David Yates is known around the world for his directorial work in the series about Harry Potter and the series “Fantastic Beasts and Where They Live” and strong work in the context of the series: “The Big Game”, “Tyrant”.
“The roads we choose” are all worthy of attention. I recommend you read them.
I absolutely didn’t like this film,
more
David Yates is known around the world for his directorial work in the series about Harry Potter and the series “Fantastic Beasts and Where They Live” and strong work in the context of the series: “The Big Game”, “Tyrant”. “The roads we choose” are all worthy of attention. I recommend you read them. I absolutely didn’t like this film, the film is based on an article by Evan Hughes for The New York Times about Insys, but the writers ruthlessly changed everything, and the action itself was moved from Arizona to Florida. And here (although I respect the mixing of neat genres, not interfering with each other, but complementing), there was a team of saltwood and dramas and a satirical parable and black comedy. And it's so angular, rubbed, too entertaining. Yates, in my opinion, with this capitalist agitation leaf against the backdrop of the opioid epidemic, has overmeditated on the social component and therefore, there is no such depth in the coverage of Chekhov’s little man. And the story is really interesting, and could be presented in a more analytical way. And to whom this topic is important, Netflix has Barry Levinson’s Breakdown and the mini-series Side Effect: Death, there is more serious and weighty. The film lacked the style that this director has, but there are so many script inconsistencies that even Emily Blunt’s magnificent performance does not bring the film to a high bar. Pity. 4/10. About this film, as a single social component, well said Julia Borisovna Hippenreiter, i.e. to be more precise... She drew a parallel with the reflection in society, ideally falls on the atmosphere of "Pain sellers": It would seem that we can do something and watch ourselves at the same time. For example, write – and follow handwriting, read aloud – and monitor the expressiveness of reading. It would seem so – and at the same time not so, or at least not quite so! Is it not less well known that observing the course of one’s own activity hinders or even destroys this activity? By following handwriting, we can lose thought; by trying to read with expression, we can stop understanding the text. It is known how destructive reflection acts on the flow of our feelings: from it they pale, distort, or even disappear altogether. And on the contrary, how much "giving to feeling" excludes the possibility of reflection!
|