- The right person could do a hell of a lot of good with the right amount of money.
- Yeah, but how many people do you know with a hell a lotta money who are doing a hell a lotta good?
- Yeah, but how many people do you know with a hell a lotta money who are doing a hell a lotta good?
0
Ответить
При внимательном же просмотре открывается страшное зеркало общества, когда государство прикрывает свои проблемы чушью и мотивирует молодых, ещё не окрепших парней решать не свои проблемы, а проблемы этого государства, идя, если разобраться, на верную смерть под аплодисменты жаждущих зрелищ ради призрачной выгоды, придя к которой таким путём, человек остаётся травмирован морально и физически на всю жизнь.
I think the movie just lacks narrative depth. Yes, it provides the main plot from which you can actually derive interesting, mindful and broad conclusions, but it does so in a rather bungled, insipid and flat manner. There is little information and description of the events in the movie, little information about the participants, their backgrounds, feelings, and perceptions. Because of that, almost all the characters turn out somewhat dry, and I just can't sympathize with them at full power. You could watch just the first ten minutes, ten in the middle, and the last ten, and you'd get the same result with missing absolutely nothing.
On the contrary, the novel conveys the same idea, but in a lively and by far more entertaining way. And that's the major problem with a huge number of movies based on King's writings. I can count the successful ones on the fingers of one hand.
Well, in short, wouldn't recommend the movie, would recommend the novel.