ggggggggggreat

Rating: 10/10 (2 December 2012)

I've been reading the IMDb reviews after seeing the film last night (in 3-D). I share the awe and pleasure most viewers expressed. In fact I wonder: why the 9s? Why not 10s? Seriously, on exactly what level do you think this film fell short? The acting? The computer-generated animal effects? The script? I mean, really? Where did it fall short? I've been wracking my brain and see nothing but perfection here. There wasn't a minute I'd rewrite or reshoot. It's just a damn good movie and could stand as the gold standard in quite a few genres. I had a friend tell me he'd take off a point because there were too many flying fish. Maybe he's right. I hope that's the worst thing they could say about any film I wrote or directed or produced or shot or acted in. Too many flying fish. Go see it and be dazzled. If this doesn't earn full marks from you, I seriously pose the question: what would?