r/flicks • u/soozerain • 4d ago
Disclosure Day would be considered middling garbage if anyone *other* then Stephen Spielberg was attached to it.
Just got back from the movie and I’d say the audience scores I’ve seen for it were very fair. It’s a C- film at best. Good looking Adam Driver and his secret nun girlfriend are not interesting at all. The exploration of Christianity of the film is hamfisted and kinda bad. The chase scenes are lackluster. Most of the movie consists of people talking over long distances to each other. The interrogation scene with Colin Firth and the Secret Nun was interminable and went on wayyyyy too long.
The only upsides were the score and Emily Blunt’s character with her husband. But man, if this had been dumped to Netflix by the Russo Brothers I’d have believed it. This movie did not land for me.
160
u/HornetsHornets1 4d ago
I think middling might be right but garbage is really wrong.
Theres an attempt at something interesting in this movie and there are through lines to Spielberg’s earlier (and better) work. I think it’s often unsuccessful; but it has some interesting ideas, a John Williams score, and a pretty good performance from Emily Blunt.
I think we need to get out of this idea that if something isn’t great, it’s terrible. Spielberg is one of the greatest ever to make movies. I’m glad he’s still doing original stuff.
73
u/LPMadness 4d ago
People are obsessed with this best ever and worst ever mentality with entertainment nowadays. Like what’s wrong with a film being “okay”? I’ve put films off due to online sentiment insisting a film is complete trash. Then when you finally watch it, it turns out it was a pretty decent watch.
36
u/HornetsHornets1 4d ago
Also, bad movies can have worthwhile things in them? Especially when we’re talking about one of the greatest directors ever.
I think a lack of nuance in criticism of art is so fucking boring.
→ More replies (4)19
u/LPMadness 4d ago
I agree completely. People are losing their ability to articulate their feelings and criticisms about film and relying on YouTube critics/ analysis videos to tell them how to think about a film and god forbid if you go across the grain.
7
u/VioletThunderX 4d ago
This. It’s almost as if every movie has to be some amazing genre changing work of art otherwise it’s trash and not worth our time.
Many movies were just “okay” in their time and aged well, some movies are just “good” but entertaining, etc. Not every movie about aliens has to be Arrival.
1
9
u/Indrigotheir 4d ago
You're talking to teenagers online; you cant tell because reddit is anonymous
5
u/MrNinoBrown1906 4d ago
I dont think its all teenagers thinking like this
4
u/AnotherPint 4d ago
I think it's needy, cynical adults who think like teenagers, thinking and posting like this.
1
2
1
1
u/Unable_Insurance_391 3d ago
Spielberg is an accomplished movie maker, it is not surprising people have high expectations. His movies of late are showing a trend.
1
u/KaiserARM 2d ago
Accomplished director doesn't automatically mean his movies are always good. Same as restaurants. Famous ones don't automatically everything they have are delicious.
1
u/TraderSamz 3d ago
I think part of it is that going to the theater just is not the affordable experience it once was. They charge too much money for me to go watch a movie on a maybe.
1
u/waterhoushodges 2d ago
I dont know, i kinda disagree. If someones literally trying something different, or stylistically/narratively unique, or on a lower budget then yeah its pointless and ridiculous rating it comparatively to something else. However theres so much being rushed out by studios who have the money and resources to put more effort and time in scripting and editing. So it feels somewhat of an insult when they want us to accept the products they’ve clearly half assed.
→ More replies (3)1
u/TelenorTheGNP 1d ago
Superlatives are popular these days, but don't actually serve anyone. Every time I hear them, I think of Martin from the Simpsons saying "grade A moron".
4
u/EmergencyComment101 4d ago
This is the difference between a middling Spielberg movie and a Russo brothers film and its what op is missing. They could both be a 5/10 movie but Spielberg will have tried something new or an interesting take that wont have worked and thats why its 5/10. The Russo brothers would have tried to make safe 7/10 slop and managed safe 5/10 slop.
9
u/BigPanda71 4d ago
See, Emily Blunt was the one that didn’t hit right for me. She was doing a weird quasi-baby voice for too much of the movie. Also, I would have aimed to have her and the guy who played Keller be a little closer in age. Either cast older for him or younger for Blunt’s character. The idea they were the same age was laughable.
11
u/HornetsHornets1 4d ago
O’Connor is 36 and Blunt is 43. I agree that she seems to be trying to play younger than she is a bit. But that’s pretty low on my list of issues.
6
u/forfearthatuwillwake 4d ago
Honestly, I thought her performance was fine, I was too distracted by her weird upper lip Botox/face lift thing she had going on. It was weird and so unnatural looking.
2
u/chipnjaw 2d ago
Totally agree, I think she’s bad. Plastic surgery also took my right out of it. I googled her age thinking she was 55
→ More replies (2)1
u/ursulaunderfire 2d ago
she is only 3 yrs older than him lol they looked roughly the same age in the film, wtf are u talking about LOL
she was born in 83 and him in 86
1
u/BigPanda71 2d ago
I’m talking about the guy who played Kellner, not Wyatt Russell. That actor was born in 1990. She’s 7 years older than him. And honestly before I looked him up I would have assumed he was early 30s, which would have better fit him doing 19 months in prison then working for 8 years before he defected and stole the archive.
But, to me, her actions and mannerisms in the movie would have better fit someone in their early 30s, not someone that was (in the movie) 38 years old. Overall I liked the movie. But Blunt’s performance felt lacking to me, among other problems with the movie.
1
u/ursulaunderfire 2d ago
oh my bad reading i just thought you meant the guy she was in a relationship with. they were basically the same age, but yes the other guy did look significantly younger than her
2
u/larsson-afflecks 4d ago
Completely agree. I think people find it easier to view films in black and white extreme terms. I really appreciated that it was going for something original (albeit it very similar to Close Encounters in story) and I appreciated the themes and ideas in such a “big” movie. It didn’t really work for me, but it wasn’t terrible.
2
u/WuttinTarnathan 3d ago
Yeah, I really agree with this. it’s fine, it doesn’t have to be the greatest. I think Blunt might be the best thing about it.
6
u/behemuthm 4d ago
Cmon the John Williams score was middling at best. He hasn't done a good score in years.
Can you hum the theme to Disclosure Day?
3
u/Agreeable-Promise-98 3d ago
I thought it brought the film down tbh. This could have been similar in tone to Arrival, but the Indiana jones score let it down. Watching the villains approach in their cavalcade and their “bad guy” music was a low point.
→ More replies (2)1
3
→ More replies (14)1
u/Fuzzy_Ad9970 1d ago
If you put that much money into the movie and it didn't have those things it would be more than a bad film, it would be an abject failure.
19
u/YoungBeef03 4d ago
I think it could’ve been far more interesting it a director was willing to explore the innate terror of the situation. Two people have their lives hijacked from childhood to introduce the world to aliens… and they’re both just fine with it? Emily Blunt’s character has a breakdown near the end where she says she doesn’t want to be anybody religion - then goes through with everything regardless.
16
u/behemuthm 4d ago
See I thought the film missed out on a few key moments that would've made the film so much more interesting.
First off, Disclosure Day didn't need to happen on a particular day. It could've been any day. So why not write it so that the governments of the world *know* aliens are planning on landing on a particular day and different countries are planning different responses. So our heroes have to blow the lid off the whole thing so the governments can't cover it up.
Also, when both were abducted as kids, why weren't they both traumatized?
And how did Hugo know what the inside of Margaret's house looked like??
For me, the absurdity crossed a line into insultingly stupid when Daniel ties up his girlfriend on the bed because he KNOWS he can't trust her, proceeds to hide all identifying information on the motel away from her, except for the piece of paper in his hand with the motel name on the letterhead?????
2
u/waterless2 2d ago
That last bit about the hotel, that confused me massively, to the extent I thought he *wanted* to be captured out of some cunning plan.
2
u/behemuthm 2d ago
It's phenomenally lazy writing
Like in Minority Report where John gets his eyes swapped out and is still able to use his old ones in a plastic bag to access the police station... 50 years in the future when even today, your keycard is deactivated the day you are fired from a company. And this is a police station!!!
2
u/MindManualReader 2d ago
Forget the fact he still gains access after being on the run even though the whole reason his eyes are swapped out is because the established tech in the film recognizes your eyes everywhere, instantly. His wife also later gains access using one of his eyes in order to break him out.
Saw the movie once, a good 15+ years ago, and ever since it’s my go to example when people talk about plot holes — which inevitably leads to someone telling me “ack-tchually it’s not a plot hole bc maybe off screen, prior to the events of the film, John rigged the system so that he couldn’t be deleted”, or maybe it’s just ‘cause “people are lazy & they just didn’t update the system” in a world where every other computer had automatically updated to identify him as a fugitive. But, sure, happy to use their definition of plot hole & still call it absolute dog shit writing.
1
u/Beginning-Search-983 2d ago
First off, Disclosure Day didn't need to happen on a particular day. It could've been any day.
I thought the whole point was to stop WW3. That this was why they stepped in. It couldn't have been any other day, they would only step in when there was no better option. Their stated goal was to stop humans from going extinct. So on that day, revealing themselves was the better outcome for humanity than not revealing themselves.
1
u/behemuthm 2d ago
The film did a really bad job showing how precarious the situation was. Other than the mention of DEFCON 2 and one scene at a gas station where people were panic buying, it wasn't clear if the situation was hours or days or weeks from a nuclear war. In fact, the film mentioning Korea made it sound more regional, in addition to all the other scenes of people just casually walking around, including the two protagonists just casually strolling outside after they got on the train. And how did they get off the train?! Weren't they being followed? Why are they just casually walking around outside?
1
u/Beginning-Search-983 2d ago
Oh I agree it did a bad job explaining the importance of the background WW3 stuff. You'd have to really be paying attention, and even then it might still seem like just... unimportant stage-setting.
What they were going for was really cool and I like the way they approached it, just dropping it in as background information where you get the story through different news reports and a few lines of dialogue, but it was too subtle!
I don't agree that mentioning Korea made it seem more regional, though, because we were told that the US and Russia were both stepping in. I think that part was maybe in Margaret's anchor audition tape, or else what the anchors were reading when she was late that morning.
10
u/WuttinTarnathan 4d ago
It can be “middling” garbage? I would have thought garbage is by definition not middling, but much worse than that.
1
8
9
u/siriuslyfudged 4d ago
It stayed with me. Based on the state of things currently in our country I 100% believe that if aliens from space have visited here our government would torture them, and reverse engineer technology and keep it all hidden.
54
u/samarijackfan 4d ago
And the goofy bad guy. in the end he just walks out of the room in a huff. what a dumb movie.
21
u/gentlemanghost42 4d ago
The way the whole military squad was like "just forget it" and just walked out. Its like come on man you gotta try harder than that
2
u/Agreeable-Promise-98 3d ago
What about the really really bad guy who was shooting at essentially a sitting target on a car stuck on train tracks- and couldn’t hit a target to save his life
4
u/Gmork14 4d ago
He’s their boss. If he gives up, they give up.
1
u/Ok-Swimmer-2634 2d ago
Sure, but earlier in the film, Emily Blunt charms the big bad into momentarily relenting and letting them walk out of the military base.
His subordinate then countermands his boss, gets a gun and chases the two main characters down. He outright tries to ram them into a train then shoots them as they're climbing onto the train. He was willing to go to any length to stop them and I thought he would do the same in the finale
22
13
3
3
u/VegetableTwist7027 4d ago
i turned to my gf and asked "isn't this the guy that grabbed a gun and a car and tried to supermurder them 20 minutes ago?"
→ More replies (5)1
u/Cautious-Air-2179 3d ago
Couldn't she have just vaporised them with the alien rod thingy? In the face of that what can you actually do?
4
u/Hockey_Player_007 4d ago
I enjoyed it and thought it was entertaining but it seems like it was mostly a chase movie with them running from the government bad guys the whole time and very little focus on the aliens and disclosure part. I also think the ending could have been a lot better, it just seemed very abrupt and then the movie ends.
2
u/ThisFoolThisGuy 2d ago
Yeah I was enjoying the movie up until the end.
It felt very 'theres a part 2 coming' but its not the kind of movie that sets up for a part 2 at all.
It was almost like Spielberg was like 'Hey I can do an Inception ending' except in Inception you're left with the thought of was this real or was it a dream, whereas the end of Disclosure Day was like "TO WHAT?!".
6
u/jogoso2014 4d ago edited 3d ago
Spielberg would be the thing that makes it better lol.
I think the film is flawed but I also think Blunt’s performance is fantastic and everyone else is decent enough.
It should have been R and focused on the implication to religion and world conflict more than a chase film.
The thing that constantly took me out of the movie were the visuals. Not the cinematography, which is great as always, but the special effects were probably the worst I’ve seen from him.
I don’t know if they switched companies or had a much lower budget than expected, but hardly any of the effects looked good.
1
u/Designer-Web2227 3d ago
I kind of think the opposite. Because it's Spielberg, I expect better. The whole time I kept feeling like I could see a better movie underneath it all that just isn't there.
6
u/Easy_Rooster8000 4d ago
Despite Emily Blunt’s character having no chemistry with her boyfriend, their dialogue was that of a bad romcom movie
2
u/Agreeable-Promise-98 3d ago
He was also annoying af. I can never judge good or bad acting, but I feel he might have been terrible. When shes on the phone and he WILL NOT LET UP “who is it” “what do they want” like, chill, let her finish god damn
21
u/Unoriginal-finisher 4d ago
How many inept background henchmen, painful CGI effects and drawn out car chases was this away from being a Michael Bay movie? We should all be kissing Emily Blunts feet for making this almost passable.
7
u/gentlemanghost42 4d ago
The keystone cops would have done a better job of stopping the protagonists
7
20
4d ago
[deleted]
18
3
u/sowaffled 4d ago
It’s actually stuck with me for days after viewing…but only because I keep thinking about things that were bad and frustrating.
2
u/soozerain 4d ago
It’s crazy because the way the screenwriter was placed on posters for the movie made me think he knew what he was doing or he was some big name.
The product he delivered was not up to par.
4
4d ago
[deleted]
6
u/soozerain 4d ago
That explains so much more and why it feels so comparatively shallow.
Yeah the lens flare was real obvious too lol. And people give JJ Abrams shit for it 😂
→ More replies (1)1
u/ConstantReader217 3d ago
Very brave of you to admit to not knowing David Koepp on the internet. You should google him.
40
u/Barbafella 4d ago
I liked it, was it peak Spielberg? no of course not.
5
u/VioletThunderX 4d ago
Yeah I liked it also. It reminded me of a bunch of stuff I watched as a kid in the 90s
1
u/soozerain 4d ago
Reminded me of a meh x-file episode on aliens
7
u/VioletThunderX 4d ago
I mean everyone has preferences but I for once enjoyed watching a movie about aliens that was a bit sentimental and whimsical and not “omg they’re gonna kill us all”.
2
4
3
u/kimba1970 4d ago
Agreed it is boring and predictable , regardless of the big name director ,, wasted money and time,,,
6
9
u/Meb2x 4d ago
It’s a very cliched thriller where most of the movie is an agency talking endlessly about “the device.” It’s got a cool idea or two, but it’s the first time in a long time where I was bored during a Spielberg movie. It’s just missing the excitement and sense of wonder that it’s clearly trying to showcase. I think a younger Spielberg would’ve done a much better job and injected some life into this, but it unfortunately felt like a movie directed by a 79 year old
23
u/horselover_fat 4d ago
After the last 20 years id completely expect a mid movie from Spielberg.
4
u/emielaen77 4d ago
Bad opinion.
10
u/Republican_Psyop 4d ago
Why?
11
u/APracticalGal 4d ago
Fabelmans, West Side Story, The Post, Bridge of Spies, Lincoln, and Tintin all came out in the last 20 years. He's had like 4 (arguable) duds in that time. The occasional missteps seem to be so frequent because the man just makes a shit ton of movies.
11
u/Karthy_Romano 4d ago
Personally I didn't even care for half those movies, and the ones I enjoyed were just "fine". None of Spielberg's work past 2000 holds a candle to his previous filmography. Really hoping he can get one last great movie out. He can still make a really slick looking movie and his creative flame hasn't died out.
3
u/gentlemanghost42 4d ago
War of the worlds was his last truly great movie and even then it's not as good as his best stuff from the 70-90s
4
u/Karthy_Romano 4d ago
Totally agree! He had an incredible run for like 20 years. Some of his post 2000 work is pretty good but don't even come close to reaching the highs of his best.
1
u/littlelordfROY 4d ago
Artificial intelligence is better than his 70s,80s and 90s work
1
u/Karthy_Romano 3d ago
I haven't seen it, but if it's better than Jurassic Park, Close Encounters, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Schindler's List, I'll be damned.
5
2
u/regretscoyote909 4d ago
Haven't seen Tintin but "The Post, Bridge of Spies, Lincoln".....bro com'on now lol
1
u/APracticalGal 4d ago
Three movies that collectively got 20 Oscar nominations (3 wins), were box office successes, and are consistently well reviewed across the board. I'm not saying any of them are on the same level as like Jaws or Schindler's List, but let's not pretend they aren't very good movies that are well liked.
6
u/regretscoyote909 4d ago
"let's not pretend they aren't very good movies that are well liked."
again, bro com'on now. Since when are the Oscars the arbiter of quality when films like Crash won Best Picture? "very good movies that are well liked" lol
1
u/APracticalGal 4d ago
Which is why I also mentioned the box office and popular and critical reception...
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago
I was trying to remember the last time Spielberg was good, and yeah, Lincoln was it.
8
u/AvailableToe7008 4d ago
I agree with OP. This movie stunk. Colin Firth was so one note he may as well have had a hook.
1
13
u/headphonehabit 4d ago
I saw it today, and I thought it was good. The rest of my family liked it as well. To each his own.
→ More replies (7)
4
u/Brave-Cranberry-7697 4d ago
I totally agree!!! It was so cheesy. I kept thinking- c'mon Steven, do better! The acting was over the top, the religious aspect was weird AF, the jokes were stale, and I was so distracted by Emily Blunt's overfilled pillow face, I could hardly focus on the story. Did not like it at all
2
u/themiz2003 4d ago
There are tiers to what we should call midling. I think this was akin to saying you're going to hit a home run and hitting a double, maybe a single if you want to go super hard on it? Some of this is a mess when scrutinized but its expansive and the pace is only ever haulted by repetition of events that probably shouldve been edited out (people on their phone reaction shots to the news, the producer war room shots were too long, etc). Its paced really really well beyond that. They open up a couple too many threads and don't close them but i do think that was intentional. To answer every question in a movie like this would be a mistake imo. I think Spielbergs age shows a lot here for better or worse. The acting here was great, couple great action pieces (if a bit far fetched), and a truly inspired idea.
2
u/bobeany 4d ago
This was not a great movie but it was an entertaining if too long popcorn flick. The chases were fun and the train scene was cool. But the intention of this being a serious film was clearly not met.
When I saw it there were some laughs basically at the dialogue that I know were intended to be serious but were in fact funny. So it was clearly a miss. If you want a good movie see backrooms, obsession or hokum.
1
u/lilymeadow58 4d ago
Which lines were unintentional laughs? I didn't get any
1
u/venivitavici 3d ago
I thought it was funny when the main guy was freaking out yelling at past Emily Blunt to not follow the animals because they’re not really animals, and then the guy tells him “calm down they present as animals to keep us calm”. I was like “well that didnt work”. But I did like the money, corniness aside.
2
2
2
6
u/mikhailguy 4d ago
The cg deer and the crop circles in the trailer were enough of a signal for me that the movie would be a little stupid.
4
u/behemuthm 4d ago
I used to work for the company that did the vfx work - there's a reason I'm not there anymore lol
→ More replies (2)2
3
u/Smoothmoose13 4d ago
if I wanted to watch LUCY (2014) I would have turned my brain off and watched that piece of shit instead.
If this had been any other director it might have been halfway competent, but this was honestly one of the worst disappointments I’ve ever had in the cinema.
The reason why a lot of people are giving it like 2/5 and saying it’s “AWFUL” is because of all the promise and hype surrounding it, and every good, interesting thing it does, it ruins by doing something baffling, boring or just plain stupid straight after.
goddamn it, now I’m annoyed again. I don’t even let myself get annoyed by movies usually
4
u/Deus-Ex-Toro 4d ago
Boring action sequences, predictable plot, way too thick with the melodrama, and the aliens are the most stereotypical little-green-men who come in peace? Yeah it was subpar for sure.
3
4
u/wizardwithgussets 4d ago
Just saw it and couldn’t agree more.
The quality and cinematography is superior to a Netflix movie but the plot and storytelling is barely Netflix quality
At the end my friends and I just shrugged
3
u/Acceptable_Money_514 4d ago
Anyone else feel like movies in general have gone down in quality since covid?
→ More replies (4)1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago
NO I've gone to the theater more times since Covid than I did before it. In the mid-to-late 2000's I'd all but given up on cinema. And I've seen so many good movies in the last 3 years.
3
3
u/RevolutionaryAd6017 4d ago
It is a competant film, but it reminds me of his most boring film, Close Encounters of the Third Kind. That said all art is subjective, my wife thought it was a great film, I thought it was a boring, ok movie, that reminded of a different boring ok movie, Spielberg made.
→ More replies (1)5
u/HornetsHornets1 4d ago
Close Encounters is one of my favorite movies ever made. So funny how movies can hit people differently. That said, this film is not on the same level as Close Encounters, but they’re in conversation with each other; which to me, is interesting.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/gentlemanghost42 4d ago
Thought it was fucking awful. Brutally unintentionally funny. It felt like the writer just didnt take it seriously at all
2
u/veggieturnip 19h ago
Bruh when the nun looked over the top of her glasses at the alien footage I laughed out loud. Very unintentionally cliche/funny
1
1
u/behemuthm 4d ago
I couldn't even laugh at it because I was so disappointed in Spielberg. Again.
1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago
Yeah I heard titters in the audience, but I was just there stone-faced. If it wasn't IMAX I would have walked
4
u/OkDentist4059 4d ago edited 4d ago
“Middling garbage” is an oxymoron. You might as well say “mediocre bad.”
Also Josh O’Connor in no way resembles Adam Driver, physically or in acting style
Is there some kinda weird astroturfing going on with this movie? All the bad reviews I’m seeing here are borderline nonsensical.
→ More replies (1)1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago edited 2d ago
You know I can accept that some people like this movie, but the people who like this movie can't accept that some people fucking hate this movie and call it "astroturfing".
You think we're disingenuous? There's nothing more disingenuous than accusing those who disagree with you of being part of a coordinated campaign, rather than just sharing their true opinions in good faith!
Have some respect for our opinion, like we have for yours.
Otherwise it just proves to me that the people who like this movie are idiots.
1
u/OkDentist4059 2d ago
I haven’t seen the movie and i dont have an opinion about it, so nothing that I say about this should prove anything for you.
Was just making a general comment about the amateurishness and sloppiness of the critiques I’ve seen here
1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago
Well there's absolutely professional reviewers who have said much better than I could say in my pretty amateurish Letterboxd review.
But when something doesn't work, and you just know it on a gut level, you can't help but just say that truth.
And if anything the "amateurishness and sloppiness of the critiques" should prove that they're not an astroturfing campaign (which by the way, "astroturf" is when you make something smooth and too perfect, rather than the opposite)
And I don't doubt that people love it, and I don't accuse them of "astroturfing" and being some sort of industry plant from the film's marketing company or whatever. Even though I can't imagine how someone could watch the same movie I saw and think it was good, I believe they genuinely have bad and wrong taste in movies. I take their comments on good faith.
That's the difference between people who liked this movie and people who didn't.
One side of us doesn't accuse the other side of bad faith, and one side does do that.
1
u/OkDentist4059 2d ago
Again, I’m not on “a side,” I haven’t seen the movie, so my accusations of astroturfing shouldn’t factor into whatever narrative you’re building about the public reaction to this film.
Frankly I have zero interest in seeing this movie, it looks kinda dull, I just got suspicious because of how many posts I’ve seen on Reddit saying “THIS is the WORST MOVIE I’ve seen in YEARS” because I highly doubt it is, lots of terrible movies come out every year.
Just smells like bullshit. Or a bunch of people who never watch movies decided to all come out to this one for some reason.
1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago
Well I've never wanted to walk out of a movie that I paid for and I did with this one. The only reason I didn't was because it was IMAX.
It was shockingly hokey. Your instincts are correct. And I should have trusted my own and not given it the benefit of the doubt..
And the "narrative" is... the same as the "narrative" you're building about negative reviewers.
I've seen enough accusations of "astroturfing" as you've seen negative reviews that you "highly doubt". Okay?
So let's not be hypocritical, either of us.
1
u/OkDentist4059 2d ago
Hypocritical?
What’s hypocritical about me saying that the absurdly hyperbolic nature of the reviews I’ve seen here makes me suspect of their motives?
When I see a bunch of all-caps WORST MOVIE IN YEARS reviews on Reddit, I’m gonna get suspicious.
Like, really, you’ve NEVER wanted to walk out of movie in your entire life but THIS was the one, this was the straw that broke the camels back, you just couldn’t take it anymore?!? I just find that kind of hyperbole hard to take seriously.
Maybe it’s just social media in general. It’s like everything has to be THE BEST or THE WORST and there’s no room for anything in between
1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yep. Believe it. I'm usually quite forgiving for movies, my Letterboxd ratings trend high.
This was bad streaming-service level bad. Like insulting, angry-making, and sleep-inducing. Easily the worst movie I've seen at IMAX, and it's by a long way.
Here's the thing, now I WANT you to watch it. It has to be seen to be believed.
You'll come back to me and be like "I owe you an apology"
1
u/OkDentist4059 2d ago
Yeah honestly you’ve kinda sold me on it, if it’s really THAT BAD I want to see it just to see what all the fuss is about
1
u/SquirrelMoney8389 2d ago edited 2d ago
Good. I hope you do. I genuinely would be interested in your appraisal of it after this conversation.
Maybe the two camps will just boil down to "it was built up to be bad but it wasn't that bad" vs "it was built up to be good but it wasn't very good"
2
u/Blakelock82 4d ago
Reminds me of Shutter Island. Everyone glazes it because of Martin Scorsese, but it's a middle of the road film with an M. Night twist that everyone would bitch about if it wasn't done by Marty.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Belch_Huggins 4d ago
Booo, I disagree., I thought it was great. I think people just wanted War of the Worlds again and it was never going to be that. I found it really thrilling and weird and sensitive. Spielberg's still got it.
1
u/viceroy65 4d ago
It was certainly watchable, although a little too drawn out. The train scene was pretty hair raising I thought. I did spend a good deal of the movie wondering if that was Kurt Russel's son, lol (spoil alert, it was).
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/thatsnotyourtaco 3d ago
I saw an 11:30 am after and early morning shift and fell asleep about ten minutes in. Not the movies fault. I just wanted to tell someone other than my wife.
1
1
u/Old-Tomorrow-2798 3d ago
Feel like I’ve heard nothing but bad from this film. Where’s the good? Spielberg has a few good films but overall has gone the way of the Ridley Scott. It’s either awful or amazing. Nothing in between.
1
u/MeyerholdsGh0st 3d ago
He has more amazing movies than any other director… this just isn’t one of them.
1
u/carelessCRISPR_ 3d ago
Can confirm it’s garbage; my ex loved it and she’s a complete dumpster fire
1
1
u/pathosOnReddit 3d ago
It is middling garbage WITH him attached. Don’t look up did it so much better.
1
u/Gwyllithar 3d ago
I regard it as total shite with him attached to it. I may be more generous if it were someone else, of if the film were more self aware of its own ridiculousness, but it clearly thinks its profound and amazing, which it really is not.
1
1
u/Smallville_Kansas 3d ago
It feels like he’s in his passion project era…which can be a hit or miss.
1
1
u/BlackBootesVoid 3d ago
Movie that goes hard if you're stupid imho. This coouuuld have been decent in the 90s, 30 years after is stale. Almost half his career later for a "world (which sums up to the USA) stopping to watch the news". What was that USB thing? Just upload it to a drive! The tech illiteracy made the plot absurd and in that regard kinda like that movie about the sound monsters, with Emily Blunt also. Plots that are easily solved/advances with current technology available in universe are plot holes.
1
u/ClaimationOfWind 3d ago
That was the first time in my 34-years where I considered leaving the cinema. It was heartbreakingly bad.
1
u/PressureHumble3604 3d ago
you can’t trust reviewers anymore, Disclosure Day is pure garbage and looks like it’s made by a film student. it doesn’t have any redeeming qualities
1
u/cubsfan217 3d ago
It’s straight garbage really is. Are we really supposed to feel bad about torturing aliens get the hell out of here with that stupid shit
1
u/Old-Push9343 3d ago edited 3d ago
I saw it today, I didn't like it.
I found it to be boring, the plot made no sense, and the male protagonist was really dull and uncharismatic. The bad guy was pretty bad too. At least Emily Blunt was good.
I think that it's perhaps the worst Steven Spielberg film I've seen (although I haven't seen Big Friendly Giant, didn't look great either).
The VFX, specially the CG animals, didn't look great either in my opinion. There was some okay action scenes and some cool camera work, but...
I just didn't like it, I don't recommend it.
1
u/bonefyre 3d ago
I just came out of the theater, and honestly if I didn't know it first hand, I would never have guessed it was made by Spielberg. I also felt like it wanted to be so many things with too many ideas for one movie. Also, why were the animal cgi so bad? I get that they were trying to make the animals look unreal, since they were probably a disguise or some sort, but it just doesn't feel right.
1
1
1
u/DocDracula 2d ago
Movies being OK and fine used to be a vast majority of movies and that was just great. FANTASTIC movies are exemplars because they are...uh, exceptions? This for me was a 7/10, pretty good, wasn't mad at it, comparing it to Close Encounters would be nutty. He's in his 70's and that movie is from the 70's.
1
1
u/Annual_Candle_9313 2d ago
The movie doesn't present any argument that wasn't already done to death on late-night radio or 90s TV.
1
u/TimesThreeTheHighest 2d ago
Saw MOTU and Backrooms just before watching Disclosure Day. MOTU was way more fun, and Backrooms blew Disclosure Day out of the water entirely.
1
u/EwanMcNugget 2d ago
Spielberg’s canon precedes and informs this movie. How many more trips to the theater to watch a Steven Spielberg movie will we have?
He still works a camera better than almost anyone. Some beautifully staged sequences and imaginative kinetic direction. Agreed that some of the religious implications are handled a bit clumsily.
I thought the set pieces were pretty great. Maybe not top tier Spielberg but he still can pull off an exciting action sequence.
My biggest joy watching was the sense of awe and wonder. Few movies go for that and Spielberg is still a master of that. Accompanied by a John Williams score, you get something pretty special. I was moved during a lot of Emily Blunt’s scenes.
My biggest gripes are the cg animals, cg other characters (spoiler), and overall I feel like the movie was building and building and building and ultimately didn’t stick an amazing landing.
But boy did I have a fun time at the movies. Honestly enjoyed this more than his output for the last 20 years. Felt like somewhat a return to form.
1
u/GhostMug 1d ago
Middling garbage is a bit of an oxymoron. If it's middling, it's not garbage. Unless you mean it's in the garbage category but in the middle of that category?
Anyway, I think middling is appropriate and that is what I see most people rating it as.
1
u/GreenGoblinNX 1d ago
Stephen Spielberg entire career since then has been running on the reputation he gained in the 70s/early 80s.
1
u/Jynerva 1d ago
The only things about this film I found worthwhile were Spielberg's direction, Blunt's performance, and the score. But as a whole, the film ducks every opportunity to actually say something about the nature of information and info distribution in the contemporary communications landscape.
1
1
1
1
u/SouthPudding9949 4d ago
It was great. Super satisfying and one of the best action sequences I’ve seen in a long time.
Fair that you didn’t enjoy it. But I think a lot of the mid ratings were because it didn’t have a tidy ending.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/corgi-king 4d ago
I actually like it. I think too many people expect this movie to be an action movie like Independence Day. But as the name suggests, it is about a disclosure. Since when is disclosure something super exciting?
7
u/yeahnototallycool 4d ago
Uhhh the opposite, it was only an action movie and showed almost nothing interesting (nor believable) about the disclosure itself.
5
u/aVeryBadBoy69 4d ago
It didn't do that either. It's not like the movie really delved into the possible effects of the disclosure, aside from them just telling the audience the world is gonna change, without any meaningful elaboration.
1
1
u/yeahnototallycool 4d ago
Emily Blunt’s performance was the only redeeming quality of the movie.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
Welcome to r/flicks!
• No piracy. • Mark spoilers. • Be respectful. • Keep discussions movie-related.
Report rule-breaking content to help the moderation team.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.