An astonishment, an engineering feat, and, finally, a folly.
the new yorker is a pretentious magazine for dbags. it is the worst magazine i have ever read. they think they are so smart. not just the movie reviews but the magazine as a whole
Jul 19 - 07:14 AM
If the magazine were as pretentous as you say, I have no idea why anyone involved would not have loved this film. Maybe it was too pretentious even for them?
Jul 19 - 09:47 PM
The whole gravity thing is not a plot hole. Plot is different from movie-world physics. If you're going to split hairs over the physics of a dream, you need to realize that you are involving yourself in an argument that only hurts your ability to enjoy a good story. Yeah, very smart...Obviously the gravity deeper in the dream was a flaw in the physics, but that was done because otherwise it would have *ruined the story*. And let's be honest, the scenario led to probably the best existential escape sequence in film history.I'd say that the reason gravity fell out in the hotel is because it was the dream built by someone who was at that time in a deeper dream, so they couldn't compensate. After all, the snow area was the mark's dream, and he stayed there the whole time, thus being able to keep up his own physics.Tada! Dream logic sustained!
Jul 26 - 03:35 PM
The whole gravity thing is a waste of time. Get over it they were dreaming, since when is anything ever impossible in a dream?
Oct 3 - 08:05 PM
Sorry for this reply on a very old comment, but how did you miss that the gravity "disappeared" because the van was spinning?
Oct 31 - 04:04 PM
What on earth are you talking about?
Jul 29 - 08:59 AM
No argument Sam D, but you got to admit, he made some good points.
Jul 20 - 08:22 AM
he didnt make any "good points". he expressed perfectly normal opinions, but none of his criticisms were anything i agreed with. Denby didnt bring up any plot holes or glaring mistakes to back up his opinion that this movie was bad. all i saw in his review was him whining about how he couldnt keep track of what was going on. i thought writers for the new yorker were supposed to be smart. if i can understand every level of the movie after seeing it only once, why the hell cant he?he also seemed unable to suspend disbelief for even a moment, which is strange considering he decided to go see a scifi film. hell, even non-scifi films require some suspension of disbelief.
Jul 24 - 06:13 PM
His point was that the movie did not evoke any emotion, nor had anything interesting to say. I for one agree. I enjoyed it, but it does lack substance.
Aug 25 - 11:04 PM
Since you understood it...............maybe it tells you that you are in need of help.......?
Jul 9 - 11:08 AM
A Wise Man
Oct 26 - 04:40 PM
All these New York critics can piss off
Jul 24 - 04:20 PM
That's showing 'em! Stick it to the man brah!
Jul 29 - 09:00 AM
All of this overly zealous and demeaning analysis of the oh-so-terrible flaws of the movie detract from the shine of this creative, intricate movie. So, okay, there were a couple plot holes, but really? So the hell what? What all the critics out there don't seem to get is that the movies are created to enjoyment and entertainment. They are not little "Where's Waldo" pictures that ask you to find all the holes and mistakes. The movie was not too complicated to understand on the first watch if you were actually paying attention. Moreover, it is the complex ideas that envelop the movie that stimulate the mind, and widen our perceptions of the world around us. This was something spectacular to watch, introducing an different idea of existentialism that I could not have dreamt on my own, and this film most definitely accomplished its task of creating an enticing plot to satisfy (most of) its viewers.
Jul 25 - 06:47 PM
Sorry, Richard, but the point isn't that critics are nitpicking, but that the movie is riddled with flaws. Now don't get me wrong; Inception is without question an astounding and incredible film. Flat out amazing. Thank god it was made. But that doesn't mean we should just ignore the film's many problems, most notably, the ending. A truly terrible ending. As a devoted movie-goer, I was nothing short of offended. The 2.5 hours I spent wracking my brain and investing myself in the narrative came down to WHETHER IT WOBBLED?!?! Seriously?! You're going to build an entire movie around, Did It Wobble?!?!?! I almost stood up and booed. No joke. Again, this is coming from someone who loved the movie, recommends it to everyone, and can't wait to see it again.
Jul 29 - 09:43 AM
The "wobble" thing is just the "kick" that we need to re-think the plot, and I think this is what it's all about.Sh*tty explanation I agree, but as a French-speaking person I can't do better.
Jul 30 - 05:54 PM
Haha yes you're right. I think the writers were caught in the dilemma of 'They all lived happily ever after' and 'They woke up and it was all a dream', therefore did the generic 'No one knows what will happen...' The ending was rather predictable I have to say - kept me entertained throughout no doubt.
Jul 31 - 04:15 AM
(Another old comment reply, sorry)
The wobbling was supposed to make you ask yourself whether he actually did exit limbo or was trapped in there while Saito escaped. It isn't revealed because Cobb accepts it as reality and/or doesn't care any more.
About 90% of the plot holes people keep whining about aren't plot holes at all. People just weren't paying attention.
Oct 31 - 04:09 PM
It does not matter if it wobbled or not..The dradle belonged to his wife.It was not his totem.
Jan 2 - 05:35 AM
I thought the ending was brilliant: suspenseful and it keeps you suspense through the credits. It looked clear to me, though, that it was about to topple, so my conscience is clean. That really made you want to boo though? You would likely have been alone in the theater. What did you expect: closure? DiCaprio's character will never get it, regardless of whether it's a dream or not. I think the point of the ending was fantastic: his character left the room before he could learn what would happen to his totem because he didn't really CARE one way or another. His wife had wracked her brain over that very thing, and it killed her in the end. He won't allow it, for his children.
Feb 28 - 07:24 PM
You'd have a hell of a better time dropping some acid, than waste your time on this crap. Take your own trip!
Jul 9 - 11:07 AM
It's definitely not pretentious to tell people who are more educated and probably smarter than you that they're the worst ever
May 29 - 04:21 PM
Hehehe... Educated film reviewers. Now I've heard it all.
Oct 31 - 04:11 PM
You mean educated critics.
Feb 18 - 02:10 PM
First off, saying that The New Yorker is bad because you don't like it, is just as bad as saying that the movie was awful simply because you did not enjoy it. Denby came up with a valid opinion, I respect that he had the balls to say it outright; The New Yorker is far too successful for your words to even make sense. Second, just because the movie had a complex plot and you were able to follow it, it doesn't make the movie "good". You don't have to be so proud of yourself because you could follow a movie's plot, no matter how complex and "brilliant" it may seem, watch it a few times and even the most simple people can catch on. Stop priding yourself on how well you could understand something, and instead develop opinions of your own, you all seem to be as deep as a glass of water. You have no mind of your own to even develop some other opinion simply because your feeble minds were able to catch on to a story that made you feel intelligent.
Sep 2 - 01:26 PM
Sep 9 - 12:13 AM
Omg, thank you. This is exactly how I felt. Everyone is afraid of looking "stupid" That just shows how insecure people are about their intelligence.
Jul 1 - 09:28 PM
Jan 7 - 02:34 PM
If it wasn't for this, it would have gone up to 85%
Jul 19 - 07:44 AM
check again. (although, maybe by the time this is seen, the score will probably have been ninja altered by new yorkers)
Jul 19 - 11:36 AM
I wonder how much higher Inception would be if not for most of the New York critics trashing it.
Jul 19 - 08:00 AM
I gotta say man, living in NYC I'm a bit embarrassed at how the NY critics are trashing this the same way they trashed Dark Knight, what their major hatred (jealousy?) is for Nolan is beyond me... it's pathetic
Jul 19 - 08:05 AM
although our major newspaper NY Daily News gave it 5/5 stars
Jul 19 - 08:07 AM
It's crazy how I can hate a magazine and a writer so much but AGREE with them so whole-heartedly. Inception was a mess, an overworked tangle too complex to be enjoyable. It tried to be bigger than itself and make everyone watching it so confused that to say they didn't like it would be admitting they're stupid. It's the most complicated movie imaginable, and with all the classical Hollywood plot-holes and time distortions (Levitt's last minute to wake everyone up took half an hour, you can't do that when timing is the central theme for the entire concept of the movie) this movie was a bust. Cool special effects, cool idea, but overworked and overthought. Tone it down a little next time Nolan.
Jul 20 - 08:06 AM
Mark D. you forget that it took half an hour for our time but not for their time. as the audience, we get to see whats going on at all levels of the subconscious. time goes slower for the people at lower levels of subconscious, and if we as the audience can see whats going on at the lowest level (and thus the slowest time), then technically thats the speed for which we should be gauging the timing. in other words, it might have taken half an hour for us viewers to see levitt wake everyone up, but its only because we got to see everything else that was going on simultaneously at the lower levels. if they put up only levitts scenes and not the mountain scene or the limbo scene, i can bet you it would have only taken a couple minutes.levitts timing was not a plot hole. a real plot hole would be why there was gravity on the mountain but 0 gravity in the hotel, unless the host dreamer can alter his own dream gravity
Jul 24 - 06:21 PM
Jul 25 - 06:41 AM
"Mark D. you forget that it took half an hour for our time but not for their time. as the audience, we get to see whats going on at all levels of the subconscious. time goes slower for the people at lower levels of subconscious, and if we as the audience can see whats going on at the lowest level (and thus the slowest time), then technically thats the speed for which we should be gauging the timing. in other words, it might have taken half an hour for us viewers to see levitt wake everyone up, but its only because we got to see everything else that was going on simultaneously at the lower levels. if they put up only levitts scenes and not the mountain scene or the limbo scene, i can bet you it would have only taken a couple minutes.levitts timing was not a plot hole. a real plot hole would be why there was gravity on the mountain but 0 gravity in the hotel, unless the host dreamer can alter his own dream gravity"If you really want to read this much into a film, I think you'd be better off locking yourself in a closet with a copy of "A Brief History of Time." "Inception" was a fun little action film set in the psuedo-science of some screenwriters imagined dream machine. Ever since Star Wars, nerds have been looking for alternate universes to lock themselves into so they don't have to worry about their upcoming SAT exams. I don't remember the sci-fi fans of my day losing there minds over the methodology behind shrinking a submarine in "Fantastic Voyage." Look, you just watch the movies and say, "That was cool." But to stand there defending to your last drop of blood why times moves at different paces on the different "dream levels" is really taking things a bit too far....
Jul 26 - 02:38 AM
They clearly explained why at different levels of dream time moved at different paces, it was very clever in fact, and very plausible. I'm sure everyone knows that when you dream it feels longer than how much time has actually passed. It's the same in the movie... Not that hard to understand.
Jul 26 - 10:25 AM
You see the problem is that this is the kind of movie that you have to pay attention to in order to know what's going on sooo.....
Aug 9 - 09:46 PM
I know the reason, because the spiderman to godzilla to transformers come down to nyc, but nolan takes batman to Chicago. Thats the major grudge they have against nolan
Jul 19 - 07:29 PM
Jul 29 - 09:03 AM
Dec 29 - 04:46 PM
hahahaha, is this post intended as satire?
Jan 30 - 12:46 PM
aha awesome that makes a lot of sense if thats true
Dec 18 - 03:00 PM
Jul 19 - 07:43 PM
It might have something to do with them actually recognizing the incredibly faulty moviemaking represented by this (and Dark Knight).
The ones who make me sick are the folks who would find praise with doggy felatio snuff flicks if Nolan had anything to do with them.
Jul 19 - 09:49 PM
like (thumbs up)
Jul 20 - 08:44 AM
Holy fuck, that might be the greatest idea I've heard in years. Nolan should DEFINITELY direct "doggy felatio snuff flicks". Hell, I'd gladly pay these shitty theater prices to see that on the big screen.
Jul 16 - 10:56 PM
What a moron. He obviously has no concept that making movies is a for profit venture. Making movies that fit his criteria of good would be unwatched by most Americans, therefore, money losers. And how long would they continue to be made? Does he invest his hard earned money or time doing that? No, he just snarks about successful people doing what he can't. Those who can do, those who can't ***** about those who can.
Jul 19 - 08:22 AM
So... you're admitting that Nolan doesn't try to make good movies, then back that up with the logic that no one does/should? That's like defending a friend of yours by saying he's retarded.
Jul 20 - 08:12 AM
Sep 9 - 12:14 AM
I like what he says about the neutrality of rooting for one company over another. I think this was partially solved by Leo's need to get back...but his actions are not sympathetic in the way that his mission is for no good cause in a more global sense. I also laughed at the part when Ariadne asked whose subconscious they were entering, and I also have a couple of other gripes about the film.
However, to ask Chris Nolan to do his next movie more simply is ridiculous. Why would we want something more simple next time? As a serious film goer I would beg of Chris Nolan to continue doing exactly these types of films. This is the problem with Hollywood today. Inception gets a 9/10 from me. Bravo Mr. Nolan.
Jul 19 - 08:52 AM
I actually enjoyed that Nolan made fun of the fact that his movie's second half gets very complex, as indicated by Ariadne's confusion as to whose subconscious they were entering.
Jul 19 - 02:38 PM
I too would ask Nolan to make simpler films. I have no issue with complexity...I do however have issue with directors taking on topics too complex for their talents.
Nolan has some ability...but the number of times he breaks (ignores) his own rules in this film is pretty pathetic. More pathetic is that you folks don't even notice...leading me to wonder how many of you had any idea what was going on in the film.
Nolan consistantly bites off more than he can chew in his inane effort to look smart and sophisticated...not surprising he only succeeds with the same kind of attention seeking intellectual wannabees he himself so obviously is.
Jul 19 - 09:52 PM
Thank you for summing up all my thoughts so concisely... perfect.
Jul 20 - 08:20 AM
funny kid. besides the differing levels of gravity between levels of subconscious, where were the rules ignored? I had a lot of issues, but thought through and made sense (given the rules of the movie) of most of them. instead of being a pretentious, condescending prick, how bout you list some of the mistakes out and support your opinion?
Jul 24 - 06:26 PM
New reply on an old comment sorry, but the reason the gravity is different is because JGL's character is spinning in the van, making the hotel gravity go wonky, but Hardy's character is completely still, making the snow area have gravity.
Aug 28 - 05:31 PM
I agree, then again, if you conclude that the whole thing was a dream anything goes right?
Jul 27 - 10:39 PM
Jul 29 - 09:06 AM
u went too far in saying nolan is an attention seeking wannabe, obviously u have some connection to the psychology of it so im gonna say ur an attention seeking wannabe urself and u dont know what ur talking about, and im also shocked that u found so many errors in the movie, and that u cant find errors in ur life, like the fact that u insult someone because of a frowned upon emotion, that u also elicit urself
Dec 18 - 02:55 PM
You hate fun, don't you?
Jul 19 - 09:02 AM
An elaborate and emotionally complex film is not spoiled by a few obscure details that are unclear. I respectfully disagree.
Jul 19 - 09:07 AM
very well said
Jul 19 - 09:19 PM
one last slap from the tasteless and unprofessional critics of NY.
Jul 19 - 09:30 AM
XD I honestly agree with these negative reviews. I'd give the film like a 6/10, it was good, but not this perfect masterpiece everyone's claiming it is.
Jul 19 - 09:36 AM
you guys are all sheep. Someone doesn't like a movie and you immediately assume they are a pretentious know-nothing *******? You can't possibly accept that it really wasn't the "brilliant masterpiece" every critic and their mother seem to be jizzing onto it. Sorry, and I'm not just saying this to start a flame war, but the guy is right, the film had a lot of problems. Mainly, it was an unending slog (punctuated with only one truly original and exciting action sequence) with boring characters (except for Eames and Arthur) and a story needlessly convoluted with never-ending explanatory dialogue only written in attempts to not lose every single audience member. What's the dream, what's the reality? Who gives a **** when it's this damn boring?
he isnt pretentious, the new yorker, as a whole is
Jul 19 - 09:42 AM
Lemme guess...you like "The Money Pit"?
Jul 19 - 10:18 AM
never seen it. And just as i suspected, you have no counter argument, which I'm sure is a trait most unimaginative fanboys share. Although, granted, my response wasn't poetry, I at least provided reasons as to why the film was a dud. All you guys can do is pour more lube into your palm and stroke.
Jul 19 - 10:30 AM
your replies aren't very intelligent and thought provoking themselves.
yeah saying that you're not trying "to start a flame war" totally covers you on this one. it's like i can say anything i want no matter how misinformed or insecurely aggressive but as long as i say "all due respect" no one can point out that i'm a confused, thus angry little mindicant. it's gotta suck missing out on everything this movie is to so many other people who still enjoy open-minded films meant to please.
Jul 19 - 10:32 AM
i was thinking the same thing
Dec 18 - 03:06 PM
DON'T ****WITH THE THOUGHT POLICE
Jul 19 - 10:48 AM
*Spoiler AlertSheep? I need you to explain how Cobb's character was boring. Also, how was it an unending slog? I was so engaged that it barely felt like an hour. I disagree totally with the unending explanatory dialogue as well. The dialogue had to establish a logical base for the dream world (the time scales, the physical layout, the dreamer, etc). Once this was set, the movie took off and it had plenty of time to do so to establish three different stories. We have Cobb fighting his past, the team fighting to plant the idea, the struggle between the son and his Maurice (his father) and the turbulence of the dream worlds fighting against everyone to boot. The ending brought it together so well. I just truly don't see why anyone would not like this film. It first created a new world (the unending explanatory dialogue that I thought was interesting and efficient), then ran with it in the most clever way (by clever I mean the inception concept to begin with, and the way they planted the idea was phenomenal). Don't call me a sheep just because I'm agreeing that this film is a masterpiece. I just wish you could have been equally as satisfied as I was when I walked out of the theater. I feel bad for you because I can't imagine what movies you do like if you don't like this one.
Kenneth E.I think you are absolutely correct. This film is so amazing. Its so sad to see people leave the theater disappointed after watching Inception. This is the best movie I have ever seen. The writing is so deep. At the very end it connects everything. Throughout this whole movie I was not bored at all. "Don't call me a sheep just because I'm agreeing that this film is a masterpiece. I just wish you could have been equally as satisfied as I was when I walked out of the theater. I feel bad for you because I can't imagine what movies you do like if you don't like this one."I so agree. It really does hurt me inside when people don't like this movie. They don't know what their missing out on. Thank you so much for your comment. It was so clear. And if I didn't mention it... I agree. :)By the way "LordXeno"?Your a idiot. All the people agree with him, he didn't have to have a response to his comment for people to agree with him. People pretty much said the same thing. Go bore someone else with your stupidity.
Jul 24 - 07:37 PM
"DoctorXeno" I'm sorry. Not.
Also, hahaha nobody really responded to your points but threw in some crap and passed it off as arguements.
Jul 19 - 10:49 AM
Oh VICVEGA06, you really couldn't figure out what was a dream and what was reality? I thought it was straightforward. Honestly, if you couldn't tell what was a dream and what was reality, then maybe you should watch it again. It's ok if you didn't catch it the first time. Stop sucking, and enjoy the film, then get back to me.
Jul 19 - 10:54 AM
There we go, the entire reason this movie got so many positive reviews. Anyone who says that it was too complex or even that they didn't like it are branded as stupid. It's a big-budget film, it has plot-holes and inconsistencies just like any other movie and combining that with the grossly complex theme then dressing everyone in the same winter camo in the end makes it a mess. If you say you weren't confused for at least a good half hour then you're a goddamn liar.
Jul 20 - 08:49 AM
Except that that's actually true. If you did understand this movie, or found it too complex, then you are stone-cold retarded. Honestly, I felt they put in too much explanation and repeated some of the "rules" too many times. That people STILL had a hard time following it is truly pathetic and laughable.
Jul 24 - 01:52 PM
Another point: I get the feeling the entire movie is designed to make people have to watch it more than once. That combined with initial reviews saying "the general populace might not be smart enough to get it" all amounts to what may be an underhanded marketing scheme. The producers' own little "inception."
Jul 20 - 10:33 AM
Mark D. your subconscious must have been trained previously against invaders, because you seem determined to reject Nolan's new masterpiece.really though, i didnt think it was too complex to enjoy. i should take back my first comment that linked one's ability to understand the complexity of the movie to their level of intelligence. i can understand if you just didnt like that level of complexity in a movie. i thought it was cool though
Jul 24 - 06:33 PM
What is dream and what is reality in this film is clearly open to interpretation. Personally, my view is that the entire movie was a dream, but I've seen other theories.
Aug 25 - 05:48 PM
VICVEGA your argument has no merit. you claim that were all sheep, that we mindlessly follow one action, when you've already mindlessly been enslaved to needing to see Action in every single ****ing film. and to top it off you're rude and unintelligent.
Jul 19 - 11:40 AM
"You've already mindlessly been enslaved to needing to see Action in every single ****ing film!"-what in the world gives you the authority to make this statement? I would say out of all the films I see, action flicks are one of my least viewed genres. For instance, this summer I've only seen Exit Through the Gift Shop, Mic-Macs, Toy Story 3, Winter's Bone, and Inception. And the summer before that, you can bet your bottom dollar I wasn't in attendance for Transformers, Terimanator 3, Wolverine, GI JOE, or any of the other big action tent-poles of the year. Call me pretentious, but like most people on these boards, I value quality, and call me what you will based on my entirely valid opinion, Inception didn't do it for me.
Jul 19 - 01:36 PM
I don't wanna start anything but you're an idiot.
Jul 19 - 01:43 PM
oh my. please make us fall to our knees at the sight of your amazing film experiences! please. so let's skip to the part i give a f**k. i have as much of a right to say you have no intelligent film understanding as you do to say we are sheep and stupid etc etc etc. ergo - if you don't talk crap, i won't either.
Jul 19 - 08:39 PM
*sigh* I feel sorry for you. You couldn't/can't see the beauty of it.
Jul 25 - 02:57 PM
Thank you for have the guts to carry a satchel of common sense into 17-year-old Fanboy Town.
Jul 26 - 02:41 AM
"Unending slog" and "boring characters" are there for something, man. You just can't assume that Nolan left so many "plot holes" without noticing them. What if the inception is on Cobb ? What if Mall never killed herself ? What if creating answers on our own is the purpose of the whole damn thing?And why does Saito keep repeating sentences that Mall told to Cobb, and him only ?
Jul 30 - 06:45 PM
Thank you New York for another one of your negative reviews. Because of your lousy credibility, I will definitely be seeing this.
Jul 19 - 12:02 PM
"For long stretches, you%u2019re not sure whether you%u2019re in dream or reality, which isn%u2019t nearly as much fun as Nolan must have imagined it to be."I think some reviewers really miss the point all together. I really don't think the point is to make you wondering if you are in a dream or reality while watching the film. During the movie it's very clear what is meant to be a dream and what is not. The movie is exactly what it's advertised to be, a crime caper and the mind is the scene of the crime. Only the very last scene is meant to make you question everything you just saw. Brilliant if you ask me.
Jul 19 - 12:49 PM
thank you Steven J.You have just explained in so few words why it was a fantastic movie.
Jul 25 - 03:02 PM
new york critics get on my nerves.
Jul 19 - 12:50 PM
damn new yorkers wouldnt even know a good movie if it him them in the head are you joking me david your freaken article was horrible u should be fired....
Jul 19 - 12:53 PM
i agree, he didnt state anything a reviewer should state when reviewing a movie , he only pointed out supposed flaws and not anythign good
Dec 18 - 03:14 PM
Your ratings are usually on the money, yet you fail to achieve on one of the most spectacular movies of all time.
Jul 19 - 01:15 PM
But isn't he right that dreams do not work this way? That they are not like fragments of action movies? And that we do NOT care if Cobb returns or not to his two children that we do not care about? He is also right, imho, that Memento was Nolan's best film because it was relatively simplest, as I think Prestige is a pretentious lie and TDK is an overrated, pretentious bore.
Jul 19 - 01:17 PM
Jul 19 - 01:19 PM
David - the level of emotional engagement i think might be somewhat subjective, as is the preference for a more surreal movie over a 'literal minded' one.But I am curious to know what you think of the fact that some (many?) viewers did not find the movie perplexing and had no trouble discerning the different levels of dream states presented.How would you explain it?
Jul 19 - 01:18 PM
However you wish to take my responses, unintelligent, rude, angry, what have you, that's your business. My only intention is to point out the hypocrisy in praising blindly and too quickly a rather run of the mill film with a nice sheen and immediately branding any opinion other than "RIVETING! BRILLIANT! MIND-BLOWING!" as pretentious and purposefully against the popular grain. Oh and Kenneth, I was never confused as to wha wast a dream and what was reality (I'm pretty certain even regardless of what I think, Nolan deliberately left it ambiguous for EVERYONE) I was merely borrowing a phrase/theme that clearly lends itself to the film.
Jul 19 - 01:24 PM
Damn dude, you suck.
Jul 19 - 02:32 PM
If it makes you feel superior to tell me I suck, and that I am an idiot for not liking a movie you so avidly endorse and defend, have at it you dirty ****-rag, it won't change the fact that I am no more correct in my opinion then you are. It just really gets to you that you can't be the only one that's right cause you're just a pigheaded fanboy (who probably thinks he's some sort of expert due to a useless cinema studies focus at some community college) with a ten mile erection who is just so damn excited to have finally gotten in it up since TDK.
Jul 19 - 03:19 PM
you need to get out more. it must be getting pasty on that greasy chair of yours
Jul 19 - 08:42 PM
This really coming from someone so angry about another person on the internet disagreeing with them?
Jul 22 - 11:54 AM
Hey chief, you started out calling me a sheep. I don't like it when someone calls me mindless because a movie was kickass. Furthermore, I just don't think you justified your opinion very well. Everything you mentioned that sucked, was phenomenal. Watch it again, that's all I'm saying. Cinema studies focus at a community college? I enjoy good movies, I didn't minor in it, cum guzzler. Try a Phd student in math. Not that it matters, but check your facts bro before you go shooting your load all over your ****ing keyboard.
Jul 20 - 05:50 PM
VICVEGA06 so your intention is " to point out the hypocrisy in praising blindly and too quickly"ok fine WE GET IT.I think that most of us would understand and accept that you don't like the movie as long as you UNDERSTOOD IT. It seems to me that you didn't.I would like to hear a list of reasons why you didn't like it and please don't put something stupid like. "I didn't like the scenery"my question is: did you get the point?the point of the movie isn't to figure out what's dream or what's reality. It's something so much bigger. Do you know what that is?...in other news THANK YOU NOLAN, I left the theater feeling like I was on drugs.
Jul 25 - 03:24 PM
I'm sorry, but I could not have read a more retarded diatribe lined with derogatory bullsh*t. It seems so nonsensical that one could even conjure a string of dick insults to attempt to prove the one they are replying to is inferior in any sense. That makes me quite sad; and brings out my misanthropic side. Perhaps you should run a few needles through your eyes in order to compensate for the worthless gibberish your pathetic mind thinks as "clever" or "intricate". Where's your sense of moral standard? Oh wait, this is the internet.
Jun 17 - 04:23 AM
It seems that the reviewer is to old for the movie in this case. He talks about Hans Zimmer bringing us to "near deafness" meaning he needed to tone down his hearing. He must also have no idea what a good movie sound track is, just listen to "Time", the piece at the very end of the film. It makes us feel exactly how we were supposed to feel, there were no words, it was just the music. I could keep going on how bad this review is, but that would take too long.
Jul 19 - 02:56 PM
Jul 29 - 12:42 PM
Sorry Shawn, no one is interested in what your opinion is. You just simple do NOT pass the test.
Aug 8 - 07:42 AM
in new yooork... people act like ****ing wankers, they won't inspire youuuu
Jul 19 - 03:09 PM