- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 12/3/12 at 2:42 pm to johnnydrama
Good Movie. Great Soundtrack
Posted on 12/3/12 at 2:43 pm to Rohan2Reed
quote:
more times than not people who say that Drive was "too slow" for them are simple-minded morons.
Was Drive so deep and thoughtful that having a highly-developed brain was a prerequisite to watch it?
I think people that thought it was slow just expected it to be an action movie and were disappointed.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 2:51 pm to Bmath
its the greatest indie music video of all time.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 2:55 pm to Dr RC
One of the best movies of the last 10 years.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 3:10 pm to Billy Mays
quote:
I think people that thought it was slow just expected it to be an action movie and were disappointed.
That was more of my point. For me I like a movie if I find it fun. I don't care as much about deeper meanings. I also enjoy slapstick movies for this same reason.
Watching a movie doesn't always need to be about mental gymnastics.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:03 pm to Baloo
quote:
And I would say more often than not people talking about how great Drive was are simple minded people trying to appear deeper than they are, because they are so terrified of not "getting" it.
Yep.
quote:
There's nothing I hate more than saying people don't like a movie because they are too stupid to understand it. I'm smart enough to understand it. It just makes no narrative sense whatsoever and the climax is entirely arbitrary, as he and his girlfriend are going to get hacked up into little pieces five minutes after the credits roll. The plotting isn't slow, it's lazy and riddled with wild inconsistancies.
Refresh my memory, but why would she get killed? I just assumed he left because he thought it was the best way to protect her.
quote:
Beautifully shot. Terribly written. Yes, I know about the analogy.
I've said it's more style than substance. It's a simple story.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:06 pm to Bmath
quote:
Did anyone else enjoy the flick?
I thought it was one of the shittiest movies I have seen in a while. They should have called it "Suck".
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:08 pm to Patrick O Rly
quote:
Refresh my memory, but why would she get killed? I just assumed he left because he thought it was the best way to protect her.
Her husband (or was it boyfriend?) was part of the heist which stole the money. The bodies of the mob enforcers are in her elevator. The mob is short one million bucks and its employees in a murder that is sure to be all over the evening news. It won't take them long to put two and two together and pay her a visit. When she can't come up with the cash, they will kill her and set out on killing Ryan Gosling. He only left a trail of dead bodies for them to follow.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:14 pm to Bmath
quote:
That was more of my point. For me I like a movie if I find it fun. I don't care as much about deeper meanings. I also enjoy slapstick movies for this same reason.
Watching a movie doesn't always need to be about mental gymnastics.
I hear ya. Movies are fun, entertaining, and an escape from our boring lives
Again, Drive wasn't some mind-bending psychological thriller. It wasn't that deep or thought-provoking.
It was just a stylistic, 80s throwback, noir, bloody romp.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:18 pm to Baloo
IDGAF what anyone says, I love Drive
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:19 pm to Billy Mays
quote:
Again, Drive wasn't some mind-bending psychological thriller. It wasn't that deep or thought-provoking.
It was just a stylistic, 80s throwback, noir, bloody romp
exactly. drive wasn't even all that "cerebral." it was an intense, but uniquely original, crime thriller.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:19 pm to Baloo
I thought he left the money? Oh well, gotta wait for Drive 2.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:20 pm to Billy Mays
I was so annoyed that I spent money in this cinematic turd that I blogged about it. Here are my thoughts while they were still fresh:
What first enticed me to see it were the trailers that seemed to portray an action movie along the lines of the first Fast & Furious or Gone in 60 Seconds, except without all of the flash. What I saw last night was a train wreck of such mind-numbing proportions that "Train Wreck of Mind-Numbing Proportions" would be a much more apt title for the movie than "Drive".
While the acting was really good all-around, little else was. I can't really dog much on the dialogue, because what there was of it was fine. This in itself is one of my biggest gripes. This brings me to another name change, this one much more appropriate. Changing the name to "People Staring Off-Camera Or At Each Other For Minutes At A Time Without Saying A Single Word" would almost be a more apt title for the movie except that its own wordiness could be used as a means to sue through false advertisement. There are whole scenes where the leading male and female just stare at each other. Uncomfortably. For a long time. Then smile. Or look away. Or just continue to stare. I guess a point that the writers forgot was that they do this because they are the only two people in the history of human-kind that find long, uncomfortable silences with complete strangers to be somehow heart-warming and a way to attract each other. In the real world, this would result in a restraining order. If Gosling' s pay for this was based on how many words he spoke, he would have come out farther ahead just donating a bunch of cash to charity for the tax write-off.
However, if your idea of cinematic excellence is staring at a static, little-emotion-showing Ryan Gosling's 20-foot-tall face then feel free to ignore my rant/warning/gripe-fest and shell out ~$10 of your own.
As uncomfortable as the loooooooooooooong silences were, the music (calling it a "soundtrack" gives it too much credit) sounds like it was crafted solely on an old 1980's-era Yamaha keyboard that came pre-packaged with someone whose job in the 80's was to create soundtracks for really crappy B movies. Even the utterly forgettable SyFy Channel's made-for-SyFy movies have musical scores that are better than this. It was so bad if it were put in the hottest porn movie ever made, even prison inmates serving life sentences wouldn't watch it. At times I had to wonder which was worse, the long, uncomfortable staring-at-each-other silences or the music. The jury is still out.
And where the music was poorly done, the violence was OVER done. Stab him in the eye THEN go back and get a knife to slit hit throat? Really? How was the eye part even necessary? Then kicking a guy's head in (with really lack-luster -maybe even "sissy"- kicks) until his head completely caves in? Whisky Tango Foxtrot? And what do they follow that with? Long, silent stares again. At least they weren't playing music at the same time.
And then finally there's the ending... The plot itself was pretty solid. The ending though... HOW THE BLEEDING *censored-censored-censored-censored-censored-censored*... *censored!* do you leave a million dollars just lying on the ground? Everyone that knew he had it was dead, why the hell didn't he at least toss a few bucks at the gal he spent the entire movie starting at but not talking to but yet somehow developed a relationship with?
To sum up: just because a movie is different or unique doesn't mean it's good. I've seen a better film in the urinal trough at the old Honky Tonk bar in Monroe.
What first enticed me to see it were the trailers that seemed to portray an action movie along the lines of the first Fast & Furious or Gone in 60 Seconds, except without all of the flash. What I saw last night was a train wreck of such mind-numbing proportions that "Train Wreck of Mind-Numbing Proportions" would be a much more apt title for the movie than "Drive".
While the acting was really good all-around, little else was. I can't really dog much on the dialogue, because what there was of it was fine. This in itself is one of my biggest gripes. This brings me to another name change, this one much more appropriate. Changing the name to "People Staring Off-Camera Or At Each Other For Minutes At A Time Without Saying A Single Word" would almost be a more apt title for the movie except that its own wordiness could be used as a means to sue through false advertisement. There are whole scenes where the leading male and female just stare at each other. Uncomfortably. For a long time. Then smile. Or look away. Or just continue to stare. I guess a point that the writers forgot was that they do this because they are the only two people in the history of human-kind that find long, uncomfortable silences with complete strangers to be somehow heart-warming and a way to attract each other. In the real world, this would result in a restraining order. If Gosling' s pay for this was based on how many words he spoke, he would have come out farther ahead just donating a bunch of cash to charity for the tax write-off.
However, if your idea of cinematic excellence is staring at a static, little-emotion-showing Ryan Gosling's 20-foot-tall face then feel free to ignore my rant/warning/gripe-fest and shell out ~$10 of your own.
As uncomfortable as the loooooooooooooong silences were, the music (calling it a "soundtrack" gives it too much credit) sounds like it was crafted solely on an old 1980's-era Yamaha keyboard that came pre-packaged with someone whose job in the 80's was to create soundtracks for really crappy B movies. Even the utterly forgettable SyFy Channel's made-for-SyFy movies have musical scores that are better than this. It was so bad if it were put in the hottest porn movie ever made, even prison inmates serving life sentences wouldn't watch it. At times I had to wonder which was worse, the long, uncomfortable staring-at-each-other silences or the music. The jury is still out.
And where the music was poorly done, the violence was OVER done. Stab him in the eye THEN go back and get a knife to slit hit throat? Really? How was the eye part even necessary? Then kicking a guy's head in (with really lack-luster -maybe even "sissy"- kicks) until his head completely caves in? Whisky Tango Foxtrot? And what do they follow that with? Long, silent stares again. At least they weren't playing music at the same time.
And then finally there's the ending... The plot itself was pretty solid. The ending though... HOW THE BLEEDING *censored-censored-censored-censored-censored-censored*... *censored!* do you leave a million dollars just lying on the ground? Everyone that knew he had it was dead, why the hell didn't he at least toss a few bucks at the gal he spent the entire movie starting at but not talking to but yet somehow developed a relationship with?
To sum up: just because a movie is different or unique doesn't mean it's good. I've seen a better film in the urinal trough at the old Honky Tonk bar in Monroe.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:21 pm to Baloo
quote:the money was laying at the body of Bernie
The mob is short one million bucks
I imagine the police will get it and store it as evidence
I dont think the mob knows that the wife is involved
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:35 pm to Pilot Tiger
quote:
the money was laying at the body of Bernie
That's if its still there and someone doesn't pick up the giant bag of money. But let's say it is turned evidence. The mob is out $1 million and Bernie, their rep, is found dead in a parking lot. We're supposed to think the mob won't be mildly curious as to what happened? Throw in the dead mob enforcers found in her apartment elevator, even some lazy investigating will point to her and then Gosling (I don't think she'll be a tough nut to crack).
The ending is a fraud. The mob finds her and kills her. Brutally, so as to get Gosling's name and whereabouts. Then they find and kill him. They practically drew a map to themselves.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:40 pm to Bard
quote:
What first enticed me to see it were the trailers that seemed to portray an action movie along the lines of the first Fast & Furious or Gone in 60 Seconds
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:44 pm to TulaneTigerFan
There was a scene where he took a shot of NOS.
Dude is tweaking hard.
Dude is tweaking hard.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:45 pm to Baloo
quote:
And I would say more often than not people talking about how great Drive was are simple minded people trying to appear deeper than they are, because they are so terrified of not "getting" it.
There's nothing I hate more than saying people don't like a movie because they are too stupid to understand it. I'm smart enough to understand it.
I wasn't implying that Drive is some cerebral film that only intellectuals are capable of understanding .. I was referring to the people who hate it because it lacked enough "action." Those are the simple-minded morons I speak of; people who can't get enjoyment out of anything in Hollywood that isn't formulaic and predictable.
Posted on 12/3/12 at 4:45 pm to Patrick O Rly
I actually agree with Baloo's take for the most part, but I enjoyed how the movie was shot and the soundtrack enough to overlook the plot issues. I still enjoyed it
eta: I also really enjoyed Albert Brooks' performance in this movie. His interactions with Bryan Cranston were really good, as well as a few of his moments with the driver
eta: I also really enjoyed Albert Brooks' performance in this movie. His interactions with Bryan Cranston were really good, as well as a few of his moments with the driver
This post was edited on 12/3/12 at 4:48 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News