Boring waste of time

Maybe you should watch the movie, and form an opinion based on that, instead of a review.

No style? That scene in the woods is one of the most beautiful and amazing scenes that I have ever seen.
So, Cameron, if you could have come up with that at 8 what films have you produced since then?

The movie definitely wasn't a thriller, but it was mysterious enough to hold me through two viewings to figure out all of the little plot twists. Moody and quiet, it worked for me.

As far as the review offered, the author of the review seems to have started watching with a number of assumptions about it already in place, which, I'm guessing, is probably part of the reason he didn't enjoy it. Some films you need to watch before you categorize, this is one.

OBVIOUSLY this is just going to lead to pointless argueing and angry forum geekery, kind of a dumb thing to post.

I'm about to see this for the first time tonight, I'll share my thoughts.

Sorry that this isnt The Island. Maybe you are not meant to watch foreign films. This is the kind of movie that was once the norm in european film making, especially the bohemian sect in the 60's(before communism). It seems completely independent of Hollywood, because they are based on two completely different aspects of story telling.
Hollywood seems to be in the format of the greek comedy. The word comedy we use now is a bastardization of what it once was. A comedy in greek times was about a loser who finally wins(this is dumbing it down a bit, but you get the picture). The "Golden Age" of film making in Hollywood was defined by this to a T, and note that the main character dying in the end does not make something a tragedy. Winning is more than just survival, look at Shane for example. Films were meant for entertaining purposes only, a theory of how this differed from the european context was that the majority of people had enough money to see a film. These films are also drenched in "morality". People may argue that this was not the case, especially after the golden age, but it could just be that morality has changed.
There is a flip side, now in hollywood you need the most intricate complex plot to be considered intelligent (enter Kaufman).
Look at the european sect, a Czech film like "Valley of the Bees" and "Intacto". They comprise of visual poetry (rich in symbology as well), but relatively simple stories. They are thought provoking because they do not do the thinking for you(no moralizing). Instead of entertainment, it is viewed as art. Returning to the theory, after the war europe was a complete economic mess. Not everybody could afford to see films in theaters, but instead it was accessible by only the middle and upper classes. This is an extension of marxist views on art and entertainment and how classes dictate art, but not necessarily entertainment.
The truth of the matter is, complexity does not an intelligent film make. In my personal opinion, the simpler a film is that is as thought provoking as a complex film, is more intelligent because complexity can be overdone *cough, waking life*.
PS: dont use the "there are exceptions" argument, because it is automatically assumed that exceptions exist everywhere and it is hence not a valid argument.

[deleted]

I don't know if it's a complete waste of time but it is tedious and boring. There are some good ideas but they aren't well connected. A thriller without thrill.

Just look at the box-office results!

Just watched the film . . . My opinion isn't so negative to say that this is a "boring waste of time", but I do agree with the gist of the referenced review.


Is everyone in this house a total nutzoid or is it just me?