BogdanH

I really don't understand where from such high (6.2) rating comes for Arcadian. I mean, everything above 5 should be considered as a solid movie. Has the criteria really fallen that low recently?

Nothing in this movie is sharp (except titles) and camera is swaying all the time as it would be recorded with smartphone handheld. Actually one can get better result with smartphone.

Story is paper thin: no plot, no surprise and nothing to think about. It's a typical zombie flick in slightly different package. Needless to mention amateurish dialogs.

And as is to be expected for C-class movie, scenery is extremely scarce as well. If we forget the wood in the night, then the whole "story" happens inside old falling apart house (a shack actually).

As one reviewer already mentioned, name Nicholas Cage is only used to catch the attention. I'm quite a fan of N. Cage, but I just don't understand why a Oscar winner accepts such roles...is kinda embarrassing.

Yes, it's a drama. And those who don't know what that is or don't know how to appreciate it .. just don't write comments-- ok?

I'm not really a drama fan and so I can't judge about "quality" of drama. The only thing that matters to me is story and how actors tell the story. If I can identify with story and if actors make story believable, then I call that a good drama movie.

I can say, I've seen quite a lot of movies so far.. also some dramas. But I can easily say that "Waiting for Bojangles" is one of the best in past 20 years.

Ok, it's starts kinda silly, which made me thinking it's "another cheap" try... but soon we realize the beginning makes so much sense and the tempo of the story is just right.

Both main actors are quite new to me and truth to be told, my first visual impression was, that Romain Duris is probably wrong choice. How to say, his appearance next to Virginie Efira just didn't "fit in". But how wrong I was -only these two excellent actors could make this movie authentic.

Highly recommended for mature audience!

I give 9 out of 10 stars -because I'm picky.

I started watching this documentary by coincidence -that is, I didn't search for such content. I did watch few docu's in the past, which covered the same topic, so I though I might learn something new.

Sadly, that didn't happen. Not that I'm that smart knowing everything. It's just, this documentary doesn't give new answers, simply because wrong people have been asked to answer the questions. Asking someone, who is directly a part of monetary chain, how the money is made.. seriously?

No wonder, some didn't care, some didn't know the answer, some didn't know how to explain,.. some were confronted with question for the first time, and so, no wonder they didn't know the answer... and some avoided to answer.

So far, total documentary failure.

Besides that, the whole thing is unnecessary long, filled with long boring shots of buildings and interiors. The whole actual content would easily fit into 20 minutes movie. But if that would be the case, then the whole thing wouldn't give impression of "serious" content. Length should increase impression of some big investigation.. result of a lot of research... for trying to find the answer to question nobody asked before.

Sorry director C. Lossman, but this topic has already been beaten to death in media in much better way and presentation. And meanwhile, answer is pretty much known -at least to those who can do 1+1=2 math.

Waste of time (2 stars)