Or didnt see. I fell asleep before the end and couldnt give a toss it was crap!
The only two interesting characters died near the start. The plot just werent going anywhere fast, the main charactor was the worst actor, why did they choose him? wooden the whole time he was on screen. He looked bored and i was bored.
"what the *beep* you mean im a funny guy"
EXACTLY.. This movie tried to fashion itself like The Departed" but came way short.. what were the directors, writers and editors thinking???!!?!?!
It took itself too seriously like they were telling this epic family crime-police story that ultimately turned out to be pure garbage.. I didnt care abt any of the characters or the story..
im angry i wasted my time with this movie..
Potential Watchers Beware!!!
id like to c a list of your top 5 movies!
"i am the devil,and im here to do the devils work" WINGNUTZ
[deleted]
LOL how is this movie in anyway like The Departed?
The only similarity is that they are both part of the crime genre.
It's because you have a low attention span and can only handle films with hyperbolic acting/action and constant fireworks/explosions. The acting was wooden on purpose, yet if you had the capacity to actively pay attention to a film instead of passively be spoon-fed car chases and gun fights you would have realised this. However being unintelligent you failed to realise that the central character starts out as a lamb surrounded by lions, thus his only means of survival is hiding his emotions, he is in a position where telling the truth would get him killed or did you not manage to piece that together? The performance is actually incredibly nuanced with lots of subtle signifiers to tell us what he is thinking/feeling but they all obviously went way over your head.
shareSeriously when people don't like slow films there are always people that say you are incompetent and only like big explosions and big special effects. This film tried too hard to be something it wasn't. I've seen too many movies with the same dreary atmosphere. Tough times and crime. We got it. As far as the lions and lamb thing it wasn't believable at all. They made it out like he knew exactly what was going on the whole time. It was neither subtle nor nuanced. Don't pretend it was some deep movie. You are kidding yourself if you think so.
shareThere are plenty of slow films I have recognised as devoid of substance, but again you confirm your lack of attention span and ability to pick up on subtly by making statements which you wouldn't had you actively payed attention and thus corrected your own misperceptions. The atmosphere wasn't dreary beyond the first scene, you want a dreary film watch early nicholas winding refn i.e. 'pusher' or 'bleeder'. I didn't mean he was a lamb as in he was 'innocent' and didn't know what was happening around him, I meant he was a lamb because he did know and had no power to stop it. Remember what happened when he DID go into witness protection, or did your lazy mind fall asleep before that part? He was almost killed by a squad of COPS, which he might have suspected in advance. Go watch some twilight or another American film which spells everything out for you in direct dialogue, and stop trying to pass your own stupidity off as a failing of the film makers.
shareI agree with you. Animal Kingdom is a very good film and there will always be haters. The film is slow, sure! The film is also basic as much as it is deep and complex. I don't place expectations on movies, ever. I just get on for the ride and see where it takes me on a personal level which after all is highly subjective. AK could have been an all time great, maybe if it delved deeper into each individual character, maybe if it had more suspenseful moments, more twists and more turns. The kind of elements that leave you going "wow" after the end of such a film. But for what is was, it was good and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Sometimes you have to appreciate movies for what they are and for what they provoke emotionally within you rather than having to break out the measuring stick.
AK is a good film and a film worth seeing.
As for dreary? Yeah AK is dreary but there are degrees of which that dreariness exists. Pusher on the hand is not so much dreary as it is gritty. Pusher is a fantastic film and one of my all time favorites. Dreariness is imposed but outweighed by grit. AK didn't have that gritty feel about it, but it sure did feel dreary and it's what suits the film.
If I were to swap out Pusher with another film to contrast your statement I would put in it's place The Wounds which is another excellent film.
Watch Animal Kingdom if it comes your way, it's not the best there ever was but it's damn good!
Agreed . Just because a film tries to be 'Arty' does not necessarily a good film make .
That which does not Kill me makes me Stranger
There is no intelligence needed because the plot was in fact boring and predictable...the only good part in this moving was when he finally became the main man in his family, should of happened earlier in my opinion. You must be on drugs to think this is a classic!
shareIs that really necessary? I think you being so small-minded that you think no one else should have an opinion that differs from yours is just sad. Do you ridicule and insult those who dislike A Clockwork Orange as well or just save it all for this movie?
-Dad, who's that?
-Oh, that? One of my patients. He's...sick.
-Will he live?
-It's looking grim.
You hit the hammer on the head of the nail! So many people do not know what a REAL movie is because of their affliction to the pyrotechnics and low VERY LOW attention span. This movie was riveting, well paced and that is why it is so critically acclaimed by people who review movies for a living.
shareI don't know if I would you critics of an example of why a film is good or bad. We all know critics don't mean sh*t.
shareHowever, I finally just watched the movie. And it was pretty damn good.
For those that say the main character was wooden and terrible, yeah maybe.. but I don't think the writers/directors wanted the main character to stand out. It was more of what went on around him.
You fell asleep. Therefore you have no idea.
If you can't stay-up a few minutes in bed, I think this movie is the least of your problems. You might want to get your attention-span looked at too.
@andy-zero
Don't listen to haters for the sake of hating, I also thought this movie wasn't worth my time, after I finished it.
I tried to like it, really did, I watched it intently. Watched the characters relationships, their tones and mannerisms. Was engrossed in this very peculiar family dynamic they seem to have with each other.
The things that ruined this for me though are more logistically conflicting for me than anything. Such as, non of the family excepting for the mother (who was a creepy powerful influence) had any sense of intelligence, sure any armed thug can get some cash but to have an entire section of police force, other criminals and all of this seemingly constant attention and resources spent on the Cody's. I couldn't get past just how (forgive the word) but 'dumb' they were.
Two and kind of a touch on one, the best character, the one with more of a calm criminal (keep the others in check) kind of charisma (Joel Edgerton) was killed instantly and for no plot forming reason for me.
Three, I get that "j" was detached form the world and all, but what is with the need for the Sling Blade kind of thumping around and barely speaking. He was not a believable character and for me, seemed to be badly cast.
Four, five, ... etc etc
Guy Pierce as well as his character were underused, (personally) disliked the character Pope, he could have been altered a bit and been fine, but most of the latter half of the film his scenes just left me with a bad taste (like watching a child set a pet aflame for no reason with a dash of borderline pedophile) kind of taste.
Anyway, overall I really wasn't even glad I watched it, so much potential was missed and it's more or less just a waste.
haha u ppl are all shot. comparing this to departed and saying its boring and crap. HA! is everyone on this thread more lame than the next person. has anyone here ever heard of "the slow burn" well, this movie perfected the art of a slow burn. is anyone familiar with some polanski films like frantic or repulsion. they both have that quality to them. this was not some kind of cops and robbers action movie. this was a VERY deep, VERY thought provoking film where the actions of the lead character had to be well thought out. not just some crappy hollywood action movie like it sounds all you morons wanted. not too mention that all of the acting is top notch as is the directing and script!!!!!!!
ps-srry if some ppl were really defending the movie, i saw a bunch of nasty posts and stopped reading after a few of them. so this post is for the ppl who wanted another departed which isnt even that great of a film too begin w btw.
Stunning piece of cinema from start to finish!
Probably one of the first film's I've been fully satisfied with the ending.......
"Its a crazy *beep* world" BANG!!!! stunning!!!
Good cinema. A character study and not a adrenalin fuel pumping car chase, gun blasting, matrix leaping slo-mo, bullet fest.
Great performances from Guy Pearce, and Jackie Weaver, in particular. God, are there some ADHD type people in cinema these days.
Agreed. This was a great film. Love the music. I got the pressure J was under and thought it came out well. The only character I thought could have been better was Pope. While he did a great job I reckon they needed someone a bit harder in presence than Mendelsohn. Kinda like a De Niro in Cape Fear or Henshall in Snowtown. Like the end too, wan't expecting that.
shareThe movie creates a situation in which all moral and social order has broken down. The family matriarch is a monster willing to have her teenage grandson bumped off for the sake of the family criminal enterprise. The cops are either corrupt or ineffectual; in either case, they are incapable of protecting the film's one innocent character. The film's most stable and possibly most intelligent character is done away with early to make the situation even more chaotic. And in the middle of all this is a kid desperately trying to navigate the treacherous waters into which he's been thrown.
Most films that deal with the breakdown of social order are based in fanciful post-apocalyptic or wartime scenarios that don't correlate to anything much of anybody has experienced. But in Animal Kingdom, the contours of a familiar Western urban society of recent vintage are readily recognizable, making the complete absence of social order all the more frightening. It's a lot more difficult to distance oneself from this material than it is with, say, Mad Max or Fires on the Plain. Frankly, Animal Kingdom's one of the most horrifying and morally complex films I've ever seen, like Bergman trying his hand at film noir.
But it didn't have any CGI, so I guess it sucks.
Could not agree more,this was dull and boring.Totally baffled that it got good reviews.
shareit's good in my opinion. the main character is "wooden" until that one scene where he cries in his gf bathroom. that scene made the rest of his performance worth it. and the scene where they kill his gf was a good scene. it got 18 nominations in aussie don't hate
shareI remember not liking films like this. Then I grew up.
shareDark but gripping. Long after I saw Jacki Weaver in "Silver Lining Playbook", I realized that I had seen her in this movie, playing the matriarch of this family -- a testament to her prowess as an actor.
share