Roande

The atmosphere, the fantastic vocal performances, the fantastic visual presentation... I've never been so scared of a Youtube video before... and I'm happy I was scared.

I mean, it's a nice little story. It's not that dark of a story and there's points in the story that actually feel quite nice. But when there's a much better side of the same story, then what's the point?

News of the World aka The Bad of Us is completely a rip-off of... *drums rollin* The Last of Us, who could've seen that one coming huh? But for real, this story isn't anything more than a rip-off of The Last of Us. I mean, this whole concept of story isn't anything special, but you can tell that the movie was trying to mimic The Last of Us and added a bit of Mandy (1952) just so that they won't get straight called out for plagiarism. And if someone says: "The movie was based on a novel", you know what, you're right kiddo. Except that novel was released in 2016. I'm not against it if you take an concept of rivarly for your movie, but at least try to make it a good movie. Unlike The Last of Us, this one ain't even good, boyo.

Let's start with the acting. Helena Zengel was pretty alright with her role. I don't want to discourage her or anything, but I think she could've done a much better job. I think it might have been more of Paul Greengrass's fault but whatever. Tom Hanks was Tom Hanks and Tom Hanks as Tom Hanks is the same as Steven Seagal as Steven Seagal: uninteresting. Well, to be honest, Steven Seagal is much more interesting than Tom Hanks. I don't hate Tom Hanks, but I haven't seen him acting a character instead of himself since the early 2000s. There could've been a much more better actors for this role, but I think Tom Hanks did his job. When it comes to the other characters, well... Michael Angelo Covino did a pretty good job with his character. The other actors... did not so well with their characters.

Now, the directing. I don't mean to say that Paul Greengrass is an untalented movie director who shouldn't ever try to make anything that involves good acting, good writing and good directing... but I'm saying that. I mean, sure, in Captain Phillips Barkhad Abdi was really good, but I think it's more likely that Barkhad Abdi is just a natural born actor. In Good Time he did a good job, even in Blade Runner 2049 he did a good job, so I believe that's it's more thank to him than Paul Greengrass. Paul Greengrass isn't untalented, I've seen parts of his Bourne movies and they seem actually pretty good movies, but his directing is the same as Steven Spielberg's: money-grubbin'. I don't see that there's any passion or style in the directing, it just feels like Paul Greengrass just wanted that paycheck.

Cinematograpy is good. Only thing that I do like about in all of Paul Greengrass's movies, is how everything is mostly shot handheld. It's obviously a stylistic choice, which I do like, but I think it's more thanks to the cinematographer Barry Ackroyd, who shot The Hurt Locker.

Music is alright. it's just alright. There's not much to say about it, to be honest. It's the most generic Hollywood violin score.

Story, even though I criticized it for ripping off The Last of Us, is not the worst still. Some of the moments and dialogue are pretty well written, but mostly it's the most generic, bland, tasteless, uninteresting, boring story. There's nothing good about that, it makes the movie just more annoying to watch.

Even though I criticized this movie a lot, there's still good things about it. Sadly, there were more good than bad: 4/10.

Ah... what an achievement. I though that I'd never make a review about this perfect movie... but f#ck it.

The Academy award winning screenplay is in my opinion probably the second best of the decade, behind Bir Zamanlar Anadolu'da for a slight bit. There is just so much thought and effort put in it to make a sensible comical story. There's many quotable lines in it and all of them fit to the characters perfectly. Characters are amazingly written and developed perfectly. For me, the comedy in it wasn't all that funny. I'd criticize this movie for not being funny, if there wasn't one bit that changed everything completely. The comedy, made everything much more sad. Riggan Thompson's struggle and unpopularity was trying to be funny, but for me it made me care more about the character - Riggan Thompson is just like Llewyn Davis. It didn't make me laugh, but I'm sure that it made someone else laugh his/her #rse off.

The acting in this movie is phenomenal and I'm shocked that no-one got an oscar for their performances. Even the more minor roles, like Zach Galifianakis's, were great. Michael Keaton's performance was mind-blowing, Edward Norton was spectacular and Emma Stone was the perfect icing on the marvelous cake. For me this is the best performed movie of the decade. ...And I got to ask the Academy Awards, how Patricia Arquette's performance was better than Emma Stone's?!

The cinematography is fantastic, it's something that many other movies fail at. For a guy like me, who cares even more about the cinematography than anything else... it's just beautiful. The best way to define the cinematography, would be comparing it to "9th Symphony by Beethoven", both are just incredibly beautiful. The way of making it look like a continuous is meta and perfect. Having the shot looking like it's continuous needs everything to be perfectly timed and that's where the directing comes in. Alejandro G. Inarritu makes everything seem so perfectly timed, that anyone else couldn't probably do. That's the reason why Richard Linklater shouldn't have won an Oscar for directing, and I'm happy that he didn't. Cinematography was the best of the decade, beating even Bir Zamanlar Anadolu'da which had also a very beautiful cinematography.

The soundtrack for this film was the third best of the decade for me, with Inside Llewyn Davis and Gustavo Santaolalla beating it. The drum soundtrack was amazing and it accompanied the movie really well. Of course, people's tastes are different, but I seriously recommend you to listen it.

As a whole, this movie is an achievement and technical marvel that everyone should at least check out. For a small budget of $18 million, it's amazingly made. $18 million isn't a small amount of money, when we think that Whiplash took only $3.3 million to make, but to achieve this much with only $18 million, it's just f#cking amazing. I don't think that I can find enough words to tell you how amazing this movie is. There is just so much to talk about it, but this is as much as I can tell you without spoilers. I can't recommend this movie enough so please, do me a favor and watch this movie.

I'm really happy that Academy Awards gave this the Oscars that this movie deserved, but I can't forgive them for not giving any Oscars for acting. This movie got the attention that it deserved and I'm happy that Alejandro made this and Revenant in a row. It's a new decade now and I hope that Alejandro makes a comeback.



Sean Penn: And... the movie of the decade-award goes to...

(pause)

Sean Penn: Who gave this son of a b#tch his green card? "Birdman".