- Awards
- 4
IT Chapter 2
My favourite film critic Mark Kermode thinks "The Deer Hunter is one of the worst films ever made, a rambling self-indulgent, self-aggrandising barf-fest steeped in manipulatively racist emotion, and notable primarily for its farcically melodramatic tone which is pitched somewhere between shrieking hysteria and somnambulist somberness." I can kind of see what he means, but I also think it's beautiful, haunting, harrowing and just so sad. It feels epic and small at the same time, sort of like an existential Dr Zhivago. The running time is three hours and pretty much the first third is given over to a small town wedding which doubles as a send-off party for the groom and his two friends who are off to Vietnam the next day. It's so wonderful to see a pre-fame Robert de Niro*, Christopher Walken, Cazale, Meryl Streep and the especially great John Savage back when they were all so young, playing off each other so beautifully -- getting drunk, falling in love, taking the p*ss, laughing, dancing, streaking. Then without warning, you're plunged into the hell of war and the film's most infamous sequence. Suffice to say, there aren't many laughs from this point on, but there are moments of delicacy and beauty and it's completely riveting throughout.
*Actually, de Niro had already done Taxi Driver and The Godfather Part II by this point.
I can't understand why the critics panned this film because I loved it and Gal Gadot is stunningly beautiful in it even after a long energetic fight scene.
Whatever the reason why they didn't like it, don't listen to them, it's a great piece of entertainment.
Esquire has ranked The Deer Hunter as the second worst Oscar winning film of all-time, calling it "Unbearably annoying, and the wedding section’s so long you’ll find yourself praying for a barely competent local band to start parping out ‘Mr Brightside’ so you can sneak off." I feel strangely proud.
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
![]()
I can't understand why the critics panned this film because I loved it and Gal Gadot is stunningly beautiful in it even after a long energetic fight scene. Maybe the critics didn't like it because it wasn't as good as the original, maybe it was because it never got a proper cinema release so some of the action sequences didn't have the intended impact or maybe it was because the storyline is a bit ludicrous but then it's a superhero film so it's not meant to be realistic. Whatever the reason why they didn't like it, don't listen to them, it's a great piece of entertainment.
Was there something specific you didn't like about the film? Did you not find the characters interesting? Was the storyline too far-fetched for you? Were there too many plot holes that you were unable to accept?It's nice to see that you liked the movie. To be honest, I really dislike it. I wasn't aware of the bad critics when I watched it. So I wasn't under influences.
Was there something specific you didn't like about the film? Did you not find the characters interesting? Was the storyline too far-fetched for you? Were there too many plot holes that you were unable to accept?
You make some good points and I can understand why some people wouldn't like the film. Personally, I liked the lighter tone because it gives the film a more of a comic book feel. I have a different opinion of Zach Snyder's interpretations of DC comics which I think is too serious for what is essentially a film of a comic and I really didn't like Batman vs Superman, for example. That's the joy of the movies, different people can watch the same film and have a completely different opinion on it.Details. For example I really enjoyed the first movie because the special FX seemed more "real".
In this new movie, the CGI WW was too obvious for me. The integration of the FX was not good. WW fighting in the mall was badly executed from and WW Jumps felt very fake. Also the FX Cheetah were kinda awful imo.
I did not warm up to the 2 villains. The character development of two villains at the same time was average. I think It might have been better with more screen time to develop only 1 villain instead of 2. Cheeta's "evolution" going from sweet & shy to seductive and ultra confident, to angry and mean, felt too fast imo
Also, the "return" of a certain dead character was forced (I get that they wanted Chris Pine) and Diana's not moving on him for almost 35years wasn't really believable. I don't mean she had to stop loving him or forget him. I understand he was her great first love. But staying for 35 years without being loved or without loving anyone : I can't buy it. I unfortunately know that grieving is a long process... But 35 years is quite a lot. Unless they explain that time is not the same for an Amazon.
Overall, the movie felt too much like a DC/Warner attempt to be colorful and fun like a Marvel movie. I really prefer the darker tone of the Snyder Universe. It was not perfect, but it was an interesting take, Snyder taking time to build a universe. Marvel has already its own formula. It's really sad that DC/Warner gage up on their first strategy (Snyder) to try to emulate Marvel (hoping It would make more money)....
You make some good points and I can understand why some people wouldn't like the film. Personally, I liked the lighter tone because it gives the film a more of a comic book feel. I have a different opinion of Zach Snyder's interpretations of DC comics which I think is too serious for what is essentially a film of a comic and I really didn't like Batman vs Superman, for example. That's the joy of the movies, different people can watch the same film and have a completely different opinion on it.