Read Mixed User Reviews for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

4

wymanOct 26, 2014

This movie really should've been good, but I think the filmmakers got caught up in making oscar-bait as opposed to making an actually good movie. Let's start off with the acting: The acting is great, not phenomenal, but definitely deservingThis movie really should've been good, but I think the filmmakers got caught up in making oscar-bait as opposed to making an actually good movie. Let's start off with the acting: The acting is great, not phenomenal, but definitely deserving of some Oscar nominations. Edward Norton kills it, and gives the best performance in the film, but that shouldn't detract from the other performances. Keaton, Stone, Watts, Galifianakis; all of them are great. The writing is also good, but again, it's not phenomenal. It touches on many different aspects of Broadway, and show business in general, but at times seems corny and unrealistic. Overall, however, the writing is effective, and one of the better aspects of the film.

Now, the bad part. The shtick of the film is that it is all in one continuous shot. I assume this is because it is a story about a play, and thus this is to give it a play-like feel. However, this ends up making the film messy, and entirely distracts us from what is going on. There are tons of extreme close-ups that after a while get boring and repetitive. We feel like we're almost trapped in this theater, with all these characters, and like we can't escape. Yes, the shots are cool, but they do nothing to progress the story. Thus, they only exist so that critics can rave about the, "Unique, beautiful cinematography." It is unique, yes, but does that mean it is good? As they say, "...your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should." If you made a film that was shot entirely using the color Brown, it would be unique, but nothing about that would make it a good film.

It isn't boring, and it isn't awful. However, it is over-hyped and over-done. It is well acted and written, but doesn't have any more substance than other films that consistently get looked over come oscar season; honestly, the film Bad Words has just as good of writing and acting as this, and I can guarantee you it will earn approximately zero Oscar nominations. Don't even get me started on the ending, where the film completely could have redeemed itself, only to flush that opportunity down the toilet in exchange for an ending that, while UNIQUE, entirely doesn't answer the questions proposed throughout the film.… Expand

19 of 40 users found this helpful1921

All this user's reviews

4

crankyermaMay 3, 2018

I honestly couldn't sit through this. It was insufferable. From what I saw, I can sum up what it is and why it did well during awards season in one sentence: "Actory actors acting as actors acting actory."

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

CalibMcBoltsMay 30, 2016

Technically brilliant, but lacks an interesting/flesh-and-blood story to keep the movie structured. Birdman is a thrilling leap forward for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, and it is an ambitious technical showcase but aside from that itTechnically brilliant, but lacks an interesting/flesh-and-blood story to keep the movie structured. Birdman is a thrilling leap forward for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, and it is an ambitious technical showcase but aside from that it has very little to offer. While I personally do not believe this film should have won "Best Picture", it is still a fine film due to incredibly strong and personal performances from both Keaton and Norton. It does get a little impressed with itself at times, and has about ten different endings before concluding on a ambiguous note.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

Eilidh2Nov 21, 2014

An over-long and annoying exercise in (sort of) magical realism. Michael Keaton is fine in the title role and goes a long way towards redeeming the project. But Edward Norton and Emma Stone's aggravatingly over-the-top performances areAn over-long and annoying exercise in (sort of) magical realism. Michael Keaton is fine in the title role and goes a long way towards redeeming the project. But Edward Norton and Emma Stone's aggravatingly over-the-top performances are exhausting to watch. The conceit of the 'single take' is claustrophic and ultimately pointless.

I had been looking forward to this one. Very disappointing.… Expand

8 of 10 users found this helpful82

All this user's reviews

5

dennismachJan 19, 2015

Such a very self-indulgent movie. More about "the actor" and the acting profession than a watchable movie. As a side note, mental illnes of the magnitude shown in the moive typically on-sets at age 20 - 30, and by age 50 - 60, the person isSuch a very self-indulgent movie. More about "the actor" and the acting profession than a watchable movie. As a side note, mental illnes of the magnitude shown in the moive typically on-sets at age 20 - 30, and by age 50 - 60, the person is well medicated or at least not surprised by its onset. I'll pass.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

4

rpmMar 16, 2015

I like Keaton as an actor. Magic Realism is a genre I enjoy. I like jazz music. I've only seen one Broadway play (Pippin) and consider it one of the highlights of my life.

That should add up to me really loving this film right? OhI like Keaton as an actor. Magic Realism is a genre I enjoy. I like jazz music. I've only seen one Broadway play (Pippin) and consider it one of the highlights of my life.

That should add up to me really loving this film right?

Oh well...I guess the whole does not equal the sum of its parts in this case.

Keaton mumbles his way through this film, even when on stage in a play (who mumbles line in a play?). The Magic Realism elements are interesting but seem mostly out of place amongst the grunge of backstage Broadway. The jazzy drum soundtrack didn't so much support the film as it distracted from the film. The play within the film was so briefly shown and so stunted as a plot element that it seemed to me much ado about nothing.

I didn't hate the film but after having read so many positive reviews from critics I'd say I was immensely disappointed. The critic I now most agree with on this film is Rex Reed, except he thought Keaton's performance was a bright note and I wouldn't even give him that.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

ScarziFeb 27, 2015

There was a couple good moments in this movie but it was just bad. This is just one of those movies that is hyped into the sky that just doesn't deliver. I am sure a lot of people in the movie/theatre industry can relate to and is the soleThere was a couple good moments in this movie but it was just bad. This is just one of those movies that is hyped into the sky that just doesn't deliver. I am sure a lot of people in the movie/theatre industry can relate to and is the sole reason its gotten so much hype. At most its a 6.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

swammerdamFeb 19, 2015

Great acting from Michael Keaton but a flat scenario which make a long film.
An average movie about critics and acting industries and only critics will love it.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

alexnexusJan 16, 2015

If Ego were a human been, it would have casted, co-written and directed this movie long, long, long time ago..... -having Pretentious as its producer.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

4

markmunroJan 9, 2015

i will start by saying i didn't particularly enjoy this film, i will agree with what many others have said and that it was a good idea and had some hugely interesting themes and sub-plots running throughout, sadly i just found it long,i will start by saying i didn't particularly enjoy this film, i will agree with what many others have said and that it was a good idea and had some hugely interesting themes and sub-plots running throughout, sadly i just found it long, ponderous and pretentious, i got how the lead character was portraying how we are all trying to find our place in the world and how he was scared he was going to be forgotten after he was gone and I also got how the film was about the lead character's personal battles vs schizophrenia and also on how to be a success in hollywood (make something 'meaningful' vs selling-out and also a comment of what these two things actually mean and whether or not these things are actually nonsense when compared to real-life success in being a man, being a good father, husband etc), it was also a comment on big hollywood blockbusters vs real art whilst also simultaneously mocking the over-pretentious nature of theatre, all very clever, it was just delivered in an overly-long and slow manner, i also hated the inane freestyle jazz drumming which constantly repeated itself throughout and the single shot camera trickery did my head in too, this though is just my opinion, if you don't agree fair enough, i don't care.… Expand

8 of 11 users found this helpful83

All this user's reviews

5

21gramsJan 17, 2015

This movie is so overrated, I almost cannot believe it got so many nominations for oscars. The movie has nothing to offer apart Michael Keaton. It's just mediocre movie about mediocre theater play. Don't know why, but critics buy thisThis movie is so overrated, I almost cannot believe it got so many nominations for oscars. The movie has nothing to offer apart Michael Keaton. It's just mediocre movie about mediocre theater play. Don't know why, but critics buy this pseudo-innovative weirdness as a pure art, but it's just lots of bull*** squeezed into one movie.… Expand

5 of 7 users found this helpful52

All this user's reviews

6

JamesLNov 9, 2014

I have seen everyone of the director's films and this just does not live up to the hype. The acting is great but I cannot tell you why it is so highly rate or what the point of the film was. The obvious point was for Keaton be a successfulI have seen everyone of the director's films and this just does not live up to the hype. The acting is great but I cannot tell you why it is so highly rate or what the point of the film was. The obvious point was for Keaton be a successful actor on the stage but there are numerous other currents running through the film. Most of them are left unexplored and the illusory effects of Keaton losing his clarity only come to play near the end.. The film left me speechless because it is so overrated. It is this year's "Inside Llewellyn Davis".… Expand

10 of 15 users found this helpful105

All this user's reviews

6

kman5473Mar 19, 2017

One of the most overrated movies by far. The script is solid, the acting is fairly good throughout, but the plot as whole has me scratching my head the whole time, asking the question, "Why am I watching this?"

It delivers on all the themesOne of the most overrated movies by far. The script is solid, the acting is fairly good throughout, but the plot as whole has me scratching my head the whole time, asking the question, "Why am I watching this?"

It delivers on all the themes its going after, and uses a technique that I admire for the effort put into it. But I just can't get passed how rotten with pretentiousness this entire film is. There's no redeemable character, and there is no heart or soul in this film. We have an empty shell of a man, surrounded by equally hollow people, all trying to desperately to grasp at the meaning of their own existence with very little payoff, and resolution that is completely predictable as it is ludicrous. From the perspective of someone that works in entertainment, I get it. But for everyone else--for all the good 'ol fashioned families out there, I couldn't get past this thought: "Who the **** cares?"

This is the ultimate Hollywood-sucking-its-own movie I have ever seen, and it really wasn't that entertaining to watch. There are so many other stories that are so much more important to watch, and so much better out there. I get it--this flick is going after to depicting the themes of melancholy (which is like "The Ultimate" theme in art to attempt to depict)--but screw this movie.

I regret watching it, to be perfectly frank.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

analogkid280Nov 2, 2014

I left the theater not really knowing if I liked this movie or not. I still do not even know. I might have to think about it some more. One thing I did like is seeking Keaton! I miss the days when he was an A list actor. Now we just have thisI left the theater not really knowing if I liked this movie or not. I still do not even know. I might have to think about it some more. One thing I did like is seeking Keaton! I miss the days when he was an A list actor. Now we just have this semi-parody of a fictional version of him. The long shots were cool. The annoying pressure building non stop drama was not cool. Dang, I almost thought I liked this movie for a minute.… Expand

7 of 11 users found this helpful74

All this user's reviews

4

argaliteNov 21, 2014

What a piece of crap. The characters are miserable losers that you do not want to know. It gets good reviews because it is about critics and actors. Lame and stupid, with no redeeming qualities.

10 of 16 users found this helpful106

All this user's reviews

6

The__ShowmanFeb 17, 2015

Birdman or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance is an American Black Comedy directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu. This movie is highly appreciative for it camera work and editing. Emmanuel Lubezki (Cinematographer), Douglas Crise andBirdman or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance is an American Black Comedy directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu. This movie is highly appreciative for it camera work and editing. Emmanuel Lubezki (Cinematographer), Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrione (Editors) deserves a big round of applause for most intensive care they took for this film as the whole movie looks like a single cut. This style of single-cut making is highly comparable to Alfred Hitchcock's 'Rope' which is an epic dramatic thriller. Although this movie 'Birdman' is touted to be a Black Comedy, it lacks that F*****g comedy because it is a drama based on a drama and what we hear most of the time is 'F**K'. You will get to know the theme of the movie at the pre-climax and it is hard for a common audience to sit 100 minutes listening to the word F**K and try to understand its meaning metaphorically. This story is about an impatient orthodox director cum actor who is trying to make a 60 year old miserable drama to reach this generation audience and believes that, it will redeem his career. Michael Keaton did a wonderful job and he is the heart and soul of this movie. But the misery is his fight with his own alternative character who is hampering him to be some other who the world really likes. This melodrama is throughout the movie and for a normal cine-goer, it is a painful watch. Do watch this movie if you want to really know how cinematography and editing looks like and if you are ardent fan of Micheal Keaton. Else forget it.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

gdog243Jan 15, 2015

I don't understand the love this movie is getting. It seems to be riding on a gimmick of shooting it on one shot, but I found it nauseating and just ok. Also, the score might be one of the most annoying scores I've heard in film in a long time.

8 of 14 users found this helpful86

All this user's reviews

5

zouz123Jan 26, 2015

I can't say it's awful and can't say it's excellent. This is is an overrated average movie that is completely forgettable. This is the type of movie that you watch once, and only once, and you may even think that it would've been better ifI can't say it's awful and can't say it's excellent. This is is an overrated average movie that is completely forgettable. This is the type of movie that you watch once, and only once, and you may even think that it would've been better if you didn't see it at all. The life of a demented Broadway actor, who gives a damn. Was completely bored and uninterested throughout the whole movie.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

4

CalimackDec 12, 2014

What a badly paced and ill-conceived "black" comedy. Movie was too long and full of pretentious bits of "knowledge" that were "dropped" on our heads. Rather watch Todd Solondz films that don't take themselves seriously, the first step inWhat a badly paced and ill-conceived "black" comedy. Movie was too long and full of pretentious bits of "knowledge" that were "dropped" on our heads. Rather watch Todd Solondz films that don't take themselves seriously, the first step in actually being a "comedy."

Don't buy into the Oscar hype machine on this. This movie will be forgotten much like Michael Keaton's career.… Expand

6 of 12 users found this helpful66

All this user's reviews

6

tonysopranozDec 23, 2014

this movie has very unlikeable, stupid, weird, creepy, annoying, depressing, and pretentious characters. this was probably intentional, but it makes watching the movie difficult because its very uncomfortable. you will want to punch everythis movie has very unlikeable, stupid, weird, creepy, annoying, depressing, and pretentious characters. this was probably intentional, but it makes watching the movie difficult because its very uncomfortable. you will want to punch every main character in the face because they deserve it. sometimes its hard to tell if the movie is encouraging this kind of terrible behaviour, or if it is just doing these characters very well as a way of satirizing it. if it is taken satirically, the movie goes down a lot smoother, but sometimes it seems like the movie actually wants you to take these characters seriously, which is very frustrating because they are all idiots....

however, somehow, the movie feels high quality and made me think. it wasn't a very comfortable or enjoyable experience, but it did get my mind working in ways it normally doesn't work, which was nice. so i give it a 6/10.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

5

BshopDec 7, 2014

Hard to watch. Maybe I'm not as entertained by theater, but this movie seemed to blend the fantasy with reality.
Keaton plays a mixed up character, with a host of equally messed up family/co-stars on the stage.
In the end, some surprises IHard to watch. Maybe I'm not as entertained by theater, but this movie seemed to blend the fantasy with reality.
Keaton plays a mixed up character, with a host of equally messed up family/co-stars on the stage.
In the end, some surprises I was not expecting, but kinda hard to watch and stay entertained.
Then again, I've never really like "theater-type" productions, so maybe a little biased.
In summary, see it if you like theater or the draw of "Broadway" production. Otherwise, wait for the rental to see it, if at all.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

DavidV293Mar 2, 2015

It was okay. Is not the type of movie that you could watch again over and over. But it's an average comedy with great Performances by Michael Keaton And Ed Norton. Emma Stone also did a great job

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

JonDocJan 27, 2015

This one trick pony of a movie might appeal to self-referential AKtors or theatre luvvies but most normal people will find this a bit of a chore. It feels like a play (no cuts, see?) and had a few fleeting moments of interest but why theyThis one trick pony of a movie might appeal to self-referential AKtors or theatre luvvies but most normal people will find this a bit of a chore. It feels like a play (no cuts, see?) and had a few fleeting moments of interest but why they hell couldn't they hire a proper screen writer and editor?… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

5

SkulbMar 18, 2015

Some mildly interesting performances raise a forgettable affair from abysmal to mediocre. Some cheap symbolism and some even cheaper pop psychology apparently has critics raving like a flock of seagulls during mating time. Stupid idiot that ISome mildly interesting performances raise a forgettable affair from abysmal to mediocre. Some cheap symbolism and some even cheaper pop psychology apparently has critics raving like a flock of seagulls during mating time. Stupid idiot that I am I assumed that this was because the annual intelligent Hollywood movie had been released. But as it happened all the racket was in aid of a tedious navel gazing exercise of dubious quality. But then it`s always one or the other with Hollywood`s "intellectual" movies apparently.

Someone more intelligent than I, as well as all the people engaged in the production of Birdman, once said that a tragedy displays the misfortunes of man while a comedy displays the misfortunes of the individual. The only funny thing about Birdman then was me and the other silly sods who were fooled into watching it by all the hype. And I suppose the only tragedy was the other silly sods who watched it and liked it because they imagine it to be witty and intelligent. It is neither. Avoid with fingers in ears to drown out the noise and while loudly singing "doodah doodah!" to make doubly sure you don`t get hypnotized by critics into watching it.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

hugoferreiraAug 29, 2018

I fail to see the brilliance that everybody talks about in this film. It's weird, not fun and difficult to follow. Michael's performance is worthy and competent and director you can fell the powerful hand of Inarritu here, but in end kindaI fail to see the brilliance that everybody talks about in this film. It's weird, not fun and difficult to follow. Michael's performance is worthy and competent and director you can fell the powerful hand of Inarritu here, but in end kinda fells that it fell a bit short. Still worthy of a look and actually enjoyable.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

BikerjamesOct 27, 2014

Loved the acting, loved the look and style of the film. The movie just didn't click with me. The film is filled with pretentious and unlikeable whiny drama queens and I had nobody to root for. I also think it's hard for me to relate toLoved the acting, loved the look and style of the film. The movie just didn't click with me. The film is filled with pretentious and unlikeable whiny drama queens and I had nobody to root for. I also think it's hard for me to relate to people that can't behave professionally and simply come to work and do their jobs. As good as the camera work is, it will occasionally distract you because you will constantly wonder how they filmed some of the shots. I did love how Keaton and Norton literally and figuratively exposed themselves and thought they both did a great job. I also loved Andrea Riseborough as the daughter fresh out of rehab. But in the end the film does not have the repeatability factor - I have no desire to see it twice due to the unlikeable characters.… Expand

4 of 15 users found this helpful411

All this user's reviews

5

tvnewsguidoJan 11, 2015

It's a movie about neurotic actors.

If you think you would enjoy spending two hours with a neurotic actor - you should enjoy this film. I found every "twist" predictable which was annoying. The performances are great but the fact thatIt's a movie about neurotic actors.

If you think you would enjoy spending two hours with a neurotic actor - you should enjoy this film.

I found every "twist" predictable which was annoying. The performances are great but the fact that they are so convincing as neurotic actors means you really have to enjoy that world to enjoy the film.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

5

AxeTFeb 9, 2015

Yet another obscenely over-rated film by jackass critics. Well acted yes. Very hard to do with the single long take camera moves. Technically very impressive. A good immersive movie with strong story that works fully on an audience? NotYet another obscenely over-rated film by jackass critics. Well acted yes. Very hard to do with the single long take camera moves. Technically very impressive. A good immersive movie with strong story that works fully on an audience? Not even. The director likes to think of himself as a challenging filmmaker, but really it's more about being pretentious and kissing the ass of a stuffy New York Broadway live theatre intelligentsia to get attention which it sure got. To make a movie with a strong narrative that moves viewers along is far harder. I like Michael Keaton and he's very good in a role made for him, but sorry this is not great. Watch now as the sheep of the Academy vote for it anyway.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

6

netflicDec 14, 2014

This movie is about an actor who used to be famous playing an iconic super-hero and now, many years after, is trying to prove himself as an actor, a director, a father, etc. All the action happens inside a small and worn-out Broadway theater.This movie is about an actor who used to be famous playing an iconic super-hero and now, many years after, is trying to prove himself as an actor, a director, a father, etc. All the action happens inside a small and worn-out Broadway theater.
The movie is stylish, it is trendy, I would say, sexy and jazzy but black comedy is definitely not my genre.
Great performances, sound track and cinematography. But overall, too crazy for me. Critics love this movie. I guess they think schizophrenia is a good thing...… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

5

ExistentialmanNov 26, 2014

While the film is interesting throughout, in end the whole is considerably less than the sum of the parts. I was never bored, but my feelings about all of the characters, with no exceptions, were left unresolved. I wanted more and I wasWhile the film is interesting throughout, in end the whole is considerably less than the sum of the parts. I was never bored, but my feelings about all of the characters, with no exceptions, were left unresolved. I wanted more and I was left feeling that the ending was really a cop-out, given the complexity of everything that led up to it. I'm trying avoid spoilers here. The ending was foreshadowed so often and in so many ways that when it finally happens my reaction was, "So what?" While all great films foreshadow the conclusion in one way or another, the best films surprise you as well. This one didn't so I was left feeling empty. The filmmaking technique is great, but the conclusion of the story needed to be a lot better to justify the "one continuous take" style employed here.… Expand

1 of 15 users found this helpful114

All this user's reviews

5

ClariseSamuelsMay 28, 2015

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences must have a soft spot for films that are about their own industry, for how else do you explain that Birdman snatched up the highest honors at the Oscars this year? The cast is filled withThe Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences must have a soft spot for films that are about their own industry, for how else do you explain that Birdman snatched up the highest honors at the Oscars this year? The cast is filled with veteran actors whose reputation precedes them—Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Andrea Riseborough, Edward Norton, Naomi Watts and Zach Galifianakis are the featured players, and they are all well-known stars. Keaton plays an actor whose heyday is long over. It has been over twenty years since he was famous for being a comic book character named Birdman. Now determined to make a comeback as a serious actor, Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) has written, produced and is starring in his own Broadway play, based on a short story by Raymond Carver, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.”

Broadway is the dream destination for many a serious actor, but director/writer Alejandro Inarritu sees the seedy side of the glamour. The backstage fitting rooms are cluttered, dark, and depressing. Actors are all psychologically damaged. They are obsessed with sexuality; they are angry and frustrated; and they have broken families and broken lives. Riggan himself is functional but psychotic—he thinks he has superpowers, he has auditory hallucinations where he hears the voice of Birdman, his old character, who is constantly berating him. And most dangerously, he thinks he can fly.

As the show’s producer, Riggan is depending on his male lead, Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), to attract large audiences. Shiner is famous but he is an alcoholic who believes that his devotion to his art has elevated him to a priesthood that makes him an untouchable demigod. When Shiner gets drunk on stage in previews and disrupts the show so that the curtain has to come down on a shocked audience, he merely excuses himself with the arrogant belief that previews are not that important. Riggan’s daughter Samantha (Emma Stone) works for her father as his assistant, a job she hates, but she is fresh out of rehab and is lucky to be employed. She is disheveled, lost, and spiritually battered as is every member of the play’s cast.

The theatricality of the stage is a different kind of acting from film acting. One has to exaggerate one’s gestures, project one’s voice, and pretend that you are unaware of the hundreds of people sitting in the audience. We see Keaton and company practicing their craft on stage, but when they leave the stage, they are unable to leave behind the theatricality. We have actors playing actors, who then must be actors playing actors who are acting in a play; then they exit the stage and go back to actors playing actors. There are fifty shades of subtlety involved, and they can’t identify all the hues. They simply keep acting like they are on a stage the whole time. It makes for an eccentric artificiality, which starts to become tedious by the end of the film.

Theater critics do not fare well in this film. The most powerful critic in New York City admits to Riggan that she is going to close down the play with a scathing review, even though the play hasn’t opened yet, and she has not seen a single preview. She is described by Riggan and Shiner as a woman who looks like she just licked the derriere of a homeless person, an imbecile insult that boggles the mind.

In general, magical realism is an interesting genre, but when the “magic” part is actually a manifestation of symptoms of mental illness, it’s not that interesting.… Expand

0 of 6 users found this helpful06

All this user's reviews

4

tomizawaMar 7, 2015

Extremely disappointing. I expected too much from this movie, but it turned out not to be my cup of tea. There I was, expecting a relevant and extraordinary plot, and all I got was some absurdist film. If you like that kind of thing, this isExtremely disappointing. I expected too much from this movie, but it turned out not to be my cup of tea. There I was, expecting a relevant and extraordinary plot, and all I got was some absurdist film. If you like that kind of thing, this is for you. The writing (dialogues) was pretty messy and failed to portray "realism". This movie is good if you wanna have a topic of conversation or you are a film critic/fan. Otherwise either you love Absurism or you will just hate this movie.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

KaarenJun 14, 2015

There are a lot of great actors in this movie, all of whom, except Naomi Watts, screw up.
She is phenomenal, but the rest of the movie is just a failure.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

NerdConsultantJan 2, 2015

this is a very good movie that is really well made and acted but I didn't love the film and i'm not quite sure why. maybe theres something wrong with me cause i was watching it thinking i should love this. maybe it's cause the films style isthis is a very good movie that is really well made and acted but I didn't love the film and i'm not quite sure why. maybe theres something wrong with me cause i was watching it thinking i should love this. maybe it's cause the films style is a bit overpowering and can be exhausting or that it goes on a bit too long and has a really bizarre ending. but i think it's down to it's implied contempt towards blockbusters which is distracting. that being said it's still a good movie with some of michael Keaton ,Zach Galifianakis and emma stone's best perfomances… Expand

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

4

SimaoOct 1, 2020

im begging.... no more movies about white rich men on their 50s with mid-life crises.. and especially not with a lame and predictable ending that tries to make up for the boring and mediocre plot.

the cinematography and acting kinda savesim begging.... no more movies about white rich men on their 50s with mid-life crises.. and especially not with a lame and predictable ending that tries to make up for the boring and mediocre plot.

the cinematography and acting kinda saves the movie from being total trash....… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

TheFrogNov 20, 2020

What a bummer! I had high expectations for this movie after reading the positive reviews, and found instead a film that bored me to death, without a single character I could relate to, in spite of the very good cast. I had to stop severalWhat a bummer! I had high expectations for this movie after reading the positive reviews, and found instead a film that bored me to death, without a single character I could relate to, in spite of the very good cast. I had to stop several times to check the running length, "are we there yet?" and was happy when it was finally over.
Am I a fan of action movies a la XXX or Rambo, dissing a higher form of art? No. There's an old movie about a similar subject, "In The Bleak Midwinter", and I absolutely loved it. So what's the difference? In the old movie, theater was the meeting point of several misfit characters, each with his or her own problems, and the story was about healing, finding oneself, facing one's fears and making the right choice. It was a nice, naive tale of innocence, to be accepted for what it is and not as a super-accurate representation of the real world.
Enter Birdman: here an aging blockbuster actor attempts his luck at theater. Everything is bombastic and in your face, from his violent outbursts against furniture and vases (using imaginary superpowers) to the excessive characterization of the star actor by Edward Norton, to the trick of introducing a drum-based soundtrack, and then showing actual drummers beating hard. Even an actress I love, Naomi Watts, who delivers as usual, can do little to save this setup.
I think it may be the difference between American and British values: the only measure of art and self-realization here is success, fame, the number of followers on twitter, who gets the front page on the newspaper. The smaller, introspective, more measured performance by Kenneth Branagh's team, for me wins the day by a long shot.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

drlowdonJan 3, 2016

I must admit to finding Birdman a difficult movie to review. Across the board the performances are superb, the cinematography is great and it's certainly a pretty original premise. For me the movie doesn't quite add up to the some of itsI must admit to finding Birdman a difficult movie to review. Across the board the performances are superb, the cinematography is great and it's certainly a pretty original premise. For me the movie doesn't quite add up to the some of its parts however as, while it makes for an intriguing and darkly humorous watch at times, some scenes do drag on a little too long without really adding anything to the plot and my attention did start to wander on more than one occasion.

In the end I wouldn't rate Birdman amongst my favourite movies but it's certainly worth a watch if you are looking for a movie that does something a bit different.… Expand