5 ms·

Except that this was not a steak dinner, not even close. It was a microwave pizza with ananas served in “Italian” restaurant.

brookst 4y ago
No, that was my point. The movie was very good for what it was, and the article’s complaints are almost all based on the author making incorrect assumptions about the movie’s intent and then complaining that the writing did not meet their incorrect assumptions. It’s fine to dislike the movie; about 7% of critics and moviegoers do, according to rotten tomatoes. But at least have the grace to understand it.
- ivan_gammel 4y ago
  In some occasions 7% of critics do have correct assumptions, being able to see through the catchy hooks, and this is one of those cases. This movie is expected to continue the original story as a proper sequel, but it is something completely different — it simply does not match the expectations. It is very easy to understand this movie, because it is flat and unimaginative junk that does not leave any space for intellectual discussion, so trivial are the ideas, the plot and the dialogues in it. In the end, of course, it is a matter of taste, so let‘s not throw the words like „grace“ in this conversation — they are reserved for more important things.
  - brookst 4y ago
    I’m very sorry the movie made you that angry. I hope it’s one of those things you can see again in a few years and enjoy in a new light. I was like that with Steve Martin’s The Jerk: hated it, thought it was banal, came to appreciate it years later. You may or may not be right about the ideas in Glass Onion being trivial, but how blind must the author of this clickbait review have been to not even notice that literally Yo-Yo Ma, literally playing himself, literally sets up the movie’s structure and explains why it plays out the way it does, in one of the first scenes? You can think that’s dumb, but you can’t ignore it when writing a critique! This supposed revelation of “bad writing” is just clickbait from someone who didn’t understand the (yes, blatant! yes, arguably trivial!) structure the movie was exploring.
- sliken 4y ago
  Shouldn't a murder mystery show what really happened? Instead of faking it to hide who did it, only to be revealed at the end with the real video footage? What's the point? Might as well just make it an action movie.
  - neaden 4y ago
    It did show what really happened, it's only in the flashback when the character lies about it that it shows something else, but if you rewatch it you'll see everything happen in the background.

brookst 4y ago

No, that was my point. The movie was very good for what it was, and the article’s complaints are almost all based on the author making incorrect assumptions about the movie’s intent and then complaining that the writing did not meet their incorrect assumptions. It’s fine to dislike the movie; about 7% of critics and moviegoers do, according to rotten tomatoes. But at least have the grace to understand it.

ivan_gammel 4y ago
In some occasions 7% of critics do have correct assumptions, being able to see through the catchy hooks, and this is one of those cases. This movie is expected to continue the original story as a proper sequel, but it is something completely different — it simply does not match the expectations. It is very easy to understand this movie, because it is flat and unimaginative junk that does not leave any space for intellectual discussion, so trivial are the ideas, the plot and the dialogues in it. In the end, of course, it is a matter of taste, so let‘s not throw the words like „grace“ in this conversation — they are reserved for more important things.
- brookst 4y ago
  I’m very sorry the movie made you that angry. I hope it’s one of those things you can see again in a few years and enjoy in a new light. I was like that with Steve Martin’s The Jerk: hated it, thought it was banal, came to appreciate it years later. You may or may not be right about the ideas in Glass Onion being trivial, but how blind must the author of this clickbait review have been to not even notice that literally Yo-Yo Ma, literally playing himself, literally sets up the movie’s structure and explains why it plays out the way it does, in one of the first scenes? You can think that’s dumb, but you can’t ignore it when writing a critique! This supposed revelation of “bad writing” is just clickbait from someone who didn’t understand the (yes, blatant! yes, arguably trivial!) structure the movie was exploring.
sliken 4y ago
Shouldn't a murder mystery show what really happened? Instead of faking it to hide who did it, only to be revealed at the end with the real video footage? What's the point? Might as well just make it an action movie.
- neaden 4y ago
  It did show what really happened, it's only in the flashback when the character lies about it that it shows something else, but if you rewatch it you'll see everything happen in the background.