A prime example of how reviewers are completely irrelevant. People politics have become the primary focus, rather than the content and particularly quality of the film itself. How many films now have great critical responses but mediocre user ratings? Not because the public is so uninformed, but that the film, the entity they're supposed to be assessing, is of questionable quality.
This is one such film. Poorly shot, bad lighting, pointless scenes that drag on and on, with little development in story or character. One decent performance. A good location, wasted through an amateur production. Really, there's not a lot more to say about it.
The critics just saw color and the director's age and jumped to the now predictable glowing states. Perhaps they're the real bigots, that they feel they have to automatically prop some filmmakers up because of their origins. A true system without personal judgment would simply focus on the work. And that is not the case here.
This is one such film. Poorly shot, bad lighting, pointless scenes that drag on and on, with little development in story or character. One decent performance. A good location, wasted through an amateur production. Really, there's not a lot more to say about it.
The critics just saw color and the director's age and jumped to the now predictable glowing states. Perhaps they're the real bigots, that they feel they have to automatically prop some filmmakers up because of their origins. A true system without personal judgment would simply focus on the work. And that is not the case here.