Why didn't the audience like it?

Why didn't the audience like it?

Attached: MV5BZWY3OTdkZDQtYjdjMy00NDRmLThiZjItYjUzZGNkZDYyYzc0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTA3MDk2NDg2._V1_.jpg (810x1080, 142.45K)

It was just kind of boring. It's a story everyone's seen a million times before, which isn't inherently a problem, but when you tackle something like that you need to really do it so well that it stands out. Nothing really stood out.

Because jews are trying to pretend no one liked it and white culture flopped, but in reality it was a masterpiece.

Pretty boring to be honest

Because it was actually good.

It was not good

too weird for normies

The core revenge narrative is basic enough, but the excessive grittiness and solemnity alienated general audiences. You've gotta weave it in and out so you can set the tone but audiences have a basic relatable anchor for broad engagement

People were turned off by the mysticism/abstract ritual scenes, your average consumer does not understand religion

Here’s my non-bait answer
>no marketing. Literally didn’t see a trailer until it hit streaming
>wayyyy too late on the Viking fad. Probably would have destroyed the box office if it came out 3 months after Skyrim
>really fucking bland and generic plot, especially for a viking film. Isnt the main plot of The Last Kingdom like identical to this?
>Too long with bad pacing. It really loses you after it’s third cave prophecy scene. All the momentum built up with him torturing his uncle is blown when he runs away with the Ayyy

It's another "subverts your expectations" movie.
>"Oh, you're rooting for protagonist? Well, he's a rape baby and actually the bad guy the movie."
>"Hey wait! Where are you going? Did you really think this movie was going to be about a guy taking back his throne like we advertised?"
Yeah, it's a really perplexing why it flopped with audiences.

>>really fucking bland and generic plot, especially for a viking film. Isnt the main plot of The Last Kingdom like identical to this?

Kek it's based on the story that inspired Shakespear's Hamlet. Hamlet is an anagram for Amleth...

it has high RT score which means DA JOOOZ liked it

>>"Oh, you're rooting for protagonist? Well, he's a rape baby and actually the bad guy the movie."
How was he the bad guy?

Too many dream/vision sequences for the normie.

There is no subversion of expectations unless you expected the dad to not get killed. Its a straight forward revenge story.

story was fine
acting was great
pacing was fine

audiences got "bored" because the action was actually pretty minimal. npc's want to see 300 over and over, with 90 minutes of stylized action sequences. this was slow burn and kind of contemplative with a lot of abstract scenes. they shoe-horned one fake dream sequence fight with the skeleton/suit of armor thing in the cave because without it, audiences would have legitimately left the theater en masse

Didnt know that Hamlet was based on this (or that this was even based on real people). Obviously it was Hamlet but that’s about as tired as a plot as it gets

Same reason Zodiac did, which is the same reason the director of Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory cut a scene where a guy says “life is a disappointment.” Generally normies don’t wanna be bummed out, even if it’s kino. At least not in the theaters. It seems to be doing better streaming.

>If you put the last letter in Amleth in the front it becomes Hamlet
holy kino bravo nolan

It had two problems:
1. It was a straight-forward revenge plot. The only "twist" was that the mother was the most evil character and the mastermind behind everything bad that happened. Other than that, everyone in it was going to die because that's how these stories go. If you're going to go that route, then the mystical/weird elements should have been pushed a shitload harder. The trailer made this movie look like a Viking "Mandy". It was actually Shakespearian and dull because of it.

2. If you're not going to give us weird elements in your straight-forward revenge plot movie, then you have to give us some sort of action. Otherwise the movie is flatly boring. Eggers can't shoot action, so he gave us about two minutes of "things happening", and the rest of the movie is just dialog and actors looking at things.

It was a big budget movie with a small budget execution. Either give us something truly bizarre to revel in or give us excitement. Eggers gave us neither.

story was meh pacing was bad. Good pacing can carry a bland script a long way. Everything else about the movie was too notch but a movie that’s 20 minutes too long is suffering. There’s so much shit in this movie that could have been cut

> story was fine
agreed. not every story needs to be super deep. a simple revenge plot is fine and they even fit a romance and a twist in there.
> acting was great
no
>pacing was fine
also no. this movie should not have been 2 + hours long. so much of the hijinks about the prophecy and pulling pranks on the vikings could have been cut down.

I watched which makes me part of the audience and I liked it. So why do you go arround spewing obvious(to me) lies?

>The only "twist" was that the mother was the most evil character and the mastermind behind everything bad that happened
What about the twist of Anya being pregnant?