Landlubber77

Landlubber77 t1_ivb37to wrote

I wonder if issue 11 was actually better than 12, like how Game of Thrones would always have the penultimate episode of the season be the banger while the season finale more or less dealt with the aftermath and set-up for the next season.

3

Landlubber77 t1_iub5bxh wrote

Kingsman: The Secret Service. Colin Firth and Samuel L Jackson have a pretty compelling conversation over dinner where each laments not fulfilling their respective childhood fantasies of becoming the very thing that the other became, gentleman spy versus colorful megalomaniac. It's a very...happy meal.

4

Landlubber77 t1_iuag82e wrote

I don't understand that. And it's an opinion so I'm not saying you're wrong, just that I don't get it. Do you not enjoy rewatching movies in general? To me, a person who enjoys rewatching movies every few years, my enjoyment isn't affected by knowing the twist or the beats of the story. If this movie sucked all the way through and was only enjoyable for that one moment where the twist is revealed, then I'd understand. But this movie is an effective chilling "horror" or psychological thriller on its own.

2

Landlubber77 t1_iua1k67 wrote

Movies like these have enormous rewatch value for at least the second viewing. You have to reevaluate nearly every single scene from a new perspective. And even after that second viewing it still holds up. No, obviously it'll never hit the same way as the first time, but people rewatch all kinds of movies even though they know all the details. Just because this one ends with a mega twist doesn't mean it should be held to some higher standard than all those other movies we rewatch. If all it had going for it was the twist then yes. But it's so much more than that.

13

Landlubber77 t1_iu8fmzz wrote

I rewatch this movie like twice a year. It's an emotional investment though. For example, I think I've fast forwarded the part with the Zodiac by the lake every single time but maybe twice. Lol it's too much.

It also really shows you the power of point of view in a movie, since everyone who watches it comes away from it with the impression that Arthur Leigh Allen must have been Zodiac. However according to the research, conventional wisdom at the time and even now was that it was someone else altogether. Arthur Leigh Allen is who Robert Graysmith zeroed in on in real life and the movie (based on his books) is from his point of view.

But this is 1B for me as far as Fincher movies go, with 1A being The Social Network. And I wouldn't be angry with anyone who wanted to switch the two.

3