Thanks for the memories!

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

OK, so my wife and I just finished watching this film and I can say that it was a little hard to not think that the movie was going to be not so great based on the ratings we saw for it. But as the movie went on it was surprisingly better than the ratings the critics gave it. I thought the acting was done really well and the storyline - although a little on the slow side, turned out to be interestingly thought provoking… How would you react if suddenly one day you woke up from being blind for many years?? Would your ambitions change?? Would you allow your own selfish ambition to destroy everything you previously loved?? Though it would be a change indeed, how would I respond to that change?? Well, it seems that is what this film is about. One man's response to how he woke up one day able to see. The movie does tend to focus a lot on James (actor Dan Stevens) much more than the characters around him like his wife, son, best friend, etc, but I don't think that was done too heavily. It just seems like the story was told in a way from James' perspective instead of from others. That kinda makes sense since he is the one who went from being blind to able to see again. Really it seemed the worst part about the movie was the music. It was too dreary from beginning to end (maybe with exception from the dancing music). Seriously, it didn't match most of the film and had they went another direction with the music it really would have made a better impact on this movie. It seemed it never changed from the dreariness, but it should have. It really only communicated 2 emotions - sadness and mystery. Though those two emotions were definitely a part of the film, the story had much more to offer than that… the joy and excitement of being able to see again, the fun James and his son had looking for fish, the hope and comfort James experiences near the end of the film, etc. Despite the seemingly wrong direction with the music and kinda slowly unfolding story, it's still worth a watch.

Dan Stevens stars here as James, a man who suddenly regains his sight, after many years, when a pituitary brain tumor shrinks. At first, he celebrates with his loving wife Sam (Malin Akerman) and his 13-year-old son Jonah (Skylar Gaertner). However, soon James wants more in his life and this leads to strong marital discord and his engaging in shady and manipulative business practices at his real estate company job.This will all eventually lead to predictable consequences, and the film became to me a very slow paced melodrama that I didn't really enjoy. The very vague and ambiguous ending certainly didn't help any either.

In "The Ticket" we get to meet a blind man, who regains his vision in the beginning of the film. When he does, he starts to pay more attention to his exterior, starts to buy fancier things and basically becomes an asshole.The film was directed by Ido Fluk in a visually fine way, but in other ways lesser good. The shots looked nice, with some good use of shadow. They also play around with the use of focus and lighting, which really fits the film. The color grading was nice and it reminded me quite a lot of the film "Demolition", staring Jake Gyllenhaal, which was a notable better film than this one. But it did make sense that the film would look very good, because the main character is able to see again, so the world must look gorgeous to him, which the film succeeded at doing. I liked what they did in the beginning of the film: they put us in complete darkness, with only the voices of characters in the background. From that moment we know that we're seeing things from the perspective of Dan Stevens' character: blind. But slowly the light starts to come through the iris of Stevens, and we feel how he regains his sight. They really sold me on that opening scene, but what was to come, was quite disappointing in comparison to that. What the director tried to do was to give the film a deeper meaning, which I thoroughly understand. It's an independent film and it wants to draw attention, so why not do it by making the film a bit odd, and by having it have a deeper meaning. This deeper meaning though, wasn't as deep as it wants to be. It's pretty obvious from the get-go, namely: when man is granted something big, it's doomed to fail. The film also does get boring pretty fast. The way characters speak in a very soft manner, the soft colors and the slow soundtrack all made the film feel longer than it was and made it feel very boring.The acting wasn't a flaw, though. It was one of the best parts of the film even. Dan Stevens, who played the main character, has proved since 2014 in "The Guest" that he's a wonderful actor. Since then he's only been growing. This year he was phenomenal in "Legion" and in this film to he really sold it. The kid actor, Skylar Gaertner too was pretty good, just not as good as Dan Stevens, as he overshadows quite a lot of the cast. Skylar Gaertner played the son of Dan Stevens and there was a fun dynamic between the two of them. Someone else who was pretty good is Oliver Platt, who played the blind friend of James (Dan Stevens). The rest of the supporting cast also did quite a good job, but just like the kid actor they were overshadowed by the wonderful acting of Dan Stevens. The main premise was good, but not well enough explored, which is quite a shame, because it all sounds so interesting. They only bring it up to create some tension between Oliver Platt and Dan Stevens, because Platt is still blind, whereas Stevens has regained sight. They glance over the regaining sight, which I would've liked to see a more in depth approach to. The screenplay by the way was also written by the director, Ido Fluk. I like when directors do this, because it shows the dedication that they put into this film, and it shows in the final result. I liked that they evolve Dan Stevens' character, but I don't like how they do it. We get introduced to James when he regains his vison, it was a good scene, but due to this we don't get to know him when he was blind, because when he regains his sight he turns into a total asshole and I don't really get the motivation for becoming one. So I believe that if we got introduced to him earlier, we got to sympathize with him, so we later could understand why he changed and by doing that the development wouldn't be as abrupt as it was now. But only the part where he turns into an asshole was handled badly, the other developments were more subtle and made me care more for James. The other characters weren't highlighted as much as Stevens, which is really understandable, because the film is told from his perspective and the other characters really don't need any development, so I found no problem in that. In the end "The Ticket" was an OK film that's worth your time. The deeper lying message was pretty obvious, but the visuals totally make up for it. The acting was wonderful, but at times the character motivation is lacking. That's why this film gets a 6.5/10 from me.

Firstly let me say the synopsis listed for this film is fairly wide of the mark. It isn't about a guy who becomes obsessed with the superficial having regained his site at all. It's about the changes that occur in his life because of the significance the event of having his sight restored has on who he is as a person. Its somewhat superficial to presume he'd not change after such a significant event, its almost as ridiculous to accept people have any clue when they make statements like 'a multi million dollar lotto win wouldn't change them'.You think that with such a simple premise there be little that could be done with such a notion, but you'd be mistaken. Its a great adaptation of a well established notion, with a reasonable cast with decent abilities and great direction. The main characters are nicely developed as is the plot and pacing. It makes a pretty engaging piece. There is a very realistic feel to the influences and conflicts that arise through most of his sight restored life and aside from a somewhat predictable ending, its all done with some pretty good results, which surprised but entertained me.See it. It's worth it.