It may be a hated movie
...but it made a big return on investment. All the money people laughed all the way to the bank, regardless of how awful the movie was.
SMH
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=lazarus.htm
All Art is pretense.
MarshallStax it wasn't an awful movie. It 100% delivered what it wanted to on screen. It got people thinking about science vs religion and also what scientists should and should not be doing today in relation to human life. I am glad that this movie made money as the people behind it can take it and make another movie that will give us more to think about hopefully.
shareI respectfully disagree with your opinion. I found the writing lazy and sloppy, the characters unbelievable, the so-called science vs. religion conflict uncompelling, the acting borderline laughable and the scares nonexistent.
By the end, I had almost given up on it. Almost. I did watch it until the end.
All Art is pretense.
Which characters did you find to be unrealistic? I thought Mark Duplass' Frank and Donald Glover's Niko were very well-written, and realistic/consistent to their pre-accident personalities.
shareThe entire movie seems to have been written by someone who is unfamiliar with how science is conducted and with how human beings behave.
Meet some researchers and hang out with them a little and you'll see what I mean.
All Art is pretense.
That has literally nothing to do with what I asked you. Like, at all.
Also, your "hang out with some researchers" comment was vague to the point of being nonsensical. I'm going to assume that you meant medical researchers, but you really should be more clear.
Now, just to clarify; I thought that this movie was a complete letdown-- the effects were garbage, the build-up too long, and the payoff underwhelming. But, the dialogue and personalities of the medical researchers were all consistent and realistic. That is literally the only silver lining of the film.
But, after looking at your page and seeing that you gave The Departed a two star review (Really? One star more than you rated Date Movie?), The Excorist a four star review, and also rating Stranger Than Fiction than either of them, I've come to the conclusion that you cherry-pick random sentiments from previously posted reviews and than add them to a review of films you don't enjoy in a way reminiscent of "Mad Libs". But I'm just hoping there.
If not, your signature truly fits you.
But, yeah. *beep* this movie.
Okay, let me spell it out for you point by point:
Which characters did you find to be unrealistic? I thought Mark Duplass' Frank and Donald Glover's Niko were very well-written, and realistic/consistent to their pre-accident personalities.
I found all of the characters to be unrealistic. None of them behave the way actual researchers behave. That's not how science is conducted in the real world. If you knew some scientists (as I implied that I do, though I will make it explicit now and say that I have known several who were university professors) or how university research programs work, you'd likely have rolled your eyes along with me at this crap film.
And as far as your remarks regarding my reviews: nope, it's all my writing. I stand behind my reviews and I give my reasons. If they disagree with yours, then... vive la difference, right?
And yes, all art is pretense. All of it. Look up definitions #5 and #6 on the Merriam- Webster website.
All Art is pretense. share
Okay, I understand you don't think that the are "researchers" that act like that, but I'm an aspiring research engineer in physics, and I can tell you from my own personal experience; that's incorrect. There isn't a defined personality for people in the field and to imply that it is pretty asinine.
And, no sh!t, the science is unrealistic. Its an indie horror movie. The science doesn't need to be. Just like Captain America's shield isn't made from vibranium, Darth Vader's respirator wouldn't function in any harsh environments, and driving in a Delorean at 88 miles wouldn't take you back in time, you should be capable of suspension of disbelief.
But, yeah, this film still blows.
[deleted]
Suspension of disbelief happens every time we watch TV, read a book or see a play. Clearly, none of this is happening directly in front of us.
Linked below is a nice article about the subject and how it can be earned or lost by the crafting of a dramatic presentation. I know that when I lose mine, I'm generally done with whatever I'm watching or reading unless it's been so slam-bang up to that point that I give the entertainment a pass.
But I'm tough to please that way, I guess.
http://articles.latimes.com/1993-04-15/entertainment/ca-23034_1_indecent-proposal
And here's a quote that sums it up for me: "Most readers will accept patently impossible events so long as they are used to address something which feels true in a more philosophical sense."
This movie failed that test for me with the situations and characters. I was willing to give it a pass on the whole "bringing the dead back to life" thing and because I liked the cast, but...
https://www.standoutbooks.com/suspension-of-disbelief
On a personal note, why do you feel the need to be so abusive and provocative to strangers on message boards? What is it you get from trying to get a rise out of people?
They're just things to think about.
All Art is pretense.
I see your point, and I can understand where you're coming from. I didn't mind it, I was just trying to enjoy some mindless horror.
Sorry if I seemed abusive or that I was trying to get a rise out of you. I do get pretty condescending when someone tags on something, even if I disliked it, without much explaination on the boards. To me, it's like, why bother? What's the point of posting of if you're not willing to discuss in detail? But, I see now that you're completely willing to, and I apologize for most of my comments, sincerely.
Because I loved The Departed. ;)
There are certain acclaimed directors whose work I just really dislike. Scorsese and Tarantino are my top two in that category.
All Art is pretense.