Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
got off on a technicality
Feb 7, 2007

oh dear
I just watched it, despite the bad reviews, because it was supposed to be visually slick and inventive. I now know that all the special effects in the world can't make up for a story that is preposterous and fails to resonate. There are impressive set pieces, but you get the impression that the screenwriters spent all their time coming up with them and then realized at the eleventh hour that they needed to actually make a film and hence cobbled the set pieces together into a disjointed mess, like a child attempting to repair a broken teapot with wallpaper paste. The film spends its extended (and flaccid) run-time rapidly ushering you from set piece to set piece, hoping that the dazzle and visual spectacle will hide the stitches on Frankenstein's monster. Dane DeHaan tries hard, but the film admits of precious little human connection and thus his efforts to inject soul into it fall flat. Please don't watch it. Really. There's entertaining bad movies, and then there's this - which is just a waste of time

got off on a technicality fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Feb 20, 2017

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread