guilhermealves15
This movie is too psychopath, and the worst is that sometimes they try to be funny, weird af!!!
David Kohen (heisenberg83)
Glad I ignored the critics & naysayers on this one as I thoroughly enjoyed it & actually look forward to watching it again soon. I'm a huge Blade Runner fan, so I really admired the homage this film plays to that classic. Even the multiple characters, with unique arcs & quirks was really enjoyable. It was fun to see Paul Rudd play so against type. The film looks beautiful, has a great futuristic score & ties in well with another excellent Duncan Jones film. In an age where every Hollywood sci fi blockbuster dwells on brainless action & violence, it baffles me why Duncan Jones has been so ripped apart by the critics for trying to make a thinking man's sci-fi movie which immerses the viewer in a gripping, scary & intelligent world & plot. Give it a try. I'll be watching it again very soon I think.
edddy-1
This film really turned my head around.Other reviewers have said the plot makes no sense. I can agree with them in a way. But I think it depends of what kind of sense you want gain from this film. I get a raw slap in the face sense of emotion and beauty and many angles and directions of human behaviour from it. Do we always need a song to "make sense" or can the sense be mainly carried in the emotion and pulse ? Can the same be true for a film ?Personally I think the plot was easily strong enough to hold this film together enough to carry story line journeys into the inner workings of its characters. This to me is how a plot should best be used and produces the greatest stories and films. The actors lived their parts as if they were acting out of things personal to them. The sets and cinematography were used to exquisitely enhance their expression.A rare and classic film.
ncitybookworm
This movie definitely had its moments, particularly in terms of Alexander Skarsgård and his character. I might have stopped watching out of pure frustration and boredom if it had not been for how interesting I found Skarsgård's character Leo. His character cannot speak but, that does not hinder his ability to communicate nonverbally. He is Amish and does not drink or use technology, but works as a bartender and lives in a technologically advanced society.The movie itself suffers from an inconsistent and bland plot as well as too much attention to Paul Rudd's Cactus and Justin Theroux's Duck. Rudd does a great job with what he has, balancing being a good father to his daughter Josie and his seedy workplace and connections. If you minimized some of his scenes and cut out some of the unnecessary parts, he would be a great addition to the story.One of the biggest issues I have with the story is the character of Duck. He detracts from the plot and serves as an unnecessary character. If you removed his character entirely, it would have almost no impact on the plot itself however there is a large focus on him. His only purpose is to make the audience uncomfortable in the worst kind of way and to almost make Rudd's character look more sympathetic.There are some great scenes and the cinematography is breath-taking at times. The world isn't "vaguely futuristic," but rather rich and realistic. If the movie did one thing right (other than the casting) it's the world this story creates. It really had a lot of potential, but it lost track of the plot at times, choosing to focus on unnecessary things and characters.
AD
