Movies

mufasa....

spoilers if you're avoiding those things until you see it:
sigh. this would have been a better movie without any of the rafiki/kiara/timon & pumbaa storyteller and meta stuff. cutting away to this garbage every 15 minutes or whatever just takes you out of any immersion you might have had and is really just unnecessary. even with that, it's a let down of a movie (not that i had high hopes going in). the songs are not catchy or good. the movie has a LOT of running away from things. the story does give some additional heft to scar's ultimate betrayal in the original movie (both in story and visually), which is probably it's biggest accomplishment. but you're probably not missing much by not seeing it unless you really want to.
 
Maybe it leads to new thriller/action movies that are all a derivative of Carry-On. Carry-On at a mall. Carry-On at a hotel. Carry-On on a train. Carry-On on a cruise ship.
What happens when we're only getting derivative works based on derivative works? I feel like Carry-On was derivative of Die Hard and probably some Steven Segal movie plot that I've forgotten about. So the question is if down the rabbit hole it gets worse then Segal or better? In fact I propose using Segal as our new measurement for each film that follows this trend.
 
Back
Top