'Nothing happens', 'no plot development' etc.
I did not love this film, but I did like it. I loved the performances. I especially loved the processing scene; it almost made my eyes water and sting (although that could be because I was tired that night, hehe!). Excellent scene. I also loved the scene when Freddie and Dodd are put in jail and the ensuing tantrum and argument. Even though I did not love this film, I definitely was not bored watching this film, and mayhap watch it again one day.
One thing that annoys me is when people say nothing happens in this film (or any other film, for that matter). I would say much more than nothing happened. Just because a film does not have a conventionally accepted definition of something happening, does not mean nothing happens. Another example is of The Road; a friend of mine did not like it because, according to him, "nothing happens". On the contrary, I think many things happened! I rarely understand when people use this argument to dislike a film. A better argument may be to say that one did not like what happens in a film.
Additionally, some have complained of lack of plot development. My response to that is that a plot does not always have to 'develop'. Why is a character study not enough?
Another criticism (aimed at any film) I do not agree with is that of lack of character arc (although I argue that there is some change in Freddie's character). Why should a character have to change in a film? Although I have nothing against an arc, what's wrong with a character not changing in a film?
Finally, before anyone says I am a pretentious, snobby, etc., I have a wide range of taste in films, whether they be 'artsy-fartsy' or 'low-brow' entertainment (I put these terms in inverted-commas as I don't like referring to films using those terms).