just wasted two hours watching this and now I wonder, is this

>>86805556
after Sicario I was expecting something better too

at best he can make a Sicario. or he can make an Arrival. I suspect Blade Runner will fall somewhere inbetween.
note: I have only seen Sicario and Arrival

File: 1498305311169.jpg (12KB, 236x354px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x354px

They should've cast Idris Elba instead of Jeremy Renner.

>>86805556

it was ok because everything else lately has been so shit

his movies are technically great but are missing something... needs more kubrick

>>86805617
the film would still be pointless anyway

>>86805556
He's been making practically one film per year from 2009 to now and every single one of them was atleast above average.
Prove me wrong.

>>86805756
above average is not good

>>86805778
Tell me a single buzzword free-argument why any of his films are "bad"
Pick literally any Villeneuve film

>>86805844
Enemy.

Boring, slow, without purpose, crappy ending with a pseudo plot twist.

Sicario was good, Prisoners was my favourite, enemy was too pretentious for me. This was his worst one Imo.

>>86805883
Boring is not a valid argument, it only says what your mood was while watching the film.
Same as saying "it was fun", that does not indicate anything about the actual quality of the film.

Yes it's slow, but that alone is not a flaw. And I don’t get your "without purpose" point, it clearly has a strong theme and narrative that it is pushing, do you think Villeneuve just put together a bunch of scenes because he was bored or what?
And the ending is not a plot twist but a reveal, the whole film is filled with spider related imagery.

>>86805556
Reminder that everyone who missed to watch this in cinema missed one of the best cinema experiences of recent times.
That first contact scene is one of the best first contact scenes in cinema history, a true experience.

OP's probably underage and never saw Prisoners or Enemy, but that's alright

>boring
>pretentious
Amazing criticism plebs.

>>86805556
It's because of the shitty script written by a guy whose biggest film was some Final Destination sequel.

Arrival is part of a recent series of movies I'd describe as Dunning-Kruger Sci-Fi. Along with Interstellar and to a somewhat lesser extent The Martian, they perfectly play to the crowd that fancies themselves as (and, to be fair, may truly be) smarter than average audiences but are not as smart as genuinely "smart people." They are movies designed to make the audience feel smart by introducing complicated and heady concepts, and then holding the viewer's hand the entire way through until there is next to nothing to be left up to interpretation.

If you didn't already know the twist in Arrival by the time she was in the milky section of the ship with the aliens AT LEAST, you perfectly fit the audience I am talking about.

There is no reward for being smart while viewing these movies because everything is eventually spelled out in big fridge magnet letters. Any clever idea is made so transparent that even the most simple in the audience will get it. It also removes any reward for rewatching or trying to figure out what you just saw.

Granted, there is a difference between Arrival and Interstellar. I think where Interstellar was pretending to have a brain it actually didn't have, Arrival has a brain that it is refusing to let the audience use.

Completely disappointing movie.

Also
>so that just happened

>>86806613
This stale pasta is so trash, it doesn’t even talk about Villeneuve or a single point about the film, just the overpraising autists.

It's like saying Fight Club is a bad film just because some normies think the film has the meaning of life itself in it.
And the saddest part is that you saved and then copypasted it probably hundred times already thinking that it's saying something "smart".

why would an alien suffer from human amnesia? this movie made no sense.

>>86807221
>why would an alien suffer from human amnesia?
What?

>>86806613
Why does being able to understand a movie make it bad?

All movies are investments and they need to at least break even, so they make the movie accessible to enough people so that they don't just waste a fuck tonne of money.

No one is going to spend 47 million dollars to make an esoteric film that doesn't explain its concepts to its audience, just so you can suck your own dick because of how smart you are, that you understood it.

If that's what you want go watch no budget Kino and fuck off.

>>86807221
Yeah, this. It makes no sense if you think about it.

>>86805556

I don't like any of his movies. He better not ruin Blade Runner!

>>86805556
all he's making is good films. but there's plenty of good films and he never will make a great one

>>86805556
that movie was shit and i saw it at the cinemas

Enemy and Hacksaw Ridge(i know its made by Gibson) are both the ultimate pleb-filters.

>>86809310
But Hacksaw Ridge is a pretty generic war film?
I mean even the normiest most casual viewers enjoyed it.

>>86809512
>Using a corpse as a literal meat shield
>Generic