Post by geode on Feb 23, 2019 2:32:16 GMT
What a stylized, pretentious, piece of dung!
No, I didn't just re-watch last year's worst film nominated for the Best Picture Academy Award, "The Phantom Thread"... I just watched this year's equivalent to it....the much Oscar nominated "The Favourite"....(yes, it is a British movie).
But perhaps it wasn't all bad, it does have a bunch of bunnies hopping around in some scenes. I like bunnies. There is also a duck racing scene. Not many movies have duck racing. Horatio the Duck wins. Yeah, Horatio!The movie also has a scene, just tossed in with no connection with anything else, of a middle-aged chubby man wearing nothing but a wig being pelted by tomatoes. High art lives!
I was in a depressed mood and this was like a trip through hell for two hours. Low key lighting combined with a bunch of scenes inexplicably shot through a fish eye lens did not fill me with warm and fuzzy feelings. I never did like intrusive cinematography with no point.The soundtrack alternates between baroque classical pieces and rhythmic noises, like birds flapping, or a rusty windmill revolving over and over for minutes on end. Very loud and irritating and it dos not match the mood of the scenes at all..
I counted three scenes where characters suddenly grab a convenient jar and vomit into it without explanation. But wasn't the director, Yorgos Lanthimos, being cute. I think he gave each of the female leads her own vomit scene. Now that is feminism at its best, is it not? Were these scenes a cue to the audience? If so, we were not given barf bags on the way in. Oh, and for all the feminist movie fans out there, there are multiple lesbian sex scenes to please you. I can't say scenes like these ever did anything for me, but to each their own.
The acting was good to excellent, but why bother considering the nature of the rest of the production? What a waste of talent under the direction of a tasteless twit. The screenplay is loaded with gratuitous Anglo-Saxon "expletive deleted" words. (Watergate tapes on my mind). A couple of scenes have people acting like frisky rabbits in corners as regular "serious" dialogue is rendered front and center. Maybe I should have used a word that rhymes with "thumping" (like the soundtrack) instead of "acting" but I am trying to keep this a family friendly review.
There are chapter titles that are lines of dialogue that will come up, but "The Man From U.N.C.L.E." this is not. They are arranged vertically with strange capitalization making them hard to read. The first chapter title is, "This mud stinks" but it should have read "This movie stinks"....
The last shot is of the favourite "servicing" the queen with bunnies superimposed over it. Ah, those bunnies yet again. Honestly, you can't make something this moronic up.
The end credits are in weird multiple fonts, with the same strange capitalization as the chapter titles. They are basically illegible. Was this in the contracts of the people listed there, so they would not be held responsible?
I understand flicks like this being released. I understand critics falling all over themselves praising them. They have a habit of adoring pretentious pics, but it defrauds the public to nominate tripe like this for best picture awards. I want my 140 baht back! Queen Anne should sue for defamation of character. Oh wait, 305 years too late.
No, I didn't just re-watch last year's worst film nominated for the Best Picture Academy Award, "The Phantom Thread"... I just watched this year's equivalent to it....the much Oscar nominated "The Favourite"....(yes, it is a British movie).
But perhaps it wasn't all bad, it does have a bunch of bunnies hopping around in some scenes. I like bunnies. There is also a duck racing scene. Not many movies have duck racing. Horatio the Duck wins. Yeah, Horatio!The movie also has a scene, just tossed in with no connection with anything else, of a middle-aged chubby man wearing nothing but a wig being pelted by tomatoes. High art lives!
I was in a depressed mood and this was like a trip through hell for two hours. Low key lighting combined with a bunch of scenes inexplicably shot through a fish eye lens did not fill me with warm and fuzzy feelings. I never did like intrusive cinematography with no point.The soundtrack alternates between baroque classical pieces and rhythmic noises, like birds flapping, or a rusty windmill revolving over and over for minutes on end. Very loud and irritating and it dos not match the mood of the scenes at all..
I counted three scenes where characters suddenly grab a convenient jar and vomit into it without explanation. But wasn't the director, Yorgos Lanthimos, being cute. I think he gave each of the female leads her own vomit scene. Now that is feminism at its best, is it not? Were these scenes a cue to the audience? If so, we were not given barf bags on the way in. Oh, and for all the feminist movie fans out there, there are multiple lesbian sex scenes to please you. I can't say scenes like these ever did anything for me, but to each their own.
The acting was good to excellent, but why bother considering the nature of the rest of the production? What a waste of talent under the direction of a tasteless twit. The screenplay is loaded with gratuitous Anglo-Saxon "expletive deleted" words. (Watergate tapes on my mind). A couple of scenes have people acting like frisky rabbits in corners as regular "serious" dialogue is rendered front and center. Maybe I should have used a word that rhymes with "thumping" (like the soundtrack) instead of "acting" but I am trying to keep this a family friendly review.
There are chapter titles that are lines of dialogue that will come up, but "The Man From U.N.C.L.E." this is not. They are arranged vertically with strange capitalization making them hard to read. The first chapter title is, "This mud stinks" but it should have read "This movie stinks"....
The last shot is of the favourite "servicing" the queen with bunnies superimposed over it. Ah, those bunnies yet again. Honestly, you can't make something this moronic up.
The end credits are in weird multiple fonts, with the same strange capitalization as the chapter titles. They are basically illegible. Was this in the contracts of the people listed there, so they would not be held responsible?
I understand flicks like this being released. I understand critics falling all over themselves praising them. They have a habit of adoring pretentious pics, but it defrauds the public to nominate tripe like this for best picture awards. I want my 140 baht back! Queen Anne should sue for defamation of character. Oh wait, 305 years too late.
