Could it be, because you were so ready to enjoy it, that it let you down more than some other reviewers, who were neutral to it, so you felt more negative towards it than they did?This genre is my cup of tea so I felt ready to enjoy it as either a trashy piece of nonsense or an interesting reimagining... and found it to be neither. If it had stopped at the point I mention in the review I would have easily given it a couple points higher as "good effort, very confused about its themes." But when it then insisted on dragging me through a badly structured, nonsensical third act, I felt totally bewildered by everything that happened, like it was being made up on the fly, constantly stretching credibility.
Since watching and writing, I've also seen some favourable reviews of it around which I'm having real difficulty squaring with the movie I watched.
Apparently,Id' still take the original wrong turn over this any day. So many plot holes it was like swiss cheese
I get that a group of people shun themselves away from society and hide out in them hills for a few hundred years but when they then show up in trucks and camper vans in the following scene.... so when did you take learn to drive, take your test, buy those vehicles?
Could it be, because you were so ready to enjoy it, that it let you down more than some other reviewers, who were neutral to it, so you felt more negative towards it than they did?
I'm the same with the Movie Pearl Harbour. Could have been great, but for anyone like myself into that time period, it was an unholy mess . However lots of people went to see it & enjoyed it.
(If it wasn't for Kate Beckinsale, I would never watch it again, but....well, Kate Beckinsale! )
Why does the reviewer deem it necessary to mention that the scriptwriter is white? Would the (poor) script be any better if he were black? Or Chinese? etc etc.
I agree with @richp007 . This is the line I think you are referring to:-Indeed he doesn't - after re-reading it, and seeing the above picture of the screenwriter, the reviewer's original comment is rendered even more absurd
To rephrase it, Tom is saying is that he feels the writer wrote it as if it were written by someone who fitted the standard mould of "old white guy".it’s scripted like an old white guy’s impression of what the youngs are like these days
Rather than suggesting McElroy is white, the comment was meant to foreground how strange it is that the racial dynamics are so mishandled and tacked on, though, hands up, rereading my own writing, that link between the two sentences is not obvious.Indeed he doesn't - after re-reading it, and seeing the above picture of the screenwriter, the reviewer's original comment is rendered even more absurd
And Mike P Nelson was a sound designer before he was a director. I couldn't understand how he botched that element!For me this film didn't know what it wanted to be i just didn't care for the character's also though it was a missed opportunity on the sound front...hardly any surround activity whatsoever.