I see no reason why a big-budget spectacle can’t be just as good as a 4 hour long art-film from the Soviet Union, and I will hold firm to this belief. I like them all.
I see no reason why a big-budget spectacle can’t be just as good as a 4 hour long art-film from the Soviet Union, and I will hold firm to this belief. I like them all.
I like what you wrote in your "About Me" section. Unless that four hour film is Andrei Rublev :)
in regards to the road- was using the term "set" as sort of a catch-all, not in any sort of specific sense. i guess a better way to word it would have been that everything felt too staged, obviously constructed by teams of professionals to suggest a post-apocalyptic wasteland....it was too hollywood-grunge for me. im aware of the shooting locations and such, and i think part of my disappointment came from the fact that they were in these magnificent locations and (in my opinion) didn't do enough with it. also, i would argue there were plenty of sets- the houses, the basements, the interior of bombed out buildings, the shelter beneath the ground....they weren't all found locations.
you cannot will a cult-film into existence just by throwing in wacky references to twinkies and cribbing from other, better cult films. still, points for being funny and for woody harrelson. the rest… read review
sadly underrated and sort of bizarrely hated film….just because it’s called funny people doesn’t mean it has to be a comedy, and a lot of people seem to dismiss this film on the basis that it’s not… read review