I feel really badly about the review that is about to come out of me: drum roll.....I did not like this movie very much. It reminded me how True Grit (the new one, I never saw the old one) and Butch Cassidy progressed from a plot-building, as well as a cinematic-pace standpoint. To me the movie was filled with a lot of middle scenes where the characters were moving around the landscape with not much else happening. Not even bad Quentin Tarantino esche dialog (joke re: Quentin's his comments about his *best ever* Death Proof dialog). I guess that meandering part of the plot was kind of necessary (?). But to me - and apparently a minor few other viewers who posted reviews on Netflix (c) - they could have cut about 1 hour out of this movie and still had it be pretty good. Don't believe me though, as I know I'm wrong. Hell, I recently watched a movie called Birdemic and LOVED it. How can I like Birdemic over a classic like The Wild Bunch? I guess that new thought they have about going back and re-rating movies over time might not be too bad after all. Once they do that, perhaps the people's ranking will show Birdemic well in front of The Wild Bunch. Please note, I am being funny here - however, I did like Birdemic better. That part is not a lie.
I tend to agree nearly 100% with this Netflix (c) viewer/reviewer:
"Considering how famous this movie is I expected something a bit more epic. Very little happens for a two and a half hour movie, it would have been easy to chop it down into an awesome 90 minutes without really losing much in the way of plot. When something does happen (at the beginning and the end) its pretty exciting stuff but there is a long, long gap in between."
A huge handful of scenes reminded me of the game Red Dead Redemption. I wonder if the movie had inspiration on the game?
No comments:
Post a Comment