Ferociously self-indulgent

Rating: 3/10 (28 November 2012)

Slow, slow slow! And I'm not talking in comparison to the over-cut rapid- fire action movies that are so prevalent these days. I'm talking about a relatively weak story that is masquerading as an art-house film. Walter Murch, who wrote In the Blink of an Eye, would probably be turning in his grave at the editing. The editing (and many of the shots) are far too long, for no reason, as far as I could tell.
Self-indulgent to the point where I feel I want my money back.
I'm told that I haven't written enough lines. How long does it tell to comment that the film is second rate? An example of a self-indulgent shot? Well, I couldn't give any without spoiling and I don't want to do that. But when you are watching the film, count how many seconds before the next cut. And, compare it with Murch's dictum that the cuts should mimic the natural blinking of your eye as you blink and effectively create a new scene in your head.
You will be blinking a lot more than the editor has cut, even in the slow scenes that are presumably trying to engage our emotions.