Who else loved this film?
Can anyone recommend me something similar?
I liked the basic concept of a guy successfully convincing his friends that he's an immortal who's existed since prehistory.
I think the idea that he was Jesus/Buddha/etc. is fucking stupid and it was a sign of the writers reaching too far for controversy.
As a film... well, it's not really a film. There's literally nothing cinematic about it. It's just a video of some people speaking in a room. Single setting films can be cinematic, but this wasn't. There was no interesting cinematography to speak of. No clever sound design. Nothing. This could have been a book instead of a movie and literally nothing would be different.
>>64401011
Requiem for Methuselah
>>64401673
There are three sets used in the movie and some of the camera work is deft. One scene uses sound to great effect. It's definitely a film, not a book.
>>64401011
Meh. The protagonist was too much of a stoic normalfag, the blonde guy was overly angsty, and the christian bitch was annoying as hell. I guess the idea is interesting but the execution was lacking, both when it comes to dialogue and to the visuals (you use one fucking set for the entire movie, is it that hard to make that set visually interesting?)
>>64401011
It's a play put on film. I really enjoyed it.
>>64402091
There are three sets used in the movie and some of the camera work is deft.
Amazing movie. After watching this I looked up more movies with one room setting and was surprised to find more than 50 of them. They all are not that good but could be a decent watch. Coherence and Exam that comes to my mind.
But in terms of a SciFi that blows your mind on this level would be Twelve Monkeys.
>>64402566
There are three sets used in the movie and some of the camera work is deft.
>>64401011
>>>/r/atheism
>>64401831
>There are three sets used in the movie and some of the camera work is deft. One scene uses sound to great effect. It's definitely a film, not a book.
>>64401673
>As a film... well, it's not really a film. There's literally nothing cinematic about it. It's just a video of some people speaking in a room. Single setting films can be cinematic, but this wasn't. There was no interesting cinematography to speak of. No clever sound design. Nothing. This could have been a book instead of a movie and literally nothing would be different.
It should have been a play you faggots.
very entertaining story, but it needed some polish. the actors are completely wooden, which is understandable considering how low budget it is.
the jesus part was so hammy. if they HAD to go down that route i would have been fine with him being an apostle
i can't remember a mediocre one about a couple in a house when a dirty bomb hits l.a and she gets locked out and he won't let her back in.
>>64401673
Yeah bro the film looks rough. Terrible framing and lighting work, very amateurish production, just an awful-looking film. The screenplay is not "bad", just very mediocre, there is barely any depth or anything really interesting on listening that guy making up random stories out of thin air.
I usually give this kind of defectuous movie a 3/10 but since it's a very low budget one I'll say that is a 5/10.
>>64402848
It could still be a play. I'm glad it was made into a movie, though. A three-set-piece movie with deft camera work and great use of sound is a lot better than a play, and also I don't have to go to a playhouse to see it.
Everything in this movie is bad. Set, acting, characters, writing, production, this fucking dumb shot in the beginning, twists.
The premise somehow makes it watchable though.
>>64401011
It's brilliant. I never would have thought I'd genuinely enjoy a movie about a bunch of people having a discussion.
Coherence, The Quiet Earth and Aronofsky's Pi are kinda similar. They all have a very reduced cast and involve seemingly impossible phenomena with a somewhat plausible scientific basis.
three sets dude
