|
I want to see this just because it's a grand experiment. Like how Russian Ark was shot in one 90 minute take or The Fall was made in a dozen countries over four years out of the director's pocket. Even if the film isn't great, it's refreshing compared to $200 million pissed away on tepid melodrama.
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
Sleeveless posted:Jupiter Ascending was a better movie on every level, even when it comes to time investment gimmicks because an action scene that Channing Tatum and Mila Kunis spent every day for six months shooting represents a bigger and more complicated investment of time than calling up that bored teenager and C-list actor you shot half a movie with ten years ago and asking them to hang out for a week It looks ok and knowing the Wachowskis, it is at least something they believe in. I'm referring more to films that are nothing more than a product, rather than a work of art. Even Ed Wood made movies with a heartfelt message, regardless of quality. Billions of dollars are spent on movies that serve no purpose other than a revenue stream. Not that it's bad to make money, but there is nothing wrong with making good films. Egbert Souse fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Feb 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2015 14:31
|
|