bluemagic-39283

I don't even have the nerves to waste my time any much more in writing about this abomination.

I'll just quote someone here that I agree with:

"The truth is however that this movie is vapid, pretentious and exhausting drivel that doesn't deserve the attention it's getting. Let me point out how I have come to this conclusion.

First of all, the movie exaggeratedly tries to criticize contemporary society. The world of modeling is fake and superficial. Influencers are self-consumed and shallow. The rich and famous are greedy and soulless. The poor are jealous and vengeful. This movie brings up so many tired old stereotypes that it doesn't become a satire of contemporary society but rather a satire of its very own kind: pretentiously moralizing films attempting to please trendy prejudices.

Up next, this film is unbearably long and clocks in at two and a half hours. We are witnessing models doing a casting for ten minutes. We are watching a toxic couple arguing over financial matters for twenty minutes. We are introduced to a whole range of characters on a yacht for forty-five minutes. Depth there is none. Development there is none. Entertainment there is none.

The characters are meant to be antipathic. However, they are never fleshed out and remain dreadfully shallow to a point that viewers will simply not care about their fates at all. Their actions, discussions and motivations keep repeating themselves endlessly. Few movies have ever had so many redundant dialogues as this one.

The acting performances also remain mostly shallow. A positive exception is Dolly de Leon who shines as manipulative antagonist in the last third of the movie but is nowhere to be seen before. Harris Dickinson disappoints as protagonist since he doesn't have any charisma whatsoever. His looks are boring, his facial expressions are repetitive and his delivery is redundant. That isn't anything new however since he already couldn't convince in previous features such as The King's Man and See How They Run. Lead actress Charlbi Dean tragically died much too young. If we strictly talk about her acting skills however, she also doesn't have the charisma to carry this movie. She often overacts in an artificial way which becomes nerve-firing through two and a half hours. She never becomes one with her role and instead establishes a distance to it that makes it obvious that she is acting. Talented actresses and actors on the other side are underused in this movie. Woody Harrelson is limited to the role of a drunk captain who keeps yelling nonsense through a closed cabin door time and again. Iris Berben is limited to repeating the same seven words over and over again since she is playing a character that suffered from a stroke and can't express herself very well. The casting choices for this movie have been absolutely dreadful in my opinion.

At the end of the day, I would highly recommend you to avoid watching Triangle of Sadness. This movie doesn't live up to its exaggeratedly positive reception. This film doesn't even know what it wants to be: adventure film, black comedy, survival drama, contemporary satire, you name it. Ultimately, this film is nothing but bloated, pretentious and shallow. Even its concept offers nothing new. You would be much better off reading Lord of the Flies or even Robinson Crusoe if you are interested in an analysis of society in a context of isolation. "

First of all, a Dior caro quilted bag is no way near 10 000 euros. It barely costs 4000 euros.

Putting that aside, the characters are void, really bad constructed, the actors play them very very poorly. Everything is overexaggerated. I doubt that some police officers in Croatia would speak such good english and on top of that they look like models. What person from Siria, with clearly their own problems, would just stay and listen to some stranger's puffed story, like they ar BFF?

But it's a mystery, so somehow it had a little bit of appeal . It could easily be summed up in a twenty minute short film.

Overall, it's a disappointment, a waste of time.

1. Oh, poor innocent, noble ottomans, what troubles they must've went through because of that big bad nasty wolf, Vlad Draculea.

Over the whole series the Ottomans look down to Vlads methods of punishment of his enemies while there is not once explained that Vlad learned those from the Ottomans. We always hear sentences like "Look what he did to these poor souls". He never, ever!, hurt his own people.

"The Ottoman Empire used impalement during, and before, the last siege of Constantinople in 1453" This is beyond hypocrisy.

2. Mehmed, the Sultan never fought side by side with his soldiers. Contrary to Vlad who lead his attacks along his soldiers Mehmed never did such a thing.

3. The Night Attack on Targoviste was a strategical win for Vlad and decimated 15% of Mehmeds army.

Instead somehow on earth it is called a win for the Ottomans because Vlad failed to kill the Sultan and that somehow is supposed to have destroyed Vlads moral (wtf)

Nicholas of Modrus (c. 1427 - 1480), was a bishop of Modrus in Lika, the Pope's representative at the courts of King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary (1463-1464):

"... I learned by questioning those who had participated in this battle that the sultan lost all confidence in the situation. During that night the sultan abandoned the camp and fled in a shameful manner."

4. It is not mentioned that Mehmed army failed to take Bucharest and Snagov before deciding to march towards Targoviste. There is not even one mention of it, it was completely ignored

5. Mehmed and his main army left Wallachia after seeing the 20,000 impaled Ottomans that Vlad had prepared for him this move left completely demoralized that being the reason he left Wallachia. Leaving Radu alone who Vlad beat multiple times after that.

6. Not mentioning Vlads imprisonment or his killing by enemy boyars.

Its unbelievable that a show wants to be a documentary and does not mention what happened to Vlad after Mehmed left Wallachia.

Vlad got imprisoned by the Hungarian King for unclear reasons for over 10 years.

Also, Vlad was named Atleta Christi (Champion of Christ) by the Pope AND Vlad reformed Wallachia bringing stability and prosperity.

Vlad broke Mehmeds moral and that's why he left Wallachia.

Even the only Romanian historian writer that is allowed to say a few words about this joke of a show disagrees with lots of aspects: "There is too much emphasis, in my opinion, on the "drama" part and less on the "docu". A lot of historical information that was also necessary. Yes, I really explained a lot of details that are left out of the series, as if they are not known or are confused.

The leather armor, the map, the geography of the banks of the Danube, the relief of Wallachia, the settlement of the Poenari fortress, and especially the aberrant story of Vlad's suicidal wife are other minus points."

Vlad was probably the greatest ruler that poor cursed country ever had. And I say cursed, not because of some hallucinated vampires story, but because those greedy boyars of Wallachia still EXIST today, and they keep the country in such a poor state so that they can gain money and power by selling all the valuables and doing business to the detriment of the people that now live in old times Wallachia, Transylvania and Moldavia.