It was a slow-moving movie, probably could have been 10-15 minutes shorter, and would have worked as well. Costner was excellent.
Only problem was how they screwed with history. It's been pretty much proven that Bonnie Parker never killed anyone, Gault was brought in only for the ambush, there was no close call in any town, and Hamer never stepped out and said "Hands up!" They opened fire from cover - like any smart commander would do - and one of the Louisiana cops actually jumped the gun a little, firing early, putting one through Barrow's head, killing him with the first shot.
It's proven that Bonnie didn't kill anyone? A discounted eye-witness who kept changing his story simply means it's not proven that she *did* kill anyone, but it is absolutely impossible to prove that she didn't.
Sorry. Thought you could read. I wrote "It's been pretty much proven that Bonnie Parker never killed anyone."
Did I write "definitively?"
Did I write "categorically?"
No. I wrote "pretty much." And that's where it stands. She was not a career criminal like Barrow- she was the girl he was screwing, and along for the excitement. That's all we know. Anything else is speculative.
"Pretty much" means "as good as". So you didn't exactly hedge your bets. "Pretty much proven" is pretty much the same as simply saying "proven". And I pointed out that there is nothing resembling PROOF that she didn't kill anyone. There can't even be EVIDENCE to that effect, so how can anything be "proven", pretty much or otherwise? What "proof" is there?
Don't cherry pick when someone knows the language- you'll get caught every time.
The Oxford Dictionary:
"nearly, almost, just about, about, more or less, practically, virtually, all but, as good as, next to, close to, near, nigh on, not far from, not far off, to all intents and purposes, approaching, bordering on, verging on, nearing;"
The prime definition of "Pretty much proven" means NEARLY, JUST ABOUT.
One gets way down the list before we get to "as good as."
When someone knows the language, they don't need to go running home to mama (or in this case, dictionary definitions). And in this case it is particularly amusing, as you are just repeating what I said. "nearly, just about" - or, as I said, as good as. I'm not cherry picking here - you are. You clearly don't know the language in which you profess mastery, or you wouldn't insinuate that a dictionary lists all possible synonyms.
And you STILL haven't offered a shred of evidence. All of this is just dodging on your part, because your bluff has been called.
Are you drunk? YOU went to the dictionary. I did no such thing. I quoted you, meaning if those words happen to be from a dictionary (I didn't bother to check), then that's on YOU.
And STILL you haven't got a shred of evidence. How much deeper do you want to dig that hole? You could have just said nothing, and at least I wouldn't have thought you a complete loon. As it is, however, your pedantry has shown you to be quite deranged.
I think higher 6's and lower 7's would be the right rating for it as a film on IMDB rating. It definitely didn't need to be 2hrs 12 mins long and I would have cut off 30 mins and made it flow faster and it probably would have made it a more enjoyable film imo, and it's just standard meat and potatoes filmmaking, not a game charger or all time classic like Arthur Penn's Oscar winner Bonnie & Clyde film. But it's worth it for Costner and Harrelson performances alone, and is a one watch and done film. I'd personally love to see a Texas Ranger film about the early days unless they've done films based on them, sounds like it was a wild bloody time.