrives that something is gonna happen between Phil and Pete. The acting was all good, the visual compositions were fine, music...whatever, it worked.

I certainly don't require any depth in any particular film or character. I suppose I didn't find Phil's character interesting in the least and didn't feel the others required any analysis. I thought it all quite simple. That's fine. Just not a compelling story perhaps.

*film begins*

HEY DYA HEAR ABOUT THE ANTHRAX?

SAY HOW ABOUT THE BLACKFOOT? Y'KNOW, THE ANTHRAX?

GOTTA DO SUCH AND SUCH WHAT WITH THE ANTHRAX....

It was so heavy-handed I was waiting for some other swerve, but nope. Fuck me man.

I just remembered Babylon Berlin season 4 is supposed to come out this year. I loved that show.

Detroiters on Paramount. If you liked I Think You Should Leave, it’s more of the same but as a sitcom with consistent recurring characters.

A_Man_Who_Tries wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:44 am *film begins*

HEY DYA HEAR ABOUT THE ANTHRAX?

SAY HOW ABOUT THE BLACKFOOT? Y'KNOW, THE ANTHRAX?

GOTTA DO SUCH AND SUCH WHAT WITH THE ANTHRAX....

It was so heavy-handed I was waiting for some other swerve, but nope. Fuck me man.

Ah, THE ANTHRAX, yes. I didn't pick up on that being the thing. The Bronco Henry stuff was laughable. I literally laughed out loud every time he came up. So stupid.

Is anyone enjoying Reacher as much as I am? On the surface, it seems like the kind of boneheaded show that I would never even consider watching, but I'm totally sucked in by it's matter-of-fact preposterous scenarios, near-cliches, and approaching surreal humor. It's all just slightly off in the best way.