|
Post by roverpup on Sept 11, 2017 21:18:04 GMT
Thank you again for your review Mllemass. I am glad you enjoyed it and it sounds like a movie to be savoured several times over. Besides BC's role I am also very curious about the visuals (after seeing another film by the same DOP). And like you I want to focus on how BC interacted with the young actors who played Edison's children. I think his own real life experience as a father will only help to enhance his performance as an on-screen father.
I will be looking for the points you made in your post when I get to see the film for myself.
:-))
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 11, 2017 21:42:34 GMT
I just read a positive review that only gave it a 6/10! The only negative comment was about the ending - they said it went on too long - so such a low score makes no sense. Anyway, why are they fixated on a particular scene that bugged them? Weren't the press informed that there would be some changes still to come?
|
|
|
Post by anjnaadams on Sept 12, 2017 1:23:59 GMT
It may fare better with non-fest critics. I've seen that before. They're tougher from an awards perspective.
The Woman in Gold, for instance, was murdered out of Berlin yet still ended up with a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not great, but it started with a 0% after the fest because it got all rotten reviews. TWC is at 17% but missing two reviews from RT-approved sources that should be positives, so it could very well end up certified fresh on there once the avalanche of non-fest reviews come.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Sept 12, 2017 1:26:31 GMT
I wonder if they update their reviews in this case?
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 12, 2017 13:13:41 GMT
I know I have to stop reading reviews because it's making me crazy. But I figured that the people who hosted press conferences and photoshoots would be decent in what they say about a movie. But no! Now they're all just quoting each other's bad reviews.
I just have to say, though, that if you describe the plot of a movie as "confusing", then maybe you shouldn't be reviewing movies for a living. They did this when reviewing Sherlock, too. I can understand Steven Moffat being so upset, telling people to use their brains. I think the reviewers use the excuse of being concerned about the average movie-goer who's too dumb to follow what's going on. But I think it's the reviewers themselves who need the plots dumbed-down.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Oct 9, 2017 18:53:36 GMT
More and more articles are being posted that refer to TCW's low Rotten Tomatoes rating. They're all quoting the same source that neglected to mention that there are only 13 reviews, and only five of those are "Top Critics" . If someone didn't feel like searching RT for themselves, they might believe that the low score was based on hundreds of reviews - at it should be once the movie is finished and released.
I found this online film reviewer who posted this a few days ago. I just wanted to show everyone that not everyone hated it, and it's too early to declare this movie a failure.
I've removed the spoilery parts.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jul 22, 2019 12:51:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by miriel68 on Jul 22, 2019 13:27:46 GMT
Ok, so I went to see it yesterday (unfortunately, in dubbing). Just for once Italy is showing something in advance, lol. I liked the film very much and heard other people from the audience expressing positive views, as well. The photography is beautiful, I appreciated the direction as well. The actors excellent. I especially enjoyed Tom Holland as Edison's secretary. There are several inaccuracies (but the film states clearly that is only INSPIRED on real facts) but the film sells the sense of wonder at the dawn of the new era very well. It's a pity Tesla hasn't been given a more prominent role in the plot, there was so much potential there. All this said, IMO it is just a solid piece of historical cinema. Performances are very good, about B. I can say only the usual: he was excellent. However, his Edison is not particularly memorable - I mean, not enough to become an iconic portrayal. I think Assange or Turing or even Cunnings were a bigger challenge for his acting range (Yes, I know I had some complaints about Brexit, but on the afterthought he did some "new" things there, new for him, I mean).
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jul 22, 2019 13:51:56 GMT
I don't think it will be well received by critics so I just hope general audiences like it. Some "professionals" claim it sounds boring but there's actually some interest in certain quarters for the theme. The only problem is that those people tend to love Tesla much more than Edison! That's why a lot of publicity is named him even when he isn't that important to the core drama.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Jul 22, 2019 14:27:29 GMT
I read the review and it wasn’t really negative, either. It’s typical of the reviews that go on about what the movie should have been - in this case, they want it to be about Tesla. They think Edison is boring and Tesla is interesting, so why isn’t the movie about Tesla? I guess I didn’t know enough about Tesla when I saw the movie to be bothered that he wasn’t in it more.
|
|