The film is a split narrative set simultaneously in contemporary London and in a future metropolis ruled by religious fervor. It's the story of four lost souls, divided by two parallel ... See full summary »
The film is a split narrative set simultaneously in contemporary London and in a future metropolis ruled by religious fervor. It's the story of four lost souls, divided by two parallel worlds, on course for an explosive collision when a single bullet will decide all their fates. Written by
Preests statement - "If a god is willing to prevent evil, but not able, then he is not omnipotent. If he is able, but not willing, then he must be malevolent. If he is neither able or willing then why call him a god? Why else do bad things happen to good people?" - is almost directly lifted from Epicurus, who is credited with first expounding the problem of evil. David Hume in his Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (1779) cited Epicurus in stating the argument as a series of questions: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?" See more »
The man talking to Milo in the room where the red haired woman disappeared to and another unseen character added some tiles to his original cross shaped design on the table. After Milo leaves the camera tilts down as the man writes into his notebook and the additional tiles are gone, reverting back to the cross shape. See more »
Building trust takes time. All structure must start with foundation, and communication is the cornerstone of foundation.
See more »
One In The Eye For The Attention-Deficienct Popcorn Cattle
Yes, it's a slow, slow build-up featuring seemingly unconnected story threads, fantastical settings and comic-book characterisation. Yes, it's all a bit of a muddle at times, and plays like the disconnected fast-cut chapters of a cynically devise modern supermarket bestselling novel.
But it's different.
Not out-there different, just stoically different from the average Hollywood committee-designed faux art-slice. It's a film that refuses to bend to the will of popular expectation and also to the viewer's clamouring desire for exposition.
For that it's to be applauded; it seems remarkable it managed mainstream distribution given the fact so many will be 'bored' ('man') awaiting the connections to satisfy their anticipation.
And you may well gather what's going on before it's explained (with a little ultimate dubiety) on screen, but this is still a well-executed piece of cinema with a solid cast that dares to offer something a little different to current lame traits after seemingly setting itself up as just another by-the-numbers collage.
Clever at times, atmospheric, beautifully shot with a good cast. Worth, nay deserving, of a watch as a mild antidote to patronising Hollywood mainstream. A solid seven out of ten.
72 of 95 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?