roadkill6
A rejoint le août 2011
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges4
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Évaluations26
Note de roadkill6
Avis4
Note de roadkill6
Seneca the Younger was a fascinating character and this movie is an interesting exploration of that character. I think that historians will be displeased with the liberties that this story takes with truth and historical accuracy, and I suspect that much of the general audience will be lost because of the lack of historical context that this movie provides. I am a fan of Seneca and I enjoyed this, but it definitely isn't a tentpole film.
There is an audience for this film though, and I wish that it had been better promoted in the U. S. and that it had seen a wider release, because John Malkovich, Lilith Stangenberg, Tom Xander, Geraldine Chaplin, and Andrew Koji and several others have delivered excellent performances here. Frankly, John deserves an Oscar for his performance, and, while John, Lilith, Geraldine, and Andrew are all seasoned actors, Tom Xander in particular deserves special credit for taking on and nailing such a complex role.
The cinematography is beautiful, the directing is great, the writing is tight, and the acting is on-point, but the subject is somewhat obscure, and so it is probably never going to be a top-ten film. Perhaps some day Seneca will get the Oppenheimer treatment, but until then, this may be the apogee of Roman history in 21st Century cinema.
There is an audience for this film though, and I wish that it had been better promoted in the U. S. and that it had seen a wider release, because John Malkovich, Lilith Stangenberg, Tom Xander, Geraldine Chaplin, and Andrew Koji and several others have delivered excellent performances here. Frankly, John deserves an Oscar for his performance, and, while John, Lilith, Geraldine, and Andrew are all seasoned actors, Tom Xander in particular deserves special credit for taking on and nailing such a complex role.
The cinematography is beautiful, the directing is great, the writing is tight, and the acting is on-point, but the subject is somewhat obscure, and so it is probably never going to be a top-ten film. Perhaps some day Seneca will get the Oppenheimer treatment, but until then, this may be the apogee of Roman history in 21st Century cinema.
The original story of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is a morality tale about a knight who fails a test of honor, but is redeemed in the end. This film is not that story. It starts out well enough, but both Gawain (not a knight in this version) and his story get lost along the way.
The opportunities for character development throughout Gawain's quest are set aside in exchange for visual spectacle and dead-end subplots and the original ending was far more satisfying than this non-ending.
It is beautifully filmed, the acting is superb, and David Lowery deserves a lot of credit for his excellent direction, but the writing falls flat. Storylines are set up and then never concluded, there are a few deus ex machina moments for no particular reason, some of the best parts of the original story were changed (like the Green Knight's insulting challenge to Arthur), and the whole movie suffers as a result.
If you've never read the original story and you just want pretty pictures, a dark and foreboding atmosphere, and closeup shots of Dev Patel (who acted the heck out of this film) looking serious, then this movie will scratch that itch. If, on the other hand, you're expecting to see the tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight or care at all about plot holes or coherent character arcs, then you might want to give this one a miss.
Maybe this film will inspire someone to make a faithful adaptation of the original story someday.
The opportunities for character development throughout Gawain's quest are set aside in exchange for visual spectacle and dead-end subplots and the original ending was far more satisfying than this non-ending.
It is beautifully filmed, the acting is superb, and David Lowery deserves a lot of credit for his excellent direction, but the writing falls flat. Storylines are set up and then never concluded, there are a few deus ex machina moments for no particular reason, some of the best parts of the original story were changed (like the Green Knight's insulting challenge to Arthur), and the whole movie suffers as a result.
If you've never read the original story and you just want pretty pictures, a dark and foreboding atmosphere, and closeup shots of Dev Patel (who acted the heck out of this film) looking serious, then this movie will scratch that itch. If, on the other hand, you're expecting to see the tale of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight or care at all about plot holes or coherent character arcs, then you might want to give this one a miss.
Maybe this film will inspire someone to make a faithful adaptation of the original story someday.
It's a bit ironic that Omari Hardwick's character quotes Joseph Campbell at one point in the film, because this is not a hero's journey story; this is simply Dawn of the Dead meets Ocean's Eleven. On the upside, the cast does a great job and the cinematography is exactly what I expect from a Snyder film; it's very good. There are some serious plot holes though, and it's obvious that realism with regards to weapons, tactics, and government/military policy took a backseat to cool special effects.
So, if you want to enjoy the film, go ahead and suspend that disbelief right now, ignore the warmed-over, clichéd tropes, and just watch the zombie brains splatter.
Zombie movies are great specifically because they have the ability to shine a light on human nature in the darkest of times, and Snyder's Dawn of the Dead did that, but Army of the Dead doesn't. You hope for a twist, a variation on a theme, a revelation, a bit of an "aha" moment, but it never comes. Instead, there are homages to classic films, but they are so on-the-nose that they distract from this film and only serve to make it seem more derivative.
I also couldn't unsee the fact that Tig Notaro was greenscreened in after principal photography was finished. It's distractingly obvious that she was added in, and it's a real shame because she's a good actor and it would have been nice to see her play off of Bautista and the rest of the cast.
I wish this movie was better, but sometimes you roll the dice and it comes up snake-eyes.
So, if you want to enjoy the film, go ahead and suspend that disbelief right now, ignore the warmed-over, clichéd tropes, and just watch the zombie brains splatter.
Zombie movies are great specifically because they have the ability to shine a light on human nature in the darkest of times, and Snyder's Dawn of the Dead did that, but Army of the Dead doesn't. You hope for a twist, a variation on a theme, a revelation, a bit of an "aha" moment, but it never comes. Instead, there are homages to classic films, but they are so on-the-nose that they distract from this film and only serve to make it seem more derivative.
I also couldn't unsee the fact that Tig Notaro was greenscreened in after principal photography was finished. It's distractingly obvious that she was added in, and it's a real shame because she's a good actor and it would have been nice to see her play off of Bautista and the rest of the cast.
I wish this movie was better, but sometimes you roll the dice and it comes up snake-eyes.