MovieChat Forums > Ragnarill > Replies
Ragnarill's Replies
The movie is 90% shock value and political correctness. There are only a handful jokes, the story is paper thin, no part of the movie looks or sounds like it could be taking place in the 1920s.
It's a movie set in the 1920s with people who all sound and look like they are in 2020.
Yes, quite bad. No wonder this movie bombed hard at the box office.
Also way too much political correctness and that's always worse in a historical piece because they always have to throw their "correct" opinions to correct history.
That's the entire point of the movie. Being able to live each others life bonded them closer together than what would otherwise be possible. As social animals, humans are defined based on how they are treated and treat others. It makes sense.
There is also the part where he works to save her from impending death and they work together to save the whole town. Damsel in distress and saving the world are classic motives for love.
I can recommend the 2017 movie Wind River. The themes are similar: lawlessness, cowboy justice and personal revenge.
You should watch the movie before you judge the actors. They are both great in this even though I am not a fan of them.
I recommend that you come here after watching the movie and never before. Most of the talking points are from people have seen the movie and want to comment on it.
It's supposed to be reminiscent of the way Natalie Wood died.
No, there is no evidence to imply that they were.
No, Emma and Rihanna were the worst characters by far.
The movie is based on real events and people in Michigan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Sharp
No, that's a common analogy for gold digging girls.
He's talking to the viewer. It's the same thing in The Big Short. They have to explain it because the average viewer doesn't understand basic finance.
Both are enjoyable movies. The Big Short is probably more interesting if you've read some books by Michael Lewis or if you have a general interest in financial markets. The humor in The Big Short is more subtle.
Yes, this is what happens in the novel. The movie has more of a bittersweet ending.
He did tell him beforehand, pay attention to what he says. But it doesn't matter, Sosa cares about results, him and his lackey are cold blooded killers and the man was a threat to his career and his associates.
Yes, your point was that a movie about boxing should be realistic and fair but that wouldn't make for a good movie. The tragic event sets the tone of the movie, there isn't supposed to be any justice or fairness because that would defeat the entire point of the movie: that it's better to live a few minutes in the spotlight than to live your whole life in nothingness.
The story is not about the Blue Bear, it's about the Million Dollar Baby. It's the same concept as the Karate Kid or Gladiator. They don't win in the last fight because happy endings don't exist in the real world. It's the journey there that matters. It makes the tragedy at the end all the more meaningful. In the movie the world of boxing is a sleazy, dirty, underhanded sport where refs are paid off and the winners are ones who play dirty. It makes for more interesting viewing than actual boxing matches.
Scrap seems to have been in the hospital when it happened. You can see him walking away from the shadows after Frankie leaves.