MovieChat Forums > NoEasyBuckets > Replies
NoEasyBuckets's Replies
I don't think that changed anything. He was basically just cosplaying as a contestant/friend and letting Gi-hun go as far as he could before he had to shut it down. It finally hit the point where Gi-hun was just going to get himself killed so he had to intervene. I guess we'll see what his motivation is in season 3 but my guess is he respected him as a competitor and wants to go against him at the end.
How can she arrest him by herself? She has no power to do that. She would most likely be trying to discuss a deal so that he could admit what he did and free the innocent man since that's the part that will weigh on her conscience.
The tone of the show is very strange. His crew of mostly regular people will be part of a massacre and then everyone will be smiling and acting like "Aw shucks glad we survived that one! I'll go dump the bodies."
The monsters are a dud to me because the writers pretty much ignore them for episodes at a time until they want something suspenseful to happen again. And they just casually walk around like they don't even care if they catch anyone. In season 3 we get a little bit of development when it comes to them sparing Boyd to mess with him and "how they're made" but that's pretty much all we've learned in 30 episodes.
But anyway if they believe they come out of that cave then why not try to block the cave or blow it up or something?
There has to have been at least 25 conversations where one character tries to talk another out of something. Boyd decides it's time to take more chances while someone pleads for him to change his mind, and then in the next episode his son tells him it's time to take more chances and Boyd tries to talk him out of it.
I actually disagree about them making it up as they go along. I think they have the answers here they just don't know how to get there without giving them away. At least with Lost they could always lean on "It was about the characters all along" but here the characters suck.
I try not to pick apart movies like this but I actually thought some of it was pretty ridiculous. They think they potentially have this mass murderer marksman after the phone call to the newscast, so they fly out in a helicopter and try to apprehend four of them by themselves in the middle of a grocery store. That was their best option to handle it? They were deservingly fired after that.
I agree Wild Tales is a great movie but just because it's the same director doesn't make this any better.
It's not like he was running through the streets in the middle of gunfire. If they got through all of his defenses then what was a bulletproof vest going to do? And he was trying to negotiate his surrender.
I think the reason is pretty clear. She's weathered and worn down from her job/life. The dress scene shows that she doesn't even consider her looks anymore.
But the first film was pretty much the opposite of experimental. It was like if you put a few certain films into a blender and added the Joker. I still enjoyed it and it came out at the right time for it to feel fresh, but if you're going to have a sequel then it seems like the exact wrong time to "experiment." Now they've created expectations for people. If Phillips and/or Phoenix wanted to experiment then do something actually new.
I don't know if he's saying older directors can't make anything good, but more that they don't recognize what's good or not in the same way they did in their primes. I think it scares him that he might make what he thinks is a great movie only to find out everyone thinks it sucks. This seems like a perfect example since Coppola was so passionate about making it and invested so much of his own money.
I don't really see the Don and Roger comparisons when it comes to the actual work. Don isn't "tricking" everyone else into doing the work. That's his job. He's the creative director. He selects the best ideas, tweaks and sells them. People seem to think all of his bad and lazy behavior means he wasn't good at his job but I took it as the opposite. He was so good he could get away with all of the BS. Roger on the other hand didn't seem to contribute anything besides taking clients out to get drunk.
I don't think it's that nothing is happening, it's just that so much of what's happening feels the same. All of the sides make moves and then Mike meets with everybody over and over.
I agree about his reaction. During the first episode I remember thinking if he ends up either being the killer or knowing who killed her then this is all misleading in a cheap way. Though I did have a feeling when the daughter was talking about disassociating that it was going to explain the murder.
It should be done obviously but considering the real killer hasn't been found I'm sure they will find a way to continue it.
He was truly terrible in this. I can't remember seeing him in anything else so I don't know if that's just the way he talks and acts generally, but it made no sense for the role of the popular new District Attorney. In reality everyone would just think he's creepy.
I didn't have a problem with anyone but the wife. I thought she was noticeably bad.
Ray wasn't some anti-hero vigilante though. He was a criminal/killer with a selective moral compass. He doesn't go after the guy that killed Zoe and the elderly couple in the camper. He went after the guy who kidnapped the girl because he kidnapped his friend's daughter. Just like he goes after a drug dealer because his daughter took the drugs. That doesn't mean he's going around taking out bad guys all day.
I agree about the cartoonish schemes. I was disappointed as soon as I realized that setting Howard up was going to be such a big focus, and I don't really agree that Kim's hatred of him makes that much sense. My general issue is that they went too far with the characters. With Jimmy and Kim it was the over-the-top cons. Mike started out as a retired cop who was crafty, meticulous and good at weighing up situations. By the end he was an expert on literally everything. He always knew exactly what to do and what the other person would do no matter the situation. Between this and Jimmy predicting such specific reactions in cons it just became too much of the same. I can't think of a single time where Mike wasn't right other than maybe when he fell for Lalo's ploy to leave Gus unattended, but even then he was the one that said they should keep eyes on Jimmy's apartment and told Gus to stay at his house.
Speaking of Lalo, you saw a badass character but to me he was the real cartoon. Or I guess maybe more like a cartel version of Jason Bourne with how they used him. He somehow tricked the court system into believing he was someone else, escaped an ambush by trained killers and killed all of them, ended up tracking down specific people in Germany to get secret information, then managed to trick and kill his way through elaborate protection into being one on one with Gus. They even had to include the touch that Gus was shot in his body armor to show that Lalo was such a badass that he would have killed him otherwise. It just felt like a different show with his character. I had the same problem when the Salamanca brothers just walked into a warehouse and killed everyone with zero preparation. It seemed like lazy ways to create "cool villains."
But she said she heard shots and claimed there was a new bullet hole when he was there the entire night. So we're left to believe that she was either scared/paranoid or some people in this thread think she was purposely trying to manipulate him into helping her move. I don't think there was any evidence in the series to make me think it was the latter, but either way we know that it wasn't really happening.