Just watched this Gyllenkino. Loved Michael Shannon, and Amy

>>86750399
Because the real world portion was pretentious as fuck

Amy Adams is so fekking hawt

>>86750399
because the "novel" portion is just a really bad, third-rate Sam Peckinpah/Paul Schrader ripoff.

>>86750399
Amy Adams can't emote for shit. Entire cast is a meme. Go back to r e d d I t

>gay fashion designer directs a shitty flick

no thanks and I'm a fan of Jake's performances.

>>86750399
wtf was up with the opening credits?

>>86750399
the acting wasnt very good. the movie if i remember correctly had some pretty basic flaws which comes from i assume the director not having that much experience.

the visuals were cool though at times

i do wonder though if the movie wasnt a bit misogynistic. there was def some animosity towards women that can only be got from the homosexual side of man.

also the villains bein hicks felt like a cliche made by some rich guy that doesnt live in a rural area

so yeah overall pretentious but good at times

>>86750399
>why didn't this get more buzz?
It got a pretty decent amount of buzz for what it is. It's a movie that uses a cliched revenge narrative as a metaphor for a man dealing with divorce. That kind of thing has a limited appeal compared to more typical Oscar-bait.

I'm not trying to say anything negative about the movie, I thought it was great, but it doesn't have the mass appeal that LaLa Land does.

>>86750399
Who cares how much 'buzz' it got? It was great, let it be.

>>86752102
>i do wonder though if the movie wasnt a bit misogynistic. there was def some animosity towards women
It's not really women-specific. The movie is about people being shitty to each other in general. It just happened to be from the point of view of a male character, but the idea of taking everything away from someone isn't really gender specific. I actually thought it managed the issue pretty well by having a women be shitty to Jake in real life, but having a man do it in the novel.

>>86752256
it felt gender specific. i read the whole movie as a critique on the female psyche. the opening shot is a bunch of old naked ladies - grotesque yet celebrated. sets a precedent you know. felt like an underlying theme of this movie was about how the inner workings of women are awful. amy adams' character realizes this by reading the book, begs for jakes forgiveness (who in the movie is sort of this effeminate beta male that has to be helped by this dying masculine stereotype) who doesnt forgive her.
sort of like a guy going "feh, women, who needs them. im gay now"

>>86751557
dood it has like secondary meaning on our SOCIETY AND SHIT BEOOOOORERO!OO!!!!! GET IT H!!H!H!

>>86752401
What kinda crack are you smokin, bud?

It was about relationships and a person's internal thoughts about who they should be.

>>86750399
90% of the audience lost their lunch during the intro

>>86752507
yeah i dont disagree with you. this is happening more underneath all that. maybe im critiquing the guy making the movie more than the movie itself

>>86752610
maybe, he's gay and has worked in the fashion industry all his life.

>>86752666
yeah this movie felt hella gay. that was the first question i had after watching this movie, i turned to my friend and asked if tom ford was gay and he is.

however that works to his advantage though because i think if a straight man wrote this movie it would be torn down by the media. but because its a gay dude its allllright

>>86751557
Literally "lol americans are fat"