I agree with Mark here. Last Night in Soho is one of my favorite movies of the year! I saw it again just to understand the majority of the critics’ issues with it, and I can’t seem to agree. It’s not a perfect film by any means, but its flaws are very minor, and all the greatest elements outweigh them. The movie definitely made the horror fan in me feel completely satisfied.
Knew Mark would love this. In a way I agree with the idea of it being the least 'Edgar Wright' film. Sure the editing style is still there, but the comedy is almost non-existent and it's definitely his most experimental film visually. Elosie was a fantastic protagonist, brilliantly written and Thomasin gave the performance of her life. I don't think I'll ever love it as much as a Hot Fuzz personally, but to this day Wright still hasn't made a bad movie in my book.
The second half felt like the same 10 minutes on repeat for what felt like hours, especially after it's thrown the same scare at you over and over. Not sure how some films manage to go through test screenings without being remedied before release, especially when a huge portion of reviews echo the exact same gripe. I can tell there's a tighter, more coherent film hidden in there - 2 hours shouldn't feel like 3. That said, Anya Taylor-Joy bathed in every color you can think of is easily worth the price of admission.
My favourite film of the last decade or so is Black Swan. And this was sort of like that (a vulnerable young woman going mad and having delusions), but nowhere near as good, in my opinion. Wright just didn't do the frightening hallucination stuff as well as Darren Aronofsky did, he went too OTT, if that's even possible. This was quite good but didn't blow me away like Black Swan did and still does after multiple viewings. But then Black Swan has the advantage of Tchaikovsky's amazing music.
It’s a proper story telling film. Wonderful. Beautiful to look at. I left london a long time ago and I kind of remember the old london as it changed through the 80s-now and it was like a love letter to london. I miss it greatly. It was another masterpiece by wright
The film looked great, but I thought the plot was predictable and the last act turned into a terrible and almost childish horror film. The "help me" cries were so cringe.
Yeah I really didn't enjoy the film at all. The "twist" at the end could be seen from a mile off and felt the whole film had one idea and ran with it for two hours
I thought it was really mediocre. It was at its best when it was a visually stunning nostalgia dream/nightmare. Later when it turned into a mystery, and when it actually started to make some kind of sense, it got quiet dull. And the spooky, spooky ghost stuff? That was unbelievably bad. Felt like something out of The Conjuring, or some other generic horror movie. Dear lord.
I totally disagree. This was such a tedious film that took so long to go anywhere, then went the cliched path, albeit full of red herrings, some perhaps unintentional. The whole roommate from hell beginning turned out to be a waste of time. Soon you're patting yourself on the back for being the first to guess that Terence Stamp is the aged version of Dr Who (and that is pretty much confirmed by the 'lady's man back in the day' pointer), but then it turns out that he isn't, and his whole storyline was also pointless. For the unintentional distraction, I assumed that the blonde was her mother, but then immediately calculated that the years didn't add up, so either the story-tellers didn't care about simple maths or I was wrong. By the time I predicted the identity of the landlady, I really didn't care anymore. The 'scary' bits were like a horror made for pre-teens. (Btw, I was a big fan of the Scott Pilgrim graphic novels, and contrary to expectations I loved that film.)
A goodish film ... but could have been a great film. Firstly, sorry I'm late to the party but last night was the first opportunity myself, wife and daughter could get to see this film. Secondly, I'm assuming most people who want to see this film have already seen it so a few spoilers ahead. Good stuff. Loved the general concept of going back to the sixties and the parallels of optimism while trying to make it big in the capital and the dangers that lie ahead. I thought the walk down the alley and then coming out in sixties London was just wonderful and brilliant. This brought about a big smile and almost a laugh ... it was so so good ( I've scanned down some of the comments below but couldn't see this mentioned ... shame on you ... it was great !!). The performances were all very good. Loved the parallel character / mirror effect ... really well done ... and the breaking mirror/glass motif that goes along with it. The soundtrack was (as expected) superb. All thoroughly enjoyable. Why wasn't it great ? The first meeting with 'the bad girl' at college. What the ??!! This was so pathetically cliched that I almost think he was taking the piss. Was he ?? I'll consider this when I watch it again on DVD/stream. He's obviously got a great sense of humour (Shaun/Fuzz/Worlds etc etc etc...) but this is not a 'sense of humour' film (misogyny, rape, murder, mental illness). Any film/TV involving time travel, faceless beings, and Matt Smith is a problem for me. I'm now 60 so Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker were of my time but Matt Smith was definitely and undeniably the best Doctor. The many plot holes/inconsistencies ... how did the hickey get there (I don't recall any other physical interaction); she would have at the very least been thrown out of college for almost stabbing someone in the face with a pair of scissors; why did security/police not go after her when they were called?; the plot device to get her to work in the bar (coincidentally where the ex detective drank !) was ham fisted to say the least - £375 for a Biba dress, really? Anyway, there are more but they just spring to mind. Terence Stamp dreadfully under utilised. He has always been a creepy, overwhelming, dark dark man. He was perfect for this type of film. And my final gripe. The final few scenes. Over the top or what. I thought I was watching the end of a Marvel movie. I know he's now a big director with big ideas and big budgets but please show a little restraint. True, chilling, mind invading, real horror is a thing of subtlety and disquiet. All contemporary horror/suspense film makers should be made to watch Saint Maud (several times). Saint Maud is (in my totally honest opinion) the absolute best (horror or not) film of recent years - truly remarkable, truly believable, truly horrific. May be this wasn't intended to be this sort of film but a heavy dose of Maud would have helped ... a lot. And finally (I lied above) ... who's idea was it to crowbar in an ending that Disney would've been proud of ?? I want to leave the cinema with questions/emotions/new ideas/conversations and debate ... not a brain covered in treacle ! I know there's a lot of negatives above but I still (honestly) enjoyed the film and the fact that it could've been really good does annoy me. P.S. sorry about the over use of parentheses (brackets).
The side characters, John and the girls, were some of the most underwritten 1d characters I've ever seen. You normally have quite memorable or likable side characters in Edgar Wright's films and these ones just seem so blehh.
This review is so off. I think the cinematography is great, but other than that, it's mediocre and very repetitive. Ghosts just appear out of nowhere to chase after her. Now their here, now their not. Spooky. Not to mention she almost murders a chick and it's never brought up again. This felt like the least Edgar Wright movie out of all of them. Only a few slick camera movements and editing tricks, bit other than that, I found the film ok at best. Plus the message at the end is mixed as fuck.
So true, the reviews from dudes that love Wright are crazy blind. This had massive 2nd act repetition problems and a silly ending. The love for Baby Driver was beyond bizarre as well.
I loved it until the parts where it got really repetitive and then it lost my interest!! Plus the movie REALLY explains everything like we're kinda stupid, so that got a bit annoying well before the end... it leaves nothing to have to think about that's for sure!!
I was confused as to why the lead character saw images of her mum. Was she schizophrenic? And thats why she was able to envision the 60s? Or was that a skill solely available at the guesthouse? The film left me with a lot of questions. The ability to transport to the 60s didn't seem to have any kind of relevance to the lead characters life apart from her liking the era and wanting an escape from reality.
No one can deny that Edgar Wright is a talented director, but that’s as far as it goes. I genuinely don’t know which demographic this movie is aimed at. The themes of this movie are just too mature for someone as clean cut as Edgar Wright. This whole movie, especially the twists and third act are infantile at best and the non stop ghost sequences are horrendously overplayed. Such a bore. 3/10 from me. Stylistically, it kind of reminded me of Bad Times At The El Royale, which despite its own problems, is a far superior movie
Well acted visually stunning. But the plot is a bit convoluted. I think it's a great concept but the twists are poorly done and it ends up poorly executed overall.
I loved it. Thomasin and Anya are revelations in this. My only critique is that Terrence Stamp’s character is kind of pointless in the grand scheme of things.
Troof. I was so happy to see him too! He's important as a red herring but....kind of underutilized? In a way though having all the female leads take up the lion's share of the focus fits the themes of the movie nicely.
@@udkline Yeah I wish they built up more of his relationship with Sandy in the past. Having Sam Claflin appear for 30 seconds felt like a waste of a great actor.
I liked it but didn't love it. It was certainly entertaining. Also, it is in no way at all a Giallo, or anything like a Giallo, not even the ending. A few coloured lights and a big knife does not make it a Giallo.
I don't always agree with Mark Kermode, but in this case I'm genuinely surprised to hear him give this film such a glowing review. It may be expertly shot, designed and edited but the plot is non-existent and the characters are paper thin at best/crude cyphers at worst. The underlying sexual politics are badly badly muddled bordering on awful, and the handling of mental illness (particularly mental illness in women) is borderline offensive. Last Night In Soho very much feels like a faux "feminist" film dreamt up by a white knight male who has set out to save women without actually asking any woman what she wants, or if she actually wants him to "save" her at all.. So Sandie has enough agency to get herself into a situation when the plot requires it, but not enough agency to get herself out of a situation when she is needed to be "saved" - that's not a character that's a cypher. In this world the protagonist Eloise faces absolutely no consequences for her toxic behaviour - being responsible for the death of a character through her own lack of knowledge, nearly stabbing a classmate in the face in front of the class, and almost having the single black character in the film framed for sexual assault he did not commit (that last scene and its lack of consequences in this world was particularly galling, and the point I officially gave up caring about anything in this film). Does Edgar Wright not understand that forgiving all this shitty behaviour because "psychic powers" is just as bad as the police in the film who write her off because "mentally ill woman"?? There's more than a large whiff of Mary Sue about Eloise, which is compounded by the fact that her psychic powers are so badly sketched out. And we haven't even reached the "shocking" twist yet! This film is over-bearlingly sex work-negative, and more generally just very sex-negative, which are attitudes very typical of men who aim to speak on behalf of women, as opposed to listening to women speak for themselves and helping them amplify their voices. Last Night in Soho is deeply soaked in this fake white knight bs fauxminism and I am super disappointed at Mark Kermode for not recognizing it and/or commenting on it.
LAST NIGHT IN SOHO- I was almost not going to see this because the premise and horror themes were too otherworldly but I gave it a chance because Edgar Wright is one of the few filmmakers who's made consistently great films (HOT FUZZ, SCOTT PILGRIM, BABY DRIVER) however this isn't as good as those three films I said. This is his weakest offering alongside SHAUN OF THE DEAD. Sorry to upset the fanboys. Found the Eloise character and her backstory was more convincing than the actual giallo, ghosts-of-creepy-leery-men's past stuff. If you want giallo in the 2020s, go see CENSOR by Prano Bailey Bond, a much better film...even if it's a 15 not an 18 like SOHO. Having the two films set there where I visited several times to visit the BBFC is unusual at best. Also worth the ticket to see Anya Taylor-Joy's sultry piercing wide-set brown eyes stare and smile at you.
@@MrSpookyLover Accurate, not pretentious. Emperors got no clothes Syndrome. If Edgar Wright hadn't directed this, the acclaim would be much diminished.
I agree with Mark here. Last Night in Soho is one of my favorite movies of the year! I saw it again just to understand the majority of the critics’ issues with it, and I can’t seem to agree. It’s not a perfect film by any means, but its flaws are very minor, and all the greatest elements outweigh them. The movie definitely made the horror fan in me feel completely satisfied.
Knew Mark would love this. In a way I agree with the idea of it being the least 'Edgar Wright' film. Sure the editing style is still there, but the comedy is almost non-existent and it's definitely his most experimental film visually. Elosie was a fantastic protagonist, brilliantly written and Thomasin gave the performance of her life. I don't think I'll ever love it as much as a Hot Fuzz personally, but to this day Wright still hasn't made a bad movie in my book.
I loved the build up to the the end, Trippy, fun, camp and emotional. I'm laughing and weeping, and that is a fine art to get together.
The second half felt like the same 10 minutes on repeat for what felt like hours, especially after it's thrown the same scare at you over and over. Not sure how some films manage to go through test screenings without being remedied before release, especially when a huge portion of reviews echo the exact same gripe. I can tell there's a tighter, more coherent film hidden in there - 2 hours shouldn't feel like 3. That said, Anya Taylor-Joy bathed in every color you can think of is easily worth the price of admission.
My favourite film of the last decade or so is Black Swan. And this was sort of like that (a vulnerable young woman going mad and having delusions), but nowhere near as good, in my opinion. Wright just didn't do the frightening hallucination stuff as well as Darren Aronofsky did, he went too OTT, if that's even possible.
This was quite good but didn't blow me away like Black Swan did and still does after multiple viewings. But then Black Swan has the advantage of Tchaikovsky's amazing music.
Black Swan is amazing. Last Night in Soho sucked.
It’s a proper story telling film. Wonderful. Beautiful to look at. I left london a long time ago and I kind of remember the old london as it changed through the 80s-now and it was like a love letter to london. I miss it greatly. It was another masterpiece by wright
Loved it. I do think it has a stronger first half, but like everything Edgar has done, it's endlessly entertaining even when it stumbles a bit.
The film looked great, but I thought the plot was predictable and the last act turned into a terrible and almost childish horror film. The "help me" cries were so cringe.
Yeah I really didn't enjoy the film at all. The "twist" at the end could be seen from a mile off and felt the whole film had one idea and ran with it for two hours
@@roryg137 I disagree with that
Agree, it was crap. The first half hour was very promising but the rest did not deliver
I thought it was really mediocre. It was at its best when it was a visually stunning nostalgia dream/nightmare. Later when it turned into a mystery, and when it actually started to make some kind of sense, it got quiet dull. And the spooky, spooky ghost stuff? That was unbelievably bad. Felt like something out of The Conjuring, or some other generic horror movie. Dear lord.
I agree, I didn't like the ghosts. They were the loud, in-your-face type of scary.
Same. Beautiful, colourful mystery descended into an almost 2nd rate slasher with CGI ghosts.
I totally disagree. This was such a tedious film that took so long to go anywhere, then went the cliched path, albeit full of red herrings, some perhaps unintentional. The whole roommate from hell beginning turned out to be a waste of time. Soon you're patting yourself on the back for being the first to guess that Terence Stamp is the aged version of Dr Who (and that is pretty much confirmed by the 'lady's man back in the day' pointer), but then it turns out that he isn't, and his whole storyline was also pointless. For the unintentional distraction, I assumed that the blonde was her mother, but then immediately calculated that the years didn't add up, so either the story-tellers didn't care about simple maths or I was wrong. By the time I predicted the identity of the landlady, I really didn't care anymore. The 'scary' bits were like a horror made for pre-teens. (Btw, I was a big fan of the Scott Pilgrim graphic novels, and contrary to expectations I loved that film.)
A goodish film ... but could have been a great film.
Firstly, sorry I'm late to the party but last night was the first opportunity myself, wife and daughter could get to see this film. Secondly, I'm assuming most people who want to see this film have already seen it so a few spoilers ahead.
Good stuff. Loved the general concept of going back to the sixties and the parallels of optimism while trying to make it big in the capital and the dangers that lie ahead. I thought the walk down the alley and then coming out in sixties London was just wonderful and brilliant. This brought about a big smile and almost a laugh ... it was so so good ( I've scanned down some of the comments below but couldn't see this mentioned ... shame on you ... it was great !!). The performances were all very good. Loved the parallel character / mirror effect ... really well done ... and the breaking mirror/glass motif that goes along with it. The soundtrack was (as expected) superb. All thoroughly enjoyable.
Why wasn't it great ?
The first meeting with 'the bad girl' at college. What the ??!! This was so pathetically cliched that I almost think he was taking the piss. Was he ?? I'll consider this when I watch it again on DVD/stream. He's obviously got a great sense of humour (Shaun/Fuzz/Worlds etc etc etc...) but this is not a 'sense of humour' film (misogyny, rape, murder, mental illness).
Any film/TV involving time travel, faceless beings, and Matt Smith is a problem for me. I'm now 60 so Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker were of my time but Matt Smith was definitely and undeniably the best Doctor.
The many plot holes/inconsistencies ... how did the hickey get there (I don't recall any other physical interaction); she would have at the very least been thrown out of college for almost stabbing someone in the face with a pair of scissors; why did security/police not go after her when they were called?; the plot device to get her to work in the bar (coincidentally where the ex detective drank !) was ham fisted to say the least - £375 for a Biba dress, really? Anyway, there are more but they just spring to mind.
Terence Stamp dreadfully under utilised. He has always been a creepy, overwhelming, dark dark man. He was perfect for this type of film.
And my final gripe. The final few scenes. Over the top or what. I thought I was watching the end of a Marvel movie. I know he's now a big director with big ideas and big budgets but please show a little restraint. True, chilling, mind invading, real horror is a thing of subtlety and disquiet. All contemporary horror/suspense film makers should be made to watch Saint Maud (several times). Saint Maud is (in my totally honest opinion) the absolute best (horror or not) film of recent years - truly remarkable, truly believable, truly horrific. May be this wasn't intended to be this sort of film but a heavy dose of Maud would have helped ... a lot.
And finally (I lied above) ... who's idea was it to crowbar in an ending that Disney would've been proud of ?? I want to leave the cinema with questions/emotions/new ideas/conversations and debate ... not a brain covered in treacle !
I know there's a lot of negatives above but I still (honestly) enjoyed the film and the fact that it could've been really good does annoy me.
P.S. sorry about the over use of parentheses (brackets).
The side characters, John and the girls, were some of the most underwritten 1d characters I've ever seen. You normally have quite memorable or likable side characters in Edgar Wright's films and these ones just seem so blehh.
Stir of Blechoes. It really could have lost 20 minutes of ghost appearances and gotten to the point quicker.
It was ok. Bit predictable. Some cool camera tricks. Where was Waterloo Sunset by The Kinks? I waited for it but I never heard the song.
Enjoyed it so much more than baby driver ,which I get but I just thought this was a step up especially loved Thomasin mac. She is fantastic.
I guess I am a minority here with the people who completely hated it, the movie was visually acceptable but the story and pace was absolute garbage.
This review is so off. I think the cinematography is great, but other than that, it's mediocre and very repetitive. Ghosts just appear out of nowhere to chase after her. Now their here, now their not. Spooky. Not to mention she almost murders a chick and it's never brought up again. This felt like the least Edgar Wright movie out of all of them. Only a few slick camera movements and editing tricks, bit other than that, I found the film ok at best. Plus the message at the end is mixed as fuck.
Eh, the third act was pretty messy but the rest of the film was still pretty good in my opinion
So true, the reviews from dudes that love Wright are crazy blind. This had massive 2nd act repetition problems and a silly ending. The love for Baby Driver was beyond bizarre as well.
@@earnthis1 doesn’t mean the rest of the film can’t be appreciated
Yeah he gives the plot a pass in this review and that can't happen cause it's so messy and poorly done.
I'm glad someone said it. If I hadn't been told it was an Edgar Wright film, I wouldn't have known it was from him. It doesn't have his usual flair.
Loved the music, my era - i was a teen in the 60's, visuals, acting etc....i'd see it again too....took me away.
I loved it until the parts where it got really repetitive and then it lost my interest!! Plus the movie REALLY explains everything like we're kinda stupid, so that got a bit annoying well before the end... it leaves nothing to have to think about that's for sure!!
It just gets more predictable as it goes on
Agreed disappointing as I love Edgar Wright and it does start well.
I was confused as to why the lead character saw images of her mum. Was she schizophrenic? And thats why she was able to envision the 60s? Or was that a skill solely available at the guesthouse? The film left me with a lot of questions. The ability to transport to the 60s didn't seem to have any kind of relevance to the lead characters life apart from her liking the era and wanting an escape from reality.
@@thebatman4279 I think the mum stuff was just to bulk up the movie a bit. It was basically pointless in the end
No one can deny that Edgar Wright is a talented director, but that’s as far as it goes. I genuinely don’t know which demographic this movie is aimed at. The themes of this movie are just too mature for someone as clean cut as Edgar Wright. This whole movie, especially the twists and third act are infantile at best and the non stop ghost sequences are horrendously overplayed. Such a bore. 3/10 from me.
Stylistically, it kind of reminded me of Bad Times At The El Royale, which despite its own problems, is a far superior movie
Or 'Mulholland Baby Driver'!
The woman jumping out from behind the dumpster in Mulholland Drive is scarier than anything in this.
Well acted visually stunning. But the plot is a bit convoluted. I think it's a great concept but the twists are poorly done and it ends up poorly executed overall.
I loved it. Thomasin and Anya are revelations in this. My only critique is that Terrence Stamp’s character is kind of pointless in the grand scheme of things.
Not really. He was like a red herring
@@MegaUtube99 If you take him out of the film, does it change anything?
Troof. I was so happy to see him too! He's important as a red herring but....kind of underutilized? In a way though having all the female leads take up the lion's share of the focus fits the themes of the movie nicely.
@@udkline Yeah I wish they built up more of his relationship with Sandy in the past. Having Sam Claflin appear for 30 seconds felt like a waste of a great actor.
@@MegaUtube99 SPOILER!!!
Is this the whole review? On the Kermode and Mayo channel it has some woman reviewing it instead. Was Mark away? Is this from Mark's radio station?
Love that Sean Connery is starring in Thunderball...
I loved every minute of this amazing movie
This sucked. Only superficially was it anything like Peeping Tom. It was a hipster film full of fancy but zero under the surface. A complete bore.
Everything was set up perfectly for the ....amazing ending...???? What? This was dumb, dude!
Eloise reminds me of myself....
Even though I am a guy
The worst part of this movie is the script… it’s quite bad
I liked it but didn't love it. It was certainly entertaining. Also, it is in no way at all a Giallo, or anything like a Giallo, not even the ending. A few coloured lights and a big knife does not make it a Giallo.
What the heck is Peeping Tom's Midnight Garden?
Just Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom and Tom’s Midnight Garden integrated....just wordplay
Mark Kermode is a Good Liar. Be honest Mark, the film was sh**!
Interesting as I hated baby driver and hated this.
Bummer
I don't always agree with Mark Kermode, but in this case I'm genuinely surprised to hear him give this film such a glowing review. It may be expertly shot, designed and edited but the plot is non-existent and the characters are paper thin at best/crude cyphers at worst. The underlying sexual politics are badly badly muddled bordering on awful, and the handling of mental illness (particularly mental illness in women) is borderline offensive. Last Night In Soho very much feels like a faux "feminist" film dreamt up by a white knight male who has set out to save women without actually asking any woman what she wants, or if she actually wants him to "save" her at all.. So Sandie has enough agency to get herself into a situation when the plot requires it, but not enough agency to get herself out of a situation when she is needed to be "saved" - that's not a character that's a cypher. In this world the protagonist Eloise faces absolutely no consequences for her toxic behaviour - being responsible for the death of a character through her own lack of knowledge, nearly stabbing a classmate in the face in front of the class, and almost having the single black character in the film framed for sexual assault he did not commit (that last scene and its lack of consequences in this world was particularly galling, and the point I officially gave up caring about anything in this film). Does Edgar Wright not understand that forgiving all this shitty behaviour because "psychic powers" is just as bad as the police in the film who write her off because "mentally ill woman"?? There's more than a large whiff of Mary Sue about Eloise, which is compounded by the fact that her psychic powers are so badly sketched out. And we haven't even reached the "shocking" twist yet! This film is over-bearlingly sex work-negative, and more generally just very sex-negative, which are attitudes very typical of men who aim to speak on behalf of women, as opposed to listening to women speak for themselves and helping them amplify their voices. Last Night in Soho is deeply soaked in this fake white knight bs fauxminism and I am super disappointed at Mark Kermode for not recognizing it and/or commenting on it.
You do know it was Co wrote by a woman?
Very average film felt like a dcotor who episode with a bit of gore.
It is a TV movie, overly clichéd, has no internal logic and the big twist towards the end is obvious from 30mins in. Utter nonsense.
It’s repetitive and the twist was obvious. Maybe I need to watch it again.
The rest was still good though
LAST NIGHT IN SOHO- I was almost not going to see this because the premise and horror themes were too otherworldly but I gave it a chance because Edgar Wright is one of the few filmmakers who's made consistently great films (HOT FUZZ, SCOTT PILGRIM, BABY DRIVER) however this isn't as good as those three films I said. This is his weakest offering alongside SHAUN OF THE DEAD. Sorry to upset the fanboys.
Found the Eloise character and her backstory was more convincing than the actual giallo, ghosts-of-creepy-leery-men's past stuff. If you want giallo in the 2020s, go see CENSOR by Prano Bailey Bond, a much better film...even if it's a 15 not an 18 like SOHO. Having the two films set there where I visited several times to visit the BBFC is unusual at best.
Also worth the ticket to see Anya Taylor-Joy's sultry piercing wide-set brown eyes stare and smile at you.
Terrible to see how people feel obliged to say the movie is great when it's actually a huge let-down.
Or maybe just maybe they actually enjoyed the film...
Not everyone has to have the same opinion as you
Most dissapointing movie of the year - by a far.
I disagree
I agree. Cant beleive how badly handled the story was. Completely washed over me, not scary and surprisingly dull.
@@thebatman4279 I disagree
It was an awful film with an even worst ending.
Bizarre, this fanaticism over mediocrity.
I mean there's not liking it but.. pretentious comment dude .
What’s your point?
Mediocre? Hardly
@@MrSpookyLover Accurate, not pretentious. Emperors got no clothes Syndrome. If Edgar Wright hadn't directed this, the acclaim would be much diminished.
@@thebatman4279 not really
It sounds a really boring film.
It’s not
@@Jackattack359 I daren't risk it.
It’s shit
@@ryanlucey1196 It doesn't sound like my type of film. I don't think Matt Smith can act anyway.
@@geoffjoffy well give it a try anyway
Total rubbish ..
Just goes to show critics are just bellends. This film is twaddle. Generic. Some bad over acting. Terrible story.