Greg*89*

Pata, did I give it two? Did I give it 4?
No, 3 because it’s a film like many others, with its flaws and its qualities.
I can’t give it 4 because someone had a couple of laughs about it.
You figure it out, I think I’ve explained myself enough.

And in any case, I will be presumptuous, but you had nothing to say about selling one's image; is it also naive to consider it stupid?

"It’s time to reflect on your life and stop watching others’ lives."
Thank you nes, really.
I’ll get it tattooed on my back.
Anyway, in the end, don’t take it too hard for the reasons that we common folk judge, go back to your ivory tower. And be magnanimous, you know you can do it.

Nes, really, you are very noble. And I am just a common person. Okay.
However, from the height of your nobility, you shouldn't make distinctions between people: between those who are common and those who are not.
Anyway, getting married, I believe, is part of a person's actions.
Being able to evaluate people is part of an individual's responsibilities.
So if you can't discern between people, and you marry one who is likely stupid or who has a moral compass that goes no further than their own profit (to the point of commodifying themselves), well, if you're a fan of Madonna, I don't mean to offend, it's just an opinion, then maybe you're not really a genius.
And the moral of the story is, if you like stupid people and can't distinguish them, perhaps it's no surprise that you don't realize you've taken directing techniques from another director and have used them, overused them, verbatim for your debut film.
I heard it from the grandmas at the hair salon with their helmets and rollers on.
Anyway, peace, amen, we can judge based on whatever we like.

So I don't intend to put Pulp Fiction on a pedestal and then use it as a comparison for all films with gangsters as protagonists, or worse, to raise monuments to Quentin and then say the rest is trash. However, there are profound differences between "being inspired by" and being derivative. There’s also the homage/mocking story, but where's the mocking? Especially when it uses all of its own techniques, revolves in the same world, and so on. An homage, as mentioned, requires a minimum degree of autonomy from the work being honored.
I appreciate your precision, but what I mean is: would you marry Madonna? The point isn't when he married her, but what kind of person marries Madonna. Someone who rides a mechanical bull on stage.
Then who knows, Guy is a genius but he likes to hurt himself, I don't know.

Hello everyone.
I’m fine with the fact that you didn’t like the review, because it’s poorly written, there are mistakes, or it’s simply boring. That’s undeniable.
However, I confirm that in my opinion the movie is too derivative, and, well, if you think it’s better or on par with Pulp Fiction, you might also want to justify your opinions; it’s not enough to just say “I liked it.”

You beat me to it! I saw it on the blog in a video, and the drawings looked beautiful. The story seems to be the usual stuff about integration, but who cares. It's on my shopping list.

Thank you, you are kind (let's go with the good one).
Fiq, I’m pleased to see that once again we are on the same wavelength; I also now want to turn towards Toffolo, but I fear he has the same problem as Baronciani: non-existent stories. I also agree on virility-pride, in fact this was the first one I bought, which is why I got upset. Geb, we agree, compared to any book of literature they cost too much and have less content, and that is a limitation. Core, I’ve never read Pazienza, nice review on Coltrane.

Well, I haven't read the book, but I actually find the review naive, even though it's well-written. In case it's not clear, let me emphasize right away that I'm not here to support anyone's agenda. The point here, regarding the review, has nothing to do with being biased or not, but with the tone in which the review is written, which feels too much like propaganda. It really reminds me of advertisements for weight loss. I've tried it, I didn't believe it, and look, now I'm happy and slim. Who hasn't seen the short films from the Istituto Luce, shot during the Ventennio? The same emphatic and forcedly joyful tone. But let's take away the words popolo viola and replace them with gruppo nazista or bolscevico, and nothing changes; this is where the naivety lies, not realizing that the words we speak or write are entirely identical to those used by all the groups that aspired to improve the world but ended up making it worse. Moreover, the belief that you are "good" or on the right side, or that you are right, is always a rather arrogant trait, and it applies to everyone.

Holdsworth is entirely right; the same "innovative" techniques are used by Rabelais, Laurence Sterne, not to mention the whirlwind irony of Wallace, which is not too dissimilar from what appears in "The Man Without Qualities" by Musil, another colossal masterpiece of the twentieth century that shares many points in common with Infinite. I find Wallace incredibly appealing, but I am convinced that his genius still needs to be re-evaluated and contextualized in light of his influences.
But let's get to the review: I'm sorry, Talkn, but it almost seems like you copied and pasted from various online reviews and the blurbs: you don't mention a single character, you say nothing about the genesis of the novel, and you limit yourself to the usual outline of the plot that can be found anywhere.
Forgive me, but I don't like it.