I was watching Ebert and Roeper a few nights back, and Roeper and the guy filling in for Ebert hated this movie so much. I haven't heard such bad things said about a movie that at least looks like it could be good. With some crappy b-movie I could see them hating it, but not something like this.
I mean they "ripped this film a new one," so basically I want to know if it's any good or not.
its really good i enjoyed it. But you shouldnt always listen to other peoples opinions then usually you already have your mind made up and it could ruin the movie
I usually trust them. I just watched it again last night and it wasn't that bad. I like Anton, I like Kristen, I like Diane and I like Donald not to mention it's filmed in Vancouver (my bias).
Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong. How you like a film is up to you. I watch those movie review shows sometimes, but if it's a movie I'm really looking forward to, I change the channel because I don't want them to cloud my own opinion of the film. I can understand how someone could have hated this film. It was really freaking weird, but I still think it was good. I may even read the book.
Astute observation sir. Good movie, I actually liked Kristin Stewart in it. Who knew. Like in Push, and every other even semi-serious role I've seen him in, Chris Evans didn't really deliver. He was only good while acting jocular, and on his scenes during the climax he wasn't really into the role/show a believable transformation. Maybe that was just the scripts fault for packing too much ending into 15 minutes of movie though. Overall, still a well done movie, everyone else was great, looking forward to seeing Anton develop his talent. If you liked him in this, check out Charlie Bartlett.
Just watched the review--and I don't even feel like they articulated well what exactly was wrong with this movie. They just said things like "Anton Yelchin over-enunciates" (I thought he did a great job as a somewhat nerdy 80s kid), "It flies off so many rails" (whatever that means), "Donald Sutherland drops his pants to prove a point" , etc. But usually their reviews are much more insightful. I'm shocked that they didn't take more time illustrating exactly what was wrong with plot, characterization, and all that other good stuff.
It's a shame that those guys don't like some my favorite movies--Fierce People, Dead Poets Society, LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring (Roeper didn't like it), etc.
Worst movie ever? No. Bad movie? I thought so. Why? Well, aside from the fact I didn't really like Evans, Stewart or Yelchin, but the shift in tone was just too much of a leap. They just throw the rape in and then he finds out who his rapist is purely through the stupidity of the rapist. I really hated that. It was so insulting and lazy. The movie wasn't about anything and the rape felt like a muddled attempted to spice things up, but it just came off as muddled and cheap.
However, I'm happy for people that like movies I didn't like. At least they got something out of it. The only thing I got out of the movie was getting to stare at Diane Lane for a little while.
I don't think it was stupidity on Bryce's part as much as arrogance. Perhaps they're the same thing, though.
It has been a while since I've seen this, but if I remember correctly, Evans (while wearing a mask to hide his identity) flips open his personal easily-identifiable zippo lighter in front of Yelchin, then later on Yelchin sees Evans with the same lighter.
It was not filmed/setup in a "I'm so arrogant I don't care" way, it was certainly more of a clumsy "ah-ha!" moment for Yelchin when he recognizes the lighter. Otherwise, why would Evans wear a mask if he didn't care if he were discovered?
That whole rape subplot was badly handled. There's a movie called The Mudge Boy that has a very disturbing male rape in it, but sets it up properly and deals with the aftermath in an interesting way. Here it just seems tacked on and out of place.
Don't try to cash in love, that check will always bounce.
It was not filmed/setup in a "I'm so arrogant I don't care" way, it was certainly more of a clumsy "ah-ha!" moment for Yelchin when he recognizes the lighter.
Actually, that's exactly what it was. Evans asks Yelchin to light something for him with the personal zippo, allowing him to see it and identify him as his rapist. Then Evans tells him, "Keep it. You've earned it."
I only recently saw this movie and I liked it. Dark movie in some ways, a few members of the family are messed up, and in other ways an entertaining movie with some unique personalities. Apart from the attack on him, I liked Anton/Finn getting plopped down into a wealthy family and seeing that side of things, and getting some education in some of those realities of life.
I turned it off after about 30 minutes...hey it may be good but right now my patience just isn't enough to tolerate this movie. I usually love movies like this but this one just wasn't working for me. I may go back and finish it at some point but probably not.
---------------------------------------- the truth hurts...sorry but it's true
Actually, I saw the second half of the film first, and it made more sense to me than when I saw it all the way through. XD It wasn't a great film either way, but when I saw only the second part, the tone was very dark, and Bryce was an extremely disturbing character. Then I saw the first half, and the transition was bizarre. The whole thing was also odd and heavy handed, which again worked better in the darker second half, for me.