I just saw it and was shocked it only got 40% on rotten tomatoes. I really liked it.

meh.

Warning: Edit or Zootown will lock this because there is already a post mildly discussing the film.

I really enjoyed it. Even the wikipedia article was hating on it a bit. I don't know why.


Fuck your sig.

It was dark and had a particular allegory to it that was kind of refreshing in a sense, but at the same time slightly terrifying. I felt bad for Danny Glover's character at the end....ahhh to be Black.

i liked it. i agree it should have gotten more love because it really threw you in this world and it was interesting that blindness was used as an allegory to the breakdown of society and how one group treats another, and social hierarchy's etc. it was somewhat heavy handed and i can see why some critics may have overlooked it when it came to choosing the years best but it was a solid flick last year the market was oversaturated with great films to choose from.

me of Children of men. I think it captured the bleakness very well . Also I loved the way it was shot and the use of the color white throughout the movie.

They just didn't like it
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1188215-blindness/?critic=creamcrop
________________________________

Ceci n'est pas une sig.

Very hard to watch though. I also was suprised by the negative reviews.





Question&Spoiler

What the hell happened to the ashy black guy?
In the end the doctor's wife is leading them through the city, they are all holding hands and he is in the back. Suddenly he stumbles, his hand slips and he takes a wrong turn. Nobody notices, nobody says anything and he is never mentioned again. Did I miss something?
________________________________

Ceci n'est pas une sig.

A scene or two later when they reach the shelter the wife tells them all to stay together because she doesn't want to lose anyone else.

Fuck your sig.

The acting was spot on, the story drew me in and the cinematography was great. I loved how the overexposed and manipulated the images to shows us how they saw.

it's one of my favorite movies of 08.

im surprised it wasnt more popular

thoroughly dug it though.

My girlfriend liked it too but homegirl from work didn't like it at all.

me and my gf, lol)
iono why it was so empty but it added to the feeling of desolation

>iono why it was so empty but it added to the feeling of
>desolation

the movie was bordering pretentious.

I didn't feel that way with the book.

that movie was rough as hell.

nm

Esp. in a particularly thin year of movies. The acting was excellent throughout. The cinematography was rich and inventive. The adaptation was a little clumsy in spots but overall I think it captured the spirit of the novel and I forgave its mistakes in respect for its ambition.

I expected things to fall apart with all the negative reviews, but it carried my interest through the end.

like i saw what was good about it...

but it was a bit too nervewrecking

and had a few moments where i couldnt suspend belief

after about 40 minutes of it...im like OKay OKay...OKay OKay (c) Kanye I GET IT

======================================
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tade/

Also, if you seemed immune, shouldn't you tell someone so they can run tests on you and possibly try to find a cure?

I just found most of her actions to be annoying. Ditto for Ruffalo.

An interesting concept but I just never bought into it.

I'd like to know why she was immune to the blindness.

Anyways, I enjoyed the movie. I'll check out the book.

Mainly a suspension of disbelief passion. I just don't think things would have happened the way they did. I think I might have felt differently about it if the movie wasn't set in the US.

1. I was mad from the biggning when the Asia dude let someone drive his care home and didn't go immediately to the hospital.

2. I was also mad that the first people suffering from the blindness were just thrown in a facility and forgotten about. Call me naive, I just don't think it would happen that way in the US. I think in the US government scientist would be all other them trying to figure out what was going on. I think you could tell that the director was South American because there was this strong distrust of government institutions, even stronger then we have here in the US.

3. What made me the most upset though was the folks handing over their women. Yeah I will admit that some folks may have let it go down like that but I personally wouldn't have stood for that. Especially if there only advantage was a one gun used by a blind person and we had a person with vision. The director had a very cynically POV about people's capacity to be heroic. I admit that the director may have intended to piss me off on this point.

I understand that the movie was an allegorical piece and I may be focusing on the "wrong" issues from the directors perspective, but if that's the case then this story may have been better left as a novel.

**********
"Play Your Game" (c) Stan Van Gundy

My understanding is that the specifically shot it so that you couldn't tell what country they were in.

I thought there were references to the CDC and the US military. Maybe it was all the american actors that gave me that impression. Will have to check for that again.

Still hate it.

**********
"Play Your Game" (c) Stan Van Gundy

According to wikipedia, the author ensured that it was set in an unnamed city or country. He didn't want people know know where the movie was supposed to set. Incidentally, they chose São Paulo for this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindness_%28film%29

especially the women scene and them being alone in the hospital kind of killed it for me.

I've ever watched on film. The whoel rape/pussy for food thing was just ... and the shit went on for what felt like a 20 minutes.

...blind people.

but seriously, it was a pretty good film, captures the mood and feel of the book. But, once again, the book is waaaaay better than the film even though it takes a minute to get used to the writing style - Jose Saramago doesn't like quotation marks, or any other punctuation marks for that matter.

7c

No way ANYONE who can see lets a blind person rape them.
No way a person who can see lets blind people take their food.

And why were blind people taking jewelry and valuables?
"Hey, we can't see and we're locked down indefinitely. Let's strong-arm folks for their valuables. Valuables that have no value to us in this situation whatsoever."

Worst movie I've seen in a while. Shocked it got into 40% on Rotten Tomatoes.

same effect.

it didnt
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

not sure how it can elicit hate, but all good.


What's the general take om Mark Ruffalo? He wasn't great in this. Actually he's never been great in anything, but for whatever reason I think he "should" be a great actor. Like he's shown flashes but doesn't have the ethic, I don't know. And I won't profess to be an expert on judging acting talent, but I just feel like he's wasting his tability to some degree.