No, I haven't seen The Room. I don't think any prior knowledge is necessary, as The Disaster Artist does a good enough job explaining what the film is about, and how bad it is. It shows some comparison shots at the end, which show how the documentary's representation of the scenes actually play out in The Room.
To satisfy my curiosity, I do now want to see The Room, but deep down, know there must be better things to do with my time.
The Room is amazing....I've seen it maybe twenty times...
Dunkirk, what a load of ****.
I honestly felt no tension when watching it, I didn’t care about any of the soldiers.
I don’t have a top 3, my favourite is saving private Ryan closely followed by the war series Band of Brothers.
Well after an easyrider probe we can now get closer to why you didn't like it...your latter point certainly improves on your former wafer thin response to the film.
Nolans idea was to put the viewer in the place of the characters in the film...No backstory of who or why...all we know is where.
In a way the camera becomes a character, it casts you into what’s happening as directly as possible...From land and sea an air POV all from overlapping timeframes...
Nolan wanted you to become part of it all...So no back stories.... No explanations of how the characters got to where they are. They’re just there.
The emotional responce doesn't come from the rooting of the characters...which is quite frankly astonishing. It comes from your forced dislocation of the unfolding situation. But this dislocation becomes fear and dread and anxiety and hope and death.
Do you use this irritating style of punctuation because you don't know any better, or is it that you think it adds gravitas to your points?
Nope....
This was part of my problem. The film was engaging and very well shot. The cinematography was excellent, I just never felt involved or part of the story which is what all great films do. They draw you into the story. Dunkirk never did that for me.
That was not Nolans intention.
Last edited by a moderator: