keithfranklinfowler

This is a brilliant satire. I am not surprised to see it has rec'd mixed reviews, but it is easy to see why. Too many critics, both professional and amateur, look to comedy to do MORE than entertain and enlighten. These sad souls look for Answers--yes, real-life answers to the problems presented on screen.

DON'T LOOK UP recognizes that any attempt to "solve" the crisis it depicts would only be dismissed as politically-driven. Why bother, then--when the only answers worth considering are self-evident? (Wake up, America!)

And what exactly is the "crisis" shown here?

Lest there be a misunderstanding, the crisis is NOT the newly-discovered comet hurtling toward earth. Nor is it climate change or COVID-19, the two likeliest problems behind the movie's symbolic comet. The crisis is to be found entirely in the manner in which America's leaders AND public prefer to look the other way (and not "Look Up") when confronted with impending doom.

If we are not to look to comedy for answers, then what in fact are we looking at? Lest we forget, try this mnemonic phrase: "Acting is to behavior, as poetry is to language." Give all credit here to the script, to the direction, and ultimately the actors. It is easy to bypass the anchors of the film's talk-show "The Daily Rip," Cate Blanchet and Tyler Perry, by simply saying they are superficial. But in what wonderful detail they show us just how such slight persons operate! This is the stuff that draws us to such movies--to see in action the psychology of such folk.

Yes, it is exaggerated and condensed, but isn't that exactly how character points are made? --In a kind of poetry of the soul? Watch DiCaprio's character's insecurities morph him into a media "influencer," then into a would-be Lothario, a Jeremiah (!), and finally back to his sadder-but-wiser truth-seeker. Jennifer Lawrence and Meryl Streep are in top form here, and nobody is slyer or subtler than Sir Mark Rylance, epecially when he has such a sneaky, snakey character to show us.

This is WHY we watch such films. Not for answers, thank you very much, but to see exacty how human beings behave, how they fool themselves, how they interact & come to their senses. (Or they don't; be sure to watch the final scene in the end credits!)

PS. This film deserves 9 stars. The 10th is reserved for a re-release in which 5 to 10 minutes are excised, not because it is too long now, but that a shortened version could be even punchier-perhaps by eliminating the general selling the free WH snacks.

Much has been made of the brilliance of the two title performers, and deservedly so. Both Hopkins and Pryce are absolutely convincing as German and Argentinean pontiffs who converse in English (conveniently for viewers) as their common language. Each actor is so fresh and alive within the personality of his "character" that I was easily persuaded they may be truer to the souls of these men than the living originals. Not enough credit has been paid to Anthony McCarten, the writer of this complex, layered conversation. It is the kind of dialogue great men wish they had spoken. What courage and skill it takes to undertake such a verbal tour de force. (Imagine if world leaders couldn't hire speech writers. Could Shakespeare's kings and queens really speak as well as he wrote for them?) McCarten has written the scripts for three Oscar-winning actors; isn't it time he was recognized? And Fernando Meirelles is the masterful director who brought all the elements together. This is a renaissance man, adept in many fields, from architecture to cinema--and organic farming as well. He has been nominated for one directing Oscar (for "City of God"), and here he shows his ability to maintain both visual interest and intellectual fascination through two hours of what amounts to an intense, extended talk. That the movie never felt "talky" is a tribute to all four great artists.

If the first episode is a true indicator of the series to come, this is surely a comic hit. Lake Bell does an outstanding turn, as a triple threat creator, director, and lead actor. The rest of the cast is wonderfully well chosen. There's Dax Shepard opposite Lake with his perfect balance of wry humor and comic timing. These two are lucky to be supported by veteran performers like Pam Grier and Ed Begley Jr. What a fine team! I can't wait to see the coming episodes.

From all the hype I expected something worthy of the awards and nominations it has claimed. PI is a well made, well-paced film, always hinting that something significant will be revealed. No, it won't. Some reviewers were impressed by the obsession displayed by the Max character, but I thought it an ordinary day's work for the actor. It certainly is not enough to hold it all together. The one true statement of the movie is spoken by Sol, when he says (paraphrasing), " Once you abandon scientific rigor, you are no longer a mathematician; you're a numerologist." I guess I'm just not interested in numerology.

In a phrase exploited by a character in another wasted opportunity, "The Circle," this expensive effort is a shameful example of "unfulfilled potential." I came here today expecting to write a notice that would buck the tide of popularity by pointing to the many ways "Wonder Woman" has turned out to be a greatly predictable banal bore. But I see my fellow Users have beat me to it. Excellent. It is good to see that many in the IMDb base share such good taste. Then why on earth are these overpaid Hollywood geniuses making the movie while these intelligent, sensitive viewers are not?

I do not blame the actors or any who demonstrated decent artistry in their specialties. I mean to include the designers and to some extent the musicians among those who deserve credit, but they have seen their work co-opted and exploited by the producers and a pass-through director and script writers. These latter have taken their cut or salaries under the false pretenses of providing a fresh vision.

The dialog. Even when the dialog aspires to match an epic tone with the mythic origin story it fails to inspire. When it is just people talking, it might as well be nods and grunts for all the humor and romance it wants to convey. Despite IMDb's category, there is nothing truly quotable to be scraped from this sound track.

The plot. Twist? What twist? The predicable nature of this kind of epic demands there be one or more twists - if only to justify why the story plods along within time-worn ruts. Sure, we'll put up with battle scenes turning against our heroine so long as she finds a clever, clever way to get out from her foe's evil clutches. But Nope, nothing clever here. She just gets madder.

When he gets bigger, she gets stronger.

Brilliant.

The characters. Who cares? Did any viewer ever worry about anyone? We knew WW would have the skills and strength to get out of any predicament. We knew that love would be interrupted, as it always is in any attempt at a love sub-plot. Depth was barely skin deep.

The ethnic diversity was a fine attempt to --? Well, to what end I'm not sure. Probably to avoid being lumped by PC critics with all the other movies that don't have "ethnic diversity." Boring.

The crime. The great sin here is the enormous budget being wasted. The film *looks* great, and I feasted my eyes on the period uniforms and settings and on the fine equestrian scenes with female archers, etc etc. I guess from a business perspective this was a fine investment. The high viewer rating suggests that there was a reasonable degree of consumer satisfaction, so maybe future ticket sales by the same team have been assured.

But - silly of me to bring it up, I guess - where was the honest emotion? - the real camaraderie? The insight?

The art?