OhmPhanphiroj

The lead actor is talented, but the story itself feels weak, and the main character's motivation isn't very convincing. I appreciate the simplicity of the story at the start and how it develops, but it could have been much more heartfelt if the writer had spent more time fleshing it out. There are too many plot holes that detract from the overall experience. However, the worst aspect isn't the story-it's the cinematography. The camera work is subpar, as if they used a cheap camcorder instead of a high-quality camera like a RED. They zoom in unnecessarily, and the grainy visuals in many scenes are distracting. The inconsistency in the film's aesthetics is so jarring that it significantly diminishes the film's quality. The director should take this as a lesson for future projects: invest in a better cinematographer and equipment.

B. J. Novak has an ego that is too big for his talent and delusions combined. His screenwriting ability is so poort and the fact that he cons himself to Hollywood as a writer and an awful actor indictates that anything can happen there if you buff exec's knobs enough time for them to give you a pity shot in life. This movie is ridiculous from the beginning to the end, with little substance worth mentioning. The twist isn't really a twist, and a supposedly philosophical dialogue only makes me wonder what if this director had a bit more education and talents, maybe the viewers can enjoy it a bit more? All in all, i am glad i didn't get to pay to see it thanks to online. If I had to pay, I would have held grudge against this idiot writer/producer/director/actor for the rest of my life. If you ever read this BJ Novak, quit Hollywood and go finish you GED and then find another meaningful journey in life that doesnt involve movies. Mmmk?

I firmly hold the belief that those who extol the virtues of this film often lack a robust education in cinema, easily swayed by European institutions attempting to engage with Asian filmmaking without genuine comprehension of its value. Apichatpong's acclaim, in my view, is more attributable to chance than to genuine talent. As a filmmaker and a Thai citizen deeply immersed in our cultural, political, and cinematic heritage, I find it profoundly disheartening to witness such recognition bestowed upon a film lacking in fundamental aspects such as art direction, cinematography, directing, and editing.

"Uncle Boonmee" is a cinematic venture that, in time, may face critical reassessment by more discerning audiences for its dearth of artistic, technical, political, and religious depth. Its narrative offers scant substance, akin to observing a river flow aimlessly for two hours, appealing solely to those who embrace vacuity and philosophical ambiguity. The film's accolades, including top honors at Cannes and recognition for cinematography at various festivals, are almost nauseating, prompting one to question the integrity of the cinematic realm.

The protracted, nonsensical sequences serve only to squander viewers' time and precious cinematic real estate. The film's opening scene, featuring a buffalo tied to a tree, breaking free, lacks relevance to the overarching narrative. The inclusion of the "big foot" character comes across as amateurish, indicative of a director lacking in creative depth, yet strangely embraced by audiences. Furthermore, the ghostly apparition of a woman is poorly executed, failing to integrate seamlessly into the film's fabric.

The cinematography falls so far below par that it would evoke tears from cinematographers worldwide, witnessing such a disservice to the art of storytelling and lighting. Simply put, this movie falters at every turn. Save yourself the disappointment and avoid this woeful piece of cinema.