Regis B. Nonato A completely misrepresented work, cartoons effects and history confused, given that it was a Tarantino story, it would have been much better executed by him, the division into chapters would much more cohesive history, I was nauseated to watch just thinking on how it could have been. I hope very much a remake that honors the work original.

fabinhu_ritter This movie try to be exciting bur it isn't. It is boring and just "free violence" without any sense or logic. The criticism of media is just empty. Nothing is profound or have any reason to happen. Is just waste time. I don't know how this movie wins any award because to me is one of the most trash and bizarre that I ever seen.

dougdoepke I've nothing against experimental movie-making. But here technique overwhelms everything else, leaving us with cinematic chaos and maybe a headache. All the rapid- fire jump cuts, color changes, and camera angles add up to an anti-movie mess. It looks like somebody's self-indulgence run wild. To me technique should enhance story, not overwhelm it. Or, in some cases, it might get us to see a familiar theme in a new way. But since there's no real story here, just a sequence of chaotic events, there's ironically no real conflict, just a two-hour waste of film and viewer attention. To be fair, I guess there is a message, something about the media creating a faux reality that sucks people into its seductive realm. That's certainly a worthy, if not novel, theme, especially in our fraught day and age. But unfortunately this movie mess overwhelms the idea without either enhancing it or seeing it in a new way. Too bad.(In passing—Most folks think of Mallory and Mickey as modern day Bonnie and Clyde. Nevertheless, B&C's main purpose was robbing banks, not killing people, a-la M&M. To me, the apt comparison is with the less well-known, teenagers Charlie Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate. After killing her parents and a baby, their murder spree spread across Nebraska and Wyoming in 1958, and appears motivated by little more than a perverted joy of killing, a-la M&M!)

mikelepost Watched this movie back in 1994 when it was released (and I was 18 or so) and again just recently when it ran on IFC. At the time of its release I thought NBK was "meh." Now with the benefit of 20 years of hindsight I think it's a bit of a disaster.There are several problems with NBK but the biggest issue is that it's a total failure as satire. I get the sense that Oliver Stone intended to satirize the media's infatuation with and exploitation of true crime stories and serial killers. This would be fine if Stone himself didn't completely romanticize and even mythologize Mickey and Mallory, the young killer protagonists of this film.I kept waiting for Stone to contrast the ugliness of their crimes with the spectacular way they are presented by the media. No such luck. Instead, all of their victims are shown to be disgusting human beings who deserve their fate. The highly stylized way the violence is meted out adds to the sense that we're supposed to be rooting for these two murderers and to view them as the victims of the film.In a nutshell, Stone is guilty of the same sensationalism he pretends to condemn in this film. The tone is all wrong and we the audience are never sure whose side we're supposed to be on or why.Aside from this huge creative miscalculation, the movie is wildly overedited and constantly shifting from black and white to color to odd angles etc. This is mostly annoying and didn't add anything to the film. The main story is also totally clichéd and the film doesn't even work on the level of satisfying exploitation, featuring far less violence or sexuality than I expected.Overall just plain bad.