I like that Bazz Luhrmann has gone in a new direction with this adaptation, as a spectacle, it looks amazing on the big screen, and the soundtrack is not as distracting as I thought it would be. But maybe the weakness is the screenplay, which tells us what to think. I didn't want the green light to be explained. To me, there was more mystery and ambiguity about the characters in the book.
Slick, US thriller. I think you could sum up the story in 2 minutes, yet they drag it out to 2 hours. Very little characterization, so I only care about the outcome, not the characters. I think this film is overrated. I can remember one line of dialogue, which addressed the Iranian culture, and that is simply not enough, and I got the feeling the script had been dumbed down.
Extra points for the suspenseful beginning and end to the movie.
Perhaps, as Random Film Buff writes: "Argo attempts to give insightful observations of the ethics of the movie business, or lack of, that is"
Could be David Cronenberg's most important, visionary, and ambitious work. A cult film that is disturbing and visually grotesque, so not for the faint of heart.
Thought-provoking, not least because the film is a window into the future: Freely available information, avatar names, the limits of satisfaction and entertainment, the effects on your surroundings and on the mind of watching violence, sex or torture, and whether entertainment is at the expense of something more worthwhile. Does viewing kill our brain…
Not to be confused with Deep Blue Sea (1999)! Based on a theatre play. The look of the film is old school. British drama that takes place around 1950. The performances are good: Rachel Weisz, Tom Hiddleston, etc. Small production, big on emotions. The characters are suddenly in love, or suddenly we hear they are married, but we don't know why, there is no build-up or warning. This is a stylistic choice it would seem. To reveal more would spoil…