Sinners

The bizarre thing is that you have spent longer writing your couple of posts on this thread than you actually spent watching the film.

If you have an opinion, that's ok. But why the need to be insulting people by calling them dummies and morons.

I thought that was mesmerising :)
Clearly a film that divides opinion.

I prefer films like that getting made than mediocre ones.

and there are equally as many who will find a reason to complain just because they think something is 'liberal' or 'woke'…..

I was on the fence about watching this as horror does nothing for me. It doesn't scare me, doesn't thrill me, it usually bores me.

Sinners- I loved it!
Everything about it.

And I was delighted that Michael B Jordan won Best Actor award at The Actors last night, he was rather overlooked for some reason until now.

I also love that we all have different tastes in film, how frightfully boring would life be if we didn't.

Just saw this tonight.

I didn't hate it. There were things I quite liked about it, in general I am perfectly happy to have style over substance and so had no problem with any of the metaphorical scenes. If it feels cool to have vampires stomping a ceili while waiting for their victims to make a mistake then go for it, I am all for that sort of thing.

But how in the hell is this nominated for so many Oscars?

MBJ I can sorta understand, I could see the differences between the twins and think he did well, but supporting actor and actress? No way in hell.

(ETA: While I think MBJ did well, I don't actually see any reason whatsoever why they got him to do both roles. What did it add to anything?)

The biggest problem is how badly paced and uneven the film is. If you are going to have that long and slow of a setup then the payoff needs to be good, and everything from when the chinese lady invited the vampires inside was an incoherent mess. It would take far longer than I am prepared to give to list out all of the ways in which it failed to stick the landing from that point on.

6/10, and thats generous.

It is definitely very strange to think that it is the movie with the most nominations in Oscar history. I suspect history won't be kind to it on reflection because of that.

The problem with doing a more grounded "Klan" movie is that you would also have to lose most of the other mystical elements as well, they would be very out of place without the vampire threat. But lose them and you lose the inherent style of the movie itself.

The problem isn't the vampires per se, I quite liked the vampire presentation to begin with. And using the old myth of vampires needing to be invited into places was fresh and gave me hope of an interesting resolution to the story.

But then we got that nonsensical attack that stands up to absolutely zero scrutiny. Seriously, watch it again and ask who is getting attacked at by whom at any point, because it is a complete mess. Then the contrived scene in the water where the vampires stand and wait for the plot to dispose of them. Followed by the tacked on Klan murder scene that, yet again, makes very little sense and is full of plot holes.

I read a comment on another forum that they should have followed on with the theme of the music being a bridge between the worlds and so used Sammi's music as a way to purge the vampires in some fashion. That could have been interesting, but certainly couldn't have been worse than the B movie ending that we got.

And i think O'Connell was unlucky not to get a nomination.

If you get the most nominations in history then in the realm of public opinion you are inevitably going to be judged against that history. Thats a simple fact of life, doesn't matter if its fair or not.

Good prediction.