The fact that you think it deserves a 2.1 (which is strangely specific) removes all credibility you could have had. That type of rating is reserved for the worst films of all time yet you think just because (in your opinion) a film didn't age well, it should get one of the lowest possible scores? That is so irrational it suggests anything you say is also likely to be lacking rational thought.
Having rewatched it a couple days ago I actually thought it was even better than I remembered it and can't imagine any reason why anyone could think it has aged poorly (it hasn't even been out very long). It sounds more like you never liked the film and are grasping for a way to explain why.
reply
share