The most advanced filming technology can’t comprehend a weak story.
The most advanced filming technology can’t comprehend a weak story.
The most advanced filming technology can’t comprehend a weak story.
For me. Sorry. I couldn’t feel the magic. I was stunned in 2009 but not 13 years later. For me, the technology (or at least, let’s say CGI) has reached its limit. Maybe I’m too spoiled by watching too many movies or I’m oversaturated by a market that spits out…
This movie would have been completely different without Boseman‘s passing (may he rest in peace). And there surely was no better way to cherish his work and appreciate him.
Beside the powerful movie soundtrack by Ludwig Göransson, I found the movie even better than the first one. While focussing more on loss, grief and acceptance they created, on the contrary, an interesting antagonist with an even more intriguing chemistry between him and the protagonist Shuri.
Even if it’s Marvel’s typical formula, it definitely worked for me and I felt touched by each characters experience.
Too much of everything (especially the music was way too epic for a movie like this) in order to be brilliant but too good to be a waste of time.
The case was quite interestingly portraited and well acted.
The topic is never not important - a tiny grain of thousands of cases like this one without ever seeing justice.
I felt very stupid because I thought the story were based on real events ... I found out otherwise later…
... or I love dogs?
There are a lot diverse opinions about Wes Anderson's movies but one thing is definitely true and valid: Wes Anderson loves story telling and he takes some time to evolve its plot. Yes, sometimes a little to long. In 'Isle of Dogs' the pacing is slow from time to time but not in an unpleasant or boring way. It's just Anderson's way and you either like it or not. I haven't watched 'the Fantastic Mr.…
