EmiAng

Look I get it, you can see the guy is good, he always knows where is the best place to put the camera and the ligths, it visible in this movie althought not amazing, everything is correct, but there is nothing we haven't seen from other good directors/photographers with less hype.

He's also good at directing actors apparently and has the power to have a casting like this, where you know everyone is gonna do a great job, and they did.

That said, all that alone is not enough. The storytelling tries to be shown in an kind of original way but ends up loosing effectiveness. It feels like nothing is happening and the story doesn't start or it is totally irrelevant.

Then, when it builds up interest in some situations, but it does it in a frustraiting way, it could be fixed in the edit room and the movie could be 20 or 30 min shorter.

I don't dig the Tarantino obsession with feet and annoying sounds, just forced things so you remember is him.

All the sound design by the way, is too exaggerated, Maggie takes a fork out of her mouth in a restaurant and it sounds a sword with built-in piezoelectric microphone coming out of a samurai metal scabbard in the silence of a temple. It's uncalled and distracting.

It does well the location into a past era, you have to with this budget, but that moves you because you are romantic about the era. Sadly there is not much thinking in the cars chosen, you don't have to, but is a missed opportunity especially in a period piece.

I'm sorry Tarantino fans, it looks pretty good but it's not an artistic film, it fails in storytelling and keeping your attention, something that usually is effective in these comercial big budget-super stars movies.

If you forget is Tarantino, recognize it, this one is on the bad side.

First time reviewing here just because I feel the obligation as a photographer of warning you after being subjected to this pathetic depiction of two useless people with cameras. I don't mind if it's not realistic, which is not at any level, but there is nothing in the characters to make them heroic or relatable or at least believable. At first I thought they were trying to revinidicate the work of female photographers, they even mention Lee Miller in the least subtle way, who just recently has been taken as a feminist figure from the photography world, but the Lee in the movie is so useless that can't even walk without the help of a man in the decisive parts of the movie.

The dialogues are so dumb as many of the annoying songs that appear from time to time when the director doesn't know how to make the insipid story last longer.

If you are a military I guess you would be insulting loudly at the screen in the shooting scenes, nothing makes scense.

But the most frustrating part is when it tries slow and long scenes expecting you to contemplate I guess, or more likely just tries to copy the style of good artistic directors, and fails horribly. I don't need frantic editing, Bella Tarr may be my favourite director, but here I was shouting many times ffs cut already!

The only reason I don't give it a 1 is because the actual photography in the movie is not bad strangely.

The story is worth watching, and if you are from some small places like me, you can feel related if you understand that it's not trying to be subtle, and if you have found some of those bizarre characters in little towns, you are going to find this not surreal at all. Writing is good and I suspect the only reason (besides the leading actor) this have got some prices. But sadly but the movie it's badly directed, and the worst part for me it's photography, I don't care if they didn't have a huge budget, you could do much better with a decent director of photography. The feeling of cheapness comes from a poor and amateurish use of camera and lighting, not from the equipment used.