No pun intended - and I had no idea this was based on something that really transpired. The movie makes it clear in the end (during the credits), where you can see a character from the movie giving a speech that is mirrored (split) with real footage ... again no pun intended.

David O. Russell - you may have heard the name. You may be a fan already - or maybe this is your first movie of his. Clearly you can see he has cloud with actors ... and I reckon there is a reason for that. Of course comparing this to something he has done before would do the movie at hand quite the disservice. On the other hand I would understand if some are not completely convinced but they are getting served here.

A lot of things are happening, there is a flashback early on, but also too late - he seems to want to defy certain rules. And in that I think he succeeds. That doesn't mean you have to love it of course. The fact that it is filled with stars also may not mean anything for or to you.

While it is a trio of people that really hold most of the movie and the plot, everyone chips in. I do believe that there is some freedom when it comes to be creative. Especially when it comes to creative and art forms ... I do not believe cameras where that advanced as they are shown.

But this is not meant to be technically correct (no pun intended) - at least I did not feel this wanted to give us an accurate version of how events went down ... there is a general feeling, but there is a lot of freedom and a lot of heightened feeling to it ... which I liked.

Looks good, sounds good ... and have I mentioned the actors? Oh and before I forget: there are some scenes that sensitive souls may have issues with ... most are relatively early on.