Why, Michael, why?


I have no clue why people are raving about this movie. Michael is a great actor in everything he does, but his character had about as much charisma as a wet rag. Imogen was okay, but her character's appeal was non-existent as well. Stilted dialogue and nothing to make the characters likable or even explain why they supposedly love each other. Shannon's emotional range was flat; like he was on Prozac.

Nether one of them are interesting or compelling in any way. As a couple, there was less than zero connection or chemistry. They might have been father/daughter for the amount of non-chemistry they had -- which would have been more appropriate considering she looks less than half his age. The story is banal and formulaic.

The description given is pretentious and off-base. It's not a 'psychosexual thriller" at all. There's no sexual tension to be found, and there was no mystery/thrill involved. Just some boring older man being jealous of his younger girlfriend. Redemption? Did we even see the same movie?

This was such an awkward, uncomfortable, unpleasant movie. I wish I'd never watched it.

reply

I agree

reply

He has been in some BAD films lately. I remember he has always been one of my favs. in the industry. But its not looking good...

reply

He did nocturnal animals this year. Think he was good. Better than Gylenhall even.

reply

[deleted]

Michael Shannon is the new Bogart maybe?

reply

Yes, this was far from a psychosexual thriller and marketing it that way seemed desperate. I didn't hate the movie, in fact I really wanted to like it, but I agree about not seeing why these two people were in a relationship with each other to begin with. Even accepting that relationship, I was left wondering how these two could even have any kind of continuing relationship, since she tells stories rather than truth and he gets violently jealous instead of asking questions.


Revenge is a dish that best goes stale.

reply

[deleted]