curtisherenow

The script was rewritten to give diCaprio a role with more depth so that he could play better with deNiro. It somehow doesn't quite work, as it's not clear what exactly diCaprio's character is supposed to represent. A miniature version of the sheriff embodied by deNiro, or a character who develops in a positive way and is a bit more reformed.

As I've already read in other comments on the film, which I have to agree with, the material for the film would have been better suited to a Fargo-style mini-series. The Native American characters could also have been given more character and depth. However, Scorsesse, deNIro and diCaprio don't like making series, as they are in favour of the big screen. The result is an epically long film that is likely to have been quite a challenge for cinema-goers.

The film's soundtrack is excellent and will probably win an Oscar. The picture composition and scenery could also be honoured.

The supporting actress delivered a good performance as a new face, but that's not enough for an Oscar for best supporting actress. Her character didn't show enough development and wasn't easy to understand for the viewer.

The other supporting characters were real characters and very well cast.

I really like Scorsesse when he makes critical films and satires, like "Wolf of Wall Street" and plays like this. It is simply excellent how it manages to expose social injustices without pointing a moral finger.

All in all, it was a great experience watching the film.

The film has a lot of scenery and backdrops. However, the camera angles are not as innovative as Wes Anderson's and the story doesn't get to the bottom of the characters in the way that Paul Thomas Anderson does. The film is absurd, but it's not really absurdly funny. Even copying from Monthy Python (Meaning of Life) or Anders Thomas Jensen (Men & Chicken) doesn't help.

The soundtrack is convincing and so is the leading actress. However, she shouldn't have been so revealing. As a viewer, you didn't have to see so much to know what was happening.

All in all, the film leaves me a little perplexed and despite the primordial nature of it, nothing really sticks with me except for the disturbing scenes with William Defoe as a surgeon in the Victor Frankenstein style.

The movie was too long and there were too many characters introduced. Also, the story was not told in a linear fashion, so you didn't always know what was happening. The last third and parts of the first third of the film were not really necessary. I had expected more.

Acting was also rather poor, because the backgrounds of the other characters were not told, because everything was focused only on the main character Oppenheimer. So it was an impressive ensemble of actors, but all actors remained very pale in their roles. The supporting characters could have just as easily been cast by no-name actors. Cillian Murphy in the leading role was good, but not Oscar worthy.

The camera wasn't good either, as there was too much focus on close-ups and too few white-angle shots.

I didn't like the picture either. It was too dark and colors were barely shown.

The best thing about the film was the soundtrack. It was very well nuanced and in tune with the film.

In general, it can be said that biopics are not Nolan's genre. Spielberg (Schindler's List) and Scorsese (Aviator) can do that worlds better. Moreover, there are already excellent documentaries and books on the Manhattan Project.

Very good and funny movie. In my opinion the best with Will Ferrell (but i haven't seen all movies of and/or with him). Some scenes are so funny that i watched them severall times and.kept in my mind. The ending with the pirates in the ship rounds off the film well.

The actor John C. Reilly is very funny in his role and in my opinion he carries the movie more then Ferrell. The childish Ferrell and all american humor is not quite mine, but in this movies it works for me. I am more a fan of british and skandinavian humor.

The director is John McKay, which work I know from "Don't Look Up". He made a good job. The movie is entertaining and have no lenghts. In general I am a fan of 90 minutes feature film length, especially comdedy movies should not go much longer.

A character in this movie says how important a good beginning and a good ending are to the rating. While the character says this in the context of a cruise, it also applies to movies. The Triangle of Sadness has a good beginning and an open ending that makes you think.

The film is divided into three parts. First, the couple is introduced, then the crew and guests of the cruise ship are introduced, and finally it is about the survivors on an island.

The first part is comparable to "Zoolander", the second part seems like a satirical take on the movie "Titanic" and the last part shows echoes of "Lord of the Flies" and "The Beach".

There are some really very funny scenes and the film shines with many role deceptions, funny twists and black humor. There are a few lengths, but in itself the work is coherent.

The actors Buric, Dickinson, Harrelson, De Leon and Dean are especially convincing. Dickinson, De Leon, Buric and Dean I did not know before this film.

Since when is action cinema primarily just shooting and blood. In earlier action films, action choreography in the form of martial arts or car chases was also important. In addition, the film lacks suspense, since all the actors in the film have different motives and the goal of the film is and remains unclear.

Nonetheless, there are postives as well. I like the style of the film and the many references. For example, Sandra Bullock plays a small role known from "Speed" and there are clear references and similarities to Guy Ritchie's movies, Tarantino's movies, as well as Rodriguez movies. In addition, the Japanese manga is also reflected in the fluctuation between childlike naivety and brutal violence.

Script: 8/10 Camera: 8/10 Scenery: 7/10 Cast: 7/10 Sound: 7/10 Action: 6/10 Humor: 4/10 Length: 5/10

The film comes off a bit like a Sin City and John Wick knock-off. However, the violence is not as explicit and splattery. Which in turn gives the film a certain quality.

Pattinson is a good Batman, but sometimes he is too much in the role of the aloof vampire who lives sexually abstinent and shows no humor, because that could diminish the sexual appeal to the opposite sex.

In the whole film I smiled twice. Once when Batman was in Catwoman's apartment and the cats scrounged along his legs. The other time I can't remember...

I liked the fact that Catwoman (Zoe Kravitz embodied the role very well, especially physically) was given a strong role and that some interesting ideas were taken up in the film. Even if it didn't reach the originality of Nolan's Batman movies 2 and 3.

What I also liked is that the sound of Reeves is balanced and not so designed for bombast, as in Nolan films in combination with Zimmer. However, the sound is not as variable as Tarantino's or Ritchie's in the pop-cultural reference.

Personally, I'm a big fan of Batman films, since Batman isn' a particularly shining hero and there's a lot of socio-critical potential in the criticism of the hero figure. Nolan has already lifted a lot of this potential, but Reeves film has also done a good job. It's just a bummer that Reeve, just like Nolan, didn't put much emphasis on humor.

The film made me think and did what good cinema and good films can do: it opened up new perspectives for me.

It showed me that when women talk openly with men, new barriers are created and that the mistakes of one generation are in some way passed on to the next.

The actresses Bening, Gerwig and Fanning play very well in the film, but the male roles are also very well cast with Crudup and Zuman.

In my opinion, this film was rightly awarded for its story telling and screenplay.

I will watch a few more of this director's films and probably this one again in a few years. Good Work!

Ridley Scott is known for his historical films, which are usually a mix of action movie and drama. This is also the case with "The Last Duel", even though the battles don't play such a big role as in "Kingdom of Heaven", but then more the heroic, as in "The Gladiator" is in the foreground.

The film is solid and is not over-modernized, or rather, an effort is made to make it really look like the Middle Ages.

Some scenes are too simplistic for me, superfluous and/or too soft pornographic. For example "The horse scene" or "The binge with orgy".

What I like are the supporting characters, like the mother of Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon), who is played by Harriet Walter, the girlfriend of Marguerite ( who is embodied by Tallulah Haddon, and Marguerite's father, who is embodied by Robert de Thibouville. It is left to the viewer's imagination what role these characters might have played in the background. Ben Affleck as Pierre d'Alençon, also plays very solidly.

Towards the end, the film picks up a lot of steam, which I like very much and speaks for the film. I also like the psychological complexity of the entire plot, without overanalyzing it in a judgmental way.

I am very disappointed.

The script seemed as if several screenwriters had worked on it and everyone was just thinking about getting their ideas through, but no one was thinking about the story as a whole being a round whole.

The dialogues were pretty lame to say the least and without any humor and only phrase-like depth.

The cast seemed wildly thrown together and individual roles, such as Blofeld, appeared only to be there, but were not really integrated into the story.

Furthermore, there were always immense logical breaks in the plot. A story doesn't have to be realistic, but it should have some kind of plot logic for the characters.

The only thing that made the film score a bit were the action sequences in Italy, Cuba and the Russian Bunker Island.

In conclusion, it remains to be said that Craig as Bond started strong with "Casino Royal", but couldn't really tie in with any of the other films. That his last Bond film is so bad, however, is not his main fault, but the many cooks who spoiled the broth. Be it in the script, be it in too many characters not integrated.

This Bond was not good British humor, but disgusting cynicism and a shame for all Bond fans.

Good film, but not a masterpiece. The director is not as great a cinematic storyteller as George Lucas or Steven Spielberg. Villeneuve is more known for his very good thrillers and his dark multifaceted characters and their psychological study. Still, the spaceships, sets, costumes and soundtrack by Hans Zimmer are impressive, but again, costumes are not as original as Luc Besson in the 5th Element.

Furthermore, I find that the main character does not really carry the film and that there are always breaks in the plot that are not exactly explained. Thus, during a chase in the desert, the villains suddenly appear, without knowing how they got on the hero's trail in the first place.

I like the director Anders Thomas Jensen and his movies very much. Just how whimsical and yet at the same time true to life the characters are drawn and how beautifully black the humor.

Also how well the actors were chosen for the roles and played them is remarkable. Mads Mikkelson, Nicolas Bro and Lars Brygmann are particularly noteworthy.

The film had a very good suspense and was very entertaining. Just that not all questions are clarified is the theme of the film and makes it out.

Very good acting, especially by Louis Wohlheim and Lew Ayres, and very good characters.

For the time probably a technically quite well implemented film, especially in terms of camera angles and scenery.

It is one of the first anti-war films and probably the mother of all anti-war films.

I saw the film for the first time today. Before I saw this film, I saw Tarantino's "Inglorious Barsterds" and in retrospect it is once again clear that Tarantino have many ideas and inspirations for the movie from grandmaster Lubitsch.

Ich kenne keinen anderen Film der so gut die psychologischen Wirkmechanismen der Nazi-Ideologie wiederspiegel. Great job!

This movie is compressed und pure life. It's show's all facettes of the human condition in the area of midlife party people. The story of the two brothers with different problems is absutely plausible. The partys in the Cafe Belgica are a little bit hyperbolic and transfigured, but that's entertaiment.

The story is so clear and so straight, that the movie loses its entertainement factor and has only marginal surprising elements in it.

• It was clear that one of two soldiers brings the message to the target
• It was clear that the story has something like a happy ending
• It was clear that the movie has some traumatic scenes in it

The movie "City Lights" from Charlie Chaplin have the best happy ending that I have ever seen. The boxing match scenes are so good and funny. A timeless movie for humanity. Thanks Charlie, you're the best.

The Movie have a few very interessting situations, in which the audience don't know if it should laugh or be serious. It's a Arthouse Movie and not a Blockbuster with very much action in it. The camera, the location and the story of the movie a very good. The house of the rich family reminds me a little bit at the house in the movie "Ex Machina". The style of the movie is similiar to other korean movies like "Burning" or "Oldboy".

• The movie has with Athur Fleck a quiet similiar main character as Taxi Driver with Travis Bickle.
• The movie has a similiar media critique as Natural Born Killers
• The movie has a similar fashistiod drift as Fight Club
• And last but not leat, the film has the same atmospheric coolness as Driver

Summa Summarum: The Movie is a remix of cult movies, has not the same level

The Story of my generation. Furious and Fantasic. Top Soundtrack, Top Camera, Top Story. It was so funny that i laugh continously the whole movie. So much references, so good dialoges. I'm very, very impressed. A cinematic firework.

The plot is good, but the movie is wether a good thriller nor a good comedy. It's wether originally nor authentical. I like the cast but their a not good in their roles. For the main role a type like Eddie Murphy, Chris Tucker or Will Smith would be bether. For the co-role a type like Jeff Goldblume would be bether.