Average User Score: 8.1Oct 30, 2012This is a fantastic attempt at adapting a book which many considered unadaptable. The disparate mishmash of genres that make up the movie somehow come together brilliantly when taken as a whole. Of course, there are 'weaknesses', as is the case in almost any work of art, but that does not prevent this from being a brilliant, audacious movie. We need more risk taking and original films like this from the big studios!… Expand
Average User Score: 7.9Feb 3, 2012Just seen this. I went from initially impressed ("wow look how authentic it looks!") to bored . . . to amazed, excited and hopeful (at the talking dream part) . . . to slowly bored again and then disappointed, as the film ended.
A few points that struck me.During the movie I was struck by the beautiful, ever so slightly familiar, string theme. On reading up after the movie I learnt this wasn't an original composition. I know the whole thing is sposed to be some kind of "homage to cinema" but thats really stretching it a bit for a Best Picture Nominee. Minus one point there.
I think the film, while technically excellent, didnt take enough risks. As I said, I thought the 'sound dream' but was fantastic and really got me excited for how the rest of the film would play out - maybe it would get surreal, maybe there would be colour, maybe matrix style SFX, even 3D as we see the evolution of film! (ok maybe not 3D, but you get my point). Instead there was nothing else of note.
The plot was wafer thin. I find it ironic that many critics who marvelled at, say, Avatar's fantastic technical aspects but berated its poor, predicatable generic plot, are willing to overlook that crucial aspect in the case of The Artist. Double standards?
Overall, and most importantly, the reason this film should NOT win best picture is that it simply has nothing to offer the viewer on repeat viewings. The first time round has its moments- "wow look how authentic it looks!" - and there's the excitement of not knowing what to expect.
But on repeat viewings all you've got is a mediocre silent film - a bit dull in places, with a wafer thin plot.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.2Mar 11, 2011Occasionally spectacular. Often ridiculous and pretentious. Wooden acting. Bad dialogue. Unconvincing story. Completely unbelievable ending. With this movie, Flying Daggers and Curse of the Golden Flower, once respected director Zhang Yimou has stopped making films with any meaning or social significance and simply gone after the money.
Average User Score: 8.6Feb 26, 2011A really interesting concept, but the movie falls short in many, many aspects. Character development, apart from Cobb (which is only adequate), is non-existant. Therefore I wasn't emotionally invested in the movie at all. Dialogue is a bit clunky, with so many expositions at the beginning of the film. The SFX were nice, but we've seen a lot of it before. They lacked the wow factor of say the Matrix, Avatar or Terminator 2. The climax felt rushed and there was way too much actiona and big explosions for what is supposed to be a thoughtful sicence fiction film. Plotholes in a complex plot such as this are inevitable, but for me, there were simply too many.
In summary a great idea, but too much action and not enough character development. The ideas in this movie and the 'setup' at the beginning felt forced in a way that, say, the Matrix never did. This is a clever film for a blockbuster, but its execution falls well, well short of the user reviews on here. The critics are nearer the mark on this one.… Expand