beautiful cinematography with a lot of long shots and no close ups. the movie seemed like a bunch of different episodes following a Mexican family around. a little boring i thought. could have done more with the plot. 7/10
shareWell glad you liked it overall.
shareYeah, I felt that way too.
I saw it called the best movie of the year, but it's just a pretty good, beautifully shot movie.
I liked this movie after seeing it too. I found both the cinematography and directing to be especially sublime. It tells a rather mundane story set in past (life in 1970s Mexico from what I understand), but it's still a decent movie worth watching.
shareVERY boring, I'd say. Beautifully shot but that does not make a movie good. 2/10.
shareI don't agree with your 2, I just watched it last night and I'm leaning toward a 7, but I agree wholeheartedly that it was beautifully shot but that that alone does not make a movie good. I feel Mid90's an overall better film than Roma because it let us into its characters' lives which I feel Roma really didn't.
shareI agree 100%. I wanted to love this movie, being a fan of Cuarón, but there not being a single, concise plot and there being 0 close-ups kept me from ever being pulled in. The close-ups are the main problem for me. It is interesting how needed close-ups are when it comes to pulling a viewer into a character's world. I think the actors did a great job but I feel that I didn't see what a great job they did because everything was shot so wide. Ultimately, it felt like 2 1/4 hours of brilliant cinematography and not too much more.
shareI feel the same way about it, BEAUTIFUL cinematography, some truly stunning scenes and shots but a very dull and mundane story that seemed stitched together and didn't 'flow' that well in my opinion.
6/10
Yeah, I have to agree. I just watched it and it was a disappointment. A 6/10 for me.
share