Reviews

Starts out well , then after 45 mins you dont know where the hell it's going, plays out like a dream state, unnecessary scenes with no meaning ing or contribution to the film, many open ends left unanswered and not mentioned, these great actors must have needed a job pretty bad. Hiddleston does a great job, as well all others, the mo ie could ha e been so much better, but someone decided to turn it in to a fantasy dream state. They never tell us how the Architect got to ha e what he has, what happened to the pregnant woman and her baby, who is paying the Bill's now, how are resources pro used? What the hell was Hiddleston doing in his apt with the paint and why did he wash it off and why is there now a hole in ceiling to next apt The whole damn thing is a waste.

The pros, Schneider, Ladd and rest of cast all did fantastic job. Clearly this was a made for TV lower budget but was presented well.

The cons, the story is completely biased, telling us this sons sniveling simpering whining outlook on life when his Father and Mother divorce. Yes its tough on kids when parents divorce, my issue was we only, and the world, saw only his view. Omitting defense for his Fathers actions, nor did he recognize absolutely no faults on his Mothers end for their relationships problems, this was literally a tunnel view of anger against a Father, like a little kid standing in a living room hearing your parents argue, makes you sad, your Dad appears to be the bad man, but you really have no facts or reality to base your feelings on.

I believe Michael Landon Sr. Deserved better than this, especially since Jr mad this film long after he was dead. Although it came together at the end of the movie, by that time it too late youve already put a bad taste in our mouths, I for one am spitting it back out. I hope you found you life Jr, likely by Standin on your Fathers back.

I love modern westerns, when I say modern I mean westerns made in the last 30 years or so. Example: Unforgiven was a great modern western, 3:10 to Yuma another one, Hostiles is another one. Bone Tomahawak with Kurt Russell is another obscure but very substantive western.

This one though, this one had the substance of a Peanuts episode, yes I said Peanuts, as in Charlie Brown. The dialogue is not only empty but stretched out beyond it realism. Scenes are over extended and dont amount to any real conclusions. Cumberbatch was great, Dunst was great, Plemmons, well he was ok, but then again any overweight nerd could have done what he did. I was waiting for the drop, even at the end of the movie, the twist, if you want to call it that, was so blended and innocuous, you can can actually miss it and guess what, the movie is over. In a nutshell, unlike the other westerns I mentioned above, although this one plays out like an obscure gem of a new western, it is actually a big wet soggy log of a boring mess. I saw a review that said it was the directors first movie in ten years, she should have stayed with her day job cause she didn't do anybody any good. Im thinking she had to call in a few favors to get some enigmatic award at some festival. Skip this lemon.

For reviewer in1984, you don't get out much do you, or rather you haven't traveled the world much....You know just because your parents have an accent (no matter where from) while speaking the English language does not mean they're children will possess those accents. Both my parents are British, I have 5 brothers and sisters, none of us have a British accent, there's a reason for this, hopefully you can figure it out. Your observation on this detail of the movie was not only unimportant, it was a complete lack of knowledge and experience with such ideas on your part. The film lacked some substance but overall was watchable. Although I would not spend money to own it.