MovieChat Forums > Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) Discussion > WAAAAAYYY too slow. (7.1? Really?)

WAAAAAYYY too slow. (7.1? Really?)

posted 5 years ago by LTUM (1034)
20 replies | jump to latest

At the 45 minute mark nothing has really happened. I am gonna turn it off now. It shouldn't take THIS long for a movie to get revved up.

This is not to mention the other issues which I won't go into.

I always enjoy Jeff Bridges but this isn't really that good. I really expected more.

And please don't come on here and tell me 'shoulda waited because the last 30 minutes were great'. One shouldn't have to wait through 90 minutes to get to the good part. FACTS!!!!

reply

[–] JimmyStrudel (600) 5 years ago

I actually dug the first half the second half is a heaping pile of cow shit though so you didn’t miss anything at all. That singing black lady literally just sings the same song for 5 hours I hated her stupid voice. This movie was a major let down.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Filmmania (57) 5 years ago

I was okay with it until about 37 minutes in when the movie seemed to take a totally different angle.

All that singing. WTF. I switched off.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Filmmania (57) 5 years ago

The whole thing was long and drawn out. The opening sequence, in the lobby of the hotel ran to about 30 minutes. They could have easily condensed that down to about 10-12 minutes. There was a lot of waffle crap talk from that salesman guy. A lot of filler which amounted to nothing.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 5 years ago

exactly how I felt

reply

[–] Filmmania (57) 5 years ago

If the movie had been 1 hour 30 minutes, and had no singing, it might have been all right. I think the film editor was absent. They seemed to have all the film they shot in the movie.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 5 years ago

damn lol. Yeah I hate when I run across ones that do that. And oddly enough it's sometimes by a really top director. Can't think of an example at the moment but I've seen that before too. This one sounds like someone went to sleep big time during post-pro lol

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7699) 5 years ago

I liked this movie but to each their own. There are popular movies I don't like.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 5 years ago

fair enough

reply

[–] Jones70 (6534) 3 years ago

It didn’t feel slow to me at all.

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 3 years ago

really? wow.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Agreed. I give it a 6

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 2 years ago

eh, i respect your assessment but for me 6 is firmly in the 'solid' range. i call a six a really good movie experience. when they fall to 5 and below (on my scale that is) it's because there are problems with the film, of varying types. when it's juts plain too unwatchable for me, as in i can't even finish the first 30-45 minutes, that doesn't even really make the scale.

i'd put this one somewhere between 3-4

ie if the most perfect and beautiful racecar in the history of the world is sitting at the starting line, in perfect condition, cranked and ready, but with a flat tire... it is 100% irrelevant.

as one of my old art professors used to say, 'don't tell me what you were TRYING to do; show me what you DID.'

reply

[–] bobbydallas (8522) 2 years ago

pacing was totally off.
also we don't NEED to see every character's flashback story do we ?!

loved the film until Jon Hamm got waxed

reply

[–] LTUM (1034) 2 years ago

exactly. it wasn't what WASNT there that was the problem; it was the crap that WAS there that was superfluous, pointless, boring.

reply

[–] Burk48917 (11365) 2 years ago

My complaint as well. There is a decent movie here, but it needs massive trimming.

reply

[–] Wuchak (8737) a year ago

His shocking death is a highlight because the viewer wasn't expecting a major character to be offed at that early stage, akin to "Psycho." Besides, the character served his purpose -- because of him the viewer knows the rooms are wire-tapped and there's a creepy voyeuristic hallway, not to mention what he discovered about edgy Emily and her captive.

reply

[–] burtonmercer (19) 10 months ago

This thread is spot on. The second half of the film spirals downward in a Pulp Fiction-y, over two hour heap of stinking garbage.

reply

[–] TheArgentinian (7072) 6 months ago

Watching it I thought it was one of the strangest movies with a major Hollywood cast that I've seen, which for me is a compliment. Then the third act gets conventional.

reply