Just finished this movie and i was wondering what you guys thought if it?

great up until they leave the hotel

then it's pure garbage

it just sounds like you didn't like the film, which is fine

True, first half was really good and then it got boring and uninspired

Great film. Refuse to share my ideas about movies I actually like on Cred Forums because 98% of the posters here are knuckle-dragging goons.

I watched it because I thought the idea could be interesting; it could have actually been funny considering they had john c reiley, but they took the film in too serious a direction

it felt like they were trying to force a level of quirkiness that was supposed to be funny, but it just fell flat

>mfw I share my opinion on Cred Forums
>other anons agree

This is how I knew your opinion is shit so you intentionally withheld it, coward

>one troglodyte grunts and a few of the others squatting around the fire grunt along with him

Consensus.

i enjoyed reileys role here however small

Of what I remember it was a sad attempt at a totalitarian society and overall the movie had no scope which is in my opinion expected of such a film. Especially some things were ludicrous and just felt lazy, like the fact that people had to have something in common to make a couple. This made it tedious as a thought experiment because that thing, that they should have something in common, could only ever be a bad plot device. It didn't add anything meaningful, it just made for an easy, uninspired obstacle for the main character, something that would create an insipid conflict that would never have to exist in the first place if the totalitarian society, with all their technological wonders, had just found a better way. I went into this thinking it would challenge my perception of something which is often the case when reading science fiction (I was probably lured into this assumption by the dystopian near future bit) but this movie is entirely forgettable.

mmm indubitably, just kidding man good point though

>the whole "we dance by ourselves in the woods while listening to electronic music" was supposed to be funny?
Yes

>and the concept of turning a human into another animal, let alone something like a flamingo is supposed to be in any way believable?
Oh, you can suspend your disbelief for an allegorical movie? Okay

I really, really liked the ending.

I thought the ending was OK, but the forest scenes were trash, I don't think anyone can rightly defend it when it simply pales in comparison to the hotel scenes.

Basically the forest fucked it all up.

To each their own. I immediately picked up on the humour. Was nearly in tears for the first half of the film. I nearly fell out of my seat in the blue balls scene. It got more serious towards the end though.

Good lord it was allegorical. It was an allegory for marriage. Implications aren't always the point of the story, they don't have to be, they merely necessitate the plot.

>it was completely unrealistic

what a bizarre criticism to level at a fictional text

somehow slow but ok

>dating is equally hard for women as for men

unrealistic premise.

lol

I loved it. I really liked the blunt dialogue.
One of the better movies I saw this year.

you're being focused far too much on the literal and not enough on the figurative and metaphorical

you'd be the kid who would read animal farm and go wtf animals can't talk this is unrealistic

they weren't metaphorically turning people into birds, it was happening literally

take jurassic park; sure bringing dinosaurs back and creating a theme park with them was just as an impossible plot, but at least they tried to make it relatively plausible in the story

what was the point of turning people into animals anyway? if population control was such a problem, why not just kill them if they did not "meet" someone? that would have been a much stronger motivator

I liked it. It was entertaining and thought-provoking, so 2/2.

the movie isn't trying to present a plausible scenario, the world and realism is not the point, it's how the characters interact and how they are treated by the society they are in

you are missing the forest for the trees

i hate how the director thought it was a good idea to take away all talent from the actors. its like they all have a stick up their ass, and they are holding it in. or like they were being held at gun point to act and they all clammed up.

Why are people responding to this "hurr it's unrealistic" guy as if he's not trolling?

He's not even trying to hide it, easiest (you)s the guy's ever had you doofuses

>how the characters interact
like how they stayed with psycho-bitch and the rules and mutilation, despite the fact that's what they were running from in the first place?

What about all those fatties?

I loved it until the ending which I felt ruined the entire experience.

why are you even here?
let us make fun of you like a man or leave.

Surrealism.

he means inconsistent

99% of these people mean inconsistent or lazy when they say unrealistic

and he's fucking right

this dude gets it

The Lobster was pretty good.
I liked Dogtooth better.
I've yet to see Alpeis and Attenberg. Do they hold up compared to the former two?