Dorathen Better Late Then Never

DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

grantss I think the producers' idea with this movie was that if you have an artsy sci fi basic plot, add a well known director in Richard Kelly and add in a host of recognisable actors, people will flock to see your movie. Whether people were actually sucked in by this and went and saw it in theatres, I don't know, but I just saw it on cable and it sure did suck, big time.The plot, if you can call it that, is random at best and generally quite boring and pretentious. The actors are mostly 80s/90s has-beens, eg Christopher Lambert, John Larroquette, or B-grade idols of teens, eg Justin Timberlake, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Seann William Scott, Sarah Michelle Gellar.And then, the crowning glory - the movie is 2 hrs 24 minutes long! No marks for editing either.Only thing preventing this from being a 1/2-star movie is the Justin Timberlake dream sequence in the middle, involving JT lip-synching The Killers' "All these things that I've done", with an army of nurses. Very cool.

bowmanblue For those of you that don't know, 'Southland Tales' is the second film from (Donnie Darko-acclaimed) writer/director Richard Kelly. After the success of Darko, he was given a much bigger budget to play with for his next feature and the stars queued up to be in it. How could it possibly fail? It did.And I was quite saddened by the reaction from viewers and critics alike (because I really loved it!). Yes, if you're thinking of watching Southland Tales, know that most people absolutely loathed it. They described it as unwatchable, too complicated and not making any sense.And they're probably right. But I still love it anyway. For a start, it's set in the same 'Darko' universe and, like its predecessor, is a mixture of genres. Ultimately, it's an 'end-of-the-world' film, but it encompasses comedy, romance, action, musical, thriller, science fiction and even political satire on the constant 'war' on terrorism.It has numerous characters, all of which are playing their part in the overall story. However, this is where the 'haters' start to build their argument. There are so many characters that none of them (bar Dwayne Johnson possibly) are really afforded the screen time they deserve. Hence we never really know an awful lot about them and then suddenly they're killed off and we're left none the wiser to what they were really about.Then you have the narration. There's an old saying in the writing world: 'Show, don't tell.' Here, Southland Tales simply tells half of the important plot points through a narrator and various fictional shots from the internet. Again, this does give off the feeling of being a bit rushed.But, if you can get over the many minus points, you'll find that Southland Tales is actually quite a novel story, told in a very slick and stylish way. Some of the scenes are almost visually hypnotic and the soundtrack (courtesy of Moby) certainly adds to the mood.If you've seen Donnie Darko, you may know what to expect. Don't think you're going to get any quick answers to what's going on. You may find you're looking up answers on the internet as to what Southland Tales is all about. That prospect may not appeal to everyone, so, if you're one of them, don't bother watching this. However, I'll just sit back and enjoy the experience. I don't claim to understand everything and I'll never say it's a perfect film. However, I found it perfect for me.

Robert Thompson (justbob1982) Version I saw: UK bluray releaseActors: 5/10Plot/script: 3/10Photography/visual style: 6/10Music/score: 6/10Overall: 5/10'Southland Tales' is director Richard Kelly's follow-up to 'Donnie Darko', which has gone down as the hippest film in the mindfuck genre. Unfortunately, unlike DD, it was an utter mess.Although the cast seemed exciting at the time, with hindsight they were nothing more than fashionable: Sarah Michelle Gellar, who has disappointed me after great work on 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer', Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson, who was still riding his large wrestling fan-base, Seann William Scott of 'American Pie' fame, and Justin Timberlake. The Rock has made a reasonable go of it, and Timberlake still dabbles in acting, but the others have faded without trace.There are, to be fair, some really interesting-seeming visual and intellectual ideas in the film, but none of them is followed up in anything like the rigorous way that would establish whether they are truly illuminating or just dead ends. At times, the ridiculousness of it all actually made me laugh out loud, and while that could be deliberate, I am really not so sure. Meanwhile, those parts of the plot that are coherent, are actually childishly straightforward, presenting little to even hold the interest.It seems as if Richard Kelly started the project with enthusiasm and excitement, sketching out a raft of ideas to be hammered together with the application of serious work later on. Then the Hollywood system ground him down, sapped his creativity and motivation, and he ended up going through the motions on the rest of the film, agreeing to casting of the latest names without really assessing their suitability, and allowing half-finished ideas to dominate the screenplay.More recently, Kelly made The Box, which slipped out barely noticed, despite having some big names associated with it. I hope it is good, as it would be so sad for the creative talent behind Donnie Darko to fall by the wayside.

LeonLouisRicci If you don't get it, no worries, no one did. Those who say they did are reaching or at best taking bits and pieces of this impenetrable Picture and making something out of it. That's an exercise in thought process and that alone is a good thing. One might say, hey, it makes you think. But this just makes you think you think. It's more like a Rorschach Test, a glob of goo for you to make something out of, and who's to argue. It is free association, but it comes at a heavy price.This is incomprehensible and daft. A presumptuous mess of Quotations and Character Names that are Ha Ha. To be kind, the Movie has a few Funny Lines and looks rather Cool. But if you are going to have so many Ideas, why make them indecipherable. A lost language of sorts, that has no Rosetta Stone. The Secrets to the Universe are there, one thinks anyway, but unfortunately it is buried forever, or at least until that Psychedelic kicks in. Or not. Truth be told, even the Director, after the Film was made, was clueless. The first release was 2 hours and 45 minutes as it was proudly unleashed on a not so forgiving Cannes Audience. It was Booed relentlessly and was one of the lowest rated Movies in the Festivals History. So, Richard Kelly (Writer/Director) cut 20 minutes and added Narration. Didn't help. It was still a headache inducing, jaw dropping, Soul Less, catastrophe. It remains so to this day, with even a few Years for it to catch on and acquire a Cult Audience, its intention. Nope. Trying to make sense of the senseless is still its greatest challenge. You might want to give it a try. You know, that Rorschach thing. Good Luck.