Or perhaps I should instead feel a little sorry for them, but happy for myself that I was didn't suffer the same fate.
Update: I have noticed comments about the too fast editing too - something that drives me nuts, but many people these days have become acclimatised to. I can safely predict I would have hated this episode. I mean, even though it seems this BBC reviewer overall thought it was good, he freely admits to a lot of negatives:
The direction and cutting makes events frenzied, scrappy and yes, due to the lack of lighting, difficult to follow – a clever visual articulation of how this fight would really feel. This is an admirable artistic choice in theory, but after a while it starts to translate as tiresome, incomprehensible noise. In interviews leading up to the episode, Sapochnik cited The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers’ Battle of Helm’s Deep as his main inspiration. But The Battle of Winterfell never quite achieves the elegance or clarity of Peter Jackson’s sequence – nor matches its remarkable balance of character and action. This is not to say that The Battle of Winterfell is bad. It is not. But based on first viewing, it is perhaps not impressive enough to live up to its own hype.Update 2: continuing to sound like a Redditor, I will assert my unpopular opinion that the only decent cinematic fantasy character based battles that took place on a field were those in the first two Narnia movies. They were well directed, not overly choppy editting, and were thrilling without obvious blood letting. (Marvel also does it without blood, but the editing often leaves a lot to be desired.)
Unpopular opinion No 2: the climatic battle in Avengers: Endgame was a little too reminiscent of that in Reader Player One.
Unpopular opinion No 3: Dr Strange is the most important Marvel Universe character, and deserves at least two more movies. (Although it seems I often do not care much for the follow up movie for a Marvel movie that I liked.)
No comments:
Post a Comment