psycho_randomnumber
Joined Dec 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews7
psycho_randomnumber's rating
Christopher Nolan's dark masterpiece is clearly one of the highlights of Hollywood's 2008.
We all know why we love it; the spectacular action, the seminal ensemble & the hype.
But really...the No. 1 film of all time? The film is at least 15 minutes too long, it's saturated with so many themes and morals that it gets lost. Don't get me wrong, it's spectacular but it's not perfect.
Please stop voting ''10/10'' just because Heath Ledger gives a sublime performance. Think about it, and hopefully in a few months it will rest at about no. 150 where it belongs.
We all know why we love it; the spectacular action, the seminal ensemble & the hype.
But really...the No. 1 film of all time? The film is at least 15 minutes too long, it's saturated with so many themes and morals that it gets lost. Don't get me wrong, it's spectacular but it's not perfect.
Please stop voting ''10/10'' just because Heath Ledger gives a sublime performance. Think about it, and hopefully in a few months it will rest at about no. 150 where it belongs.
The phrase ''controversial film'' evokes an array of feelings. They, often, are watch just for their shock value. For the adrenaline rush or the nausea. Larry Clark's latest picture is no different. It is without a doubt, content-wise absolutely horrific Graphically portraying the lives of several teenagers it counts their sexual, abusive and in one case, incestuous exploits.
None thing's for certain, it definitely is NOT a social commentary. I am a 16 year old, and in the mind of Clark, therefore, supposedly right in the middle of this polemic tempest of law-breaking and desire. Yes, this is a factor but Clark has taken this to the hyperbolic extreme.
So, what's it purpose? From a craft perspective, it's sound. With the standard attributes for most American indie pics. There's nothing much else on offer.
Yes there are a few scenes, glances, shots or indications that are genuinely good and (as the writer/director intended) it is absolutely nauseating and sickening, but tantalising as well. I can only conclude it's abit of a nonexistent, Benin film. The sort of film you would watch with your friends, simply to see the look on their faces. Nothing more, nothing less.
None thing's for certain, it definitely is NOT a social commentary. I am a 16 year old, and in the mind of Clark, therefore, supposedly right in the middle of this polemic tempest of law-breaking and desire. Yes, this is a factor but Clark has taken this to the hyperbolic extreme.
So, what's it purpose? From a craft perspective, it's sound. With the standard attributes for most American indie pics. There's nothing much else on offer.
Yes there are a few scenes, glances, shots or indications that are genuinely good and (as the writer/director intended) it is absolutely nauseating and sickening, but tantalising as well. I can only conclude it's abit of a nonexistent, Benin film. The sort of film you would watch with your friends, simply to see the look on their faces. Nothing more, nothing less.
Every time this ''experimental'' picture clutches at a grasp of interest, it loses it. Mainly because of the garish, painful to watch, lazy, amateur pornesque digital cinematography.
If any film student or enthusiast had handed this in as a festival piece, he or she would have been slapped with a pretentious badge and told not to quit their day job. It's meaningless in every sense of the word. The terrible sound job and unsymbolic, forced cutaways and randomness.
The only reason I've given this 3 out of 10 instead of 0 is because of an admirable performance from Jeremy Irons. I literally longed for scenes with him where i could comprehend and appreciate his role as the 'director'.
I really would like to know why people like this film but by reading professional and non-professional reviews, I'm still none the wise as to how the film was conceived without being thrown in the trash.
If any film student or enthusiast had handed this in as a festival piece, he or she would have been slapped with a pretentious badge and told not to quit their day job. It's meaningless in every sense of the word. The terrible sound job and unsymbolic, forced cutaways and randomness.
The only reason I've given this 3 out of 10 instead of 0 is because of an admirable performance from Jeremy Irons. I literally longed for scenes with him where i could comprehend and appreciate his role as the 'director'.
I really would like to know why people like this film but by reading professional and non-professional reviews, I'm still none the wise as to how the film was conceived without being thrown in the trash.