Very boring cinematically


Am I the only one who thought this was kinda hard to sit through because of the boring, static camerawork (there was only one moving shot), lack of close-ups, awkward editing...Just because it features men talking doesn't mean it has to be boring cinematically. Look at Glengarry Glen Ross, it's nothing but people talking to each other but at the same time it's a film, not just a piece of theater shot from weird angles.

Having said that, Eckhart was great, some good, nice flowing dialogue and Stacy Edwards was wonderful. I just know I won't be watching it again because of the lack of ingenuity when it came to shooting the scenes.

There's no such thing as pretentious movies, just movies that you didn't get

reply

Can't disagree with you, this film is just crying out for a variety of shots.

Only Ben Affleck can judge me

reply

agreed, way too many static shots. but I did like the 80s-ish look of it.

reply

I did notice that it was kind of "boring cinematically", but that didn't bother me. There was no need to make this movie more "cinematic".

reply

[deleted]