- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 9/19/11 at 12:10 am to TulaneLSU
quote:
I would love to see the shotgun wounds defended as art, so go ahead.
no one is saying that. that's an argument you've created and are now asking us to defend. I will however echo what Refn has said in the same interview I've already linked, that his portrayals of violence are "intimate."
they seem personalized and studied rather than bullet-bullet-slash-explosion//cut scene// and the hero goes on to mow down the next set of nameless, purposeless baddies.
there's more of a reality to how horrific the Drive murders are. to say that the grotesque feelings they inspire are frivolous is a disservice to the array of emotions that cinema could and should provoke. people are animals. let's stare into the abyss and get primal.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 12:15 am to Leauxgan
Read Bottomland's post and you'll see I was responding to what the article he was quoting said. Someone other than TulaneLSU was making that argument.
This post was edited on 9/19/11 at 12:17 am
Posted on 9/19/11 at 12:18 am to TulaneLSU
that writer's line was clearly hyperbole/sarcasm
Posted on 9/19/11 at 7:34 am to TulaneLSU
quote:
But like almost all violence, there is no redemptive use of it, so the violence is nocuous to the viewer's mind and soul.
You sound like the least fun person to watch a movie with.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:10 am to Superior Pariah
Refn's other movies were pretty darn good and never got the attention or $$$ at the box office that they deserved, IMO. Luckily, Refn and the studio wised up and made a run of the mill, action movie trailer with mass appeal. The second I sat in my seat I told my girlfriend, "This place is packed and they are going to be sadly disappointed when they realize this is not the movie they came to see." Sure enough about half-way through you could hear little conversations all over the theater and see people slowly heading for the exit. Once the film ended I was laughing so hard at all the people complaining. The second the credits rolled an African American woman stood up in front of me and yelled, "I give that movie a 1!". Congrats Nicolas Winding Refn; you made a stellar movie and punked the idiotic masses into handing you a few million dollars in the process. That terrible trailer did wonders for your great film.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:24 am to Blue Velvet
quote:
Congrats Nicolas Winding Refn; you made a stellar movie and punked the idiotic masses into handing you a few million dollars in the process. That terrible trailer did wonders for your great film.
quote:
The second the credits rolled an African American woman stood up in front of me and yelled, "I give that movie a 1!".
Why are they always the loudest with sharing their opinions? See my post about the people at my theater.
:Tyler Perry:
This post was edited on 9/19/11 at 9:25 am
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:37 am to Pectus
Many so-called movie snobs think this is a great movie because the masses don't like it. I have yet to read one article or post stating why this movie is great. "It's a noir movie!" and "the performances are great," they say, as if being a noir movie somehow makes a movie good. The story is bad, predictable, uninteresting. It's the kind of story that makes decent stories look like great stories. A good performance doesn't save a bad story. And so, despite the good performance of Gosling, this movie will perpetually be an average movie, brought down by the story and buoyed by the performance.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:42 am to Pectus
To me, it is one of the best movies this year. soundtrack and score were killer. fit the movie well. gosling was great. played it with confidence. brooks was great as well. the ending was great and really fit the mood of the film. classic noir. 4 1/2 out of 5 for me.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:48 am to TulaneLSU
I could give you plenty of reasons why I think it's great. Problem is those are probably the same reasons you dislike, or feel apathetic towards, it.
You probably watch movies for the wrong reasons, expecting narrative hooks and a tradition steeped in superficial American film. (edit: not discrediting American film culture at all, as I believe we have the richest legacy of any nation; I refer to mainstream releases)
You should watch more world cinema and understand that sometimes that emotional intelligence and mysterious elicitation of feeling are more important than rational storytelling.
I'd be curious on your opinion of a film like The Ballad of Narayama. Check it out and let me know.
You probably watch movies for the wrong reasons, expecting narrative hooks and a tradition steeped in superficial American film. (edit: not discrediting American film culture at all, as I believe we have the richest legacy of any nation; I refer to mainstream releases)
You should watch more world cinema and understand that sometimes that emotional intelligence and mysterious elicitation of feeling are more important than rational storytelling.
I'd be curious on your opinion of a film like The Ballad of Narayama. Check it out and let me know.
This post was edited on 9/19/11 at 9:56 am
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:48 am to TulaneLSU
I haven't
I think you've read some reasons why people liked it right here in this thread.
You're right that it wouldn't, but it helps to put the film in context. It gives a reason for the style. If you don't understand you're watching a noir then it's going to feel slow and pedantic.
It's the most compelling story that's been released since May.
Do you know who Albert Brooks is?
quote:
Many so-called movie snobs think this is a great movie because the masses don't like it.I have yet to read one article or post stating why this movie is great.
I think you've read some reasons why people liked it right here in this thread.
quote:
"It's a noir movie!" and "the performances are great," they say, as if being a noir movie somehow makes a movie good.
You're right that it wouldn't, but it helps to put the film in context. It gives a reason for the style. If you don't understand you're watching a noir then it's going to feel slow and pedantic.
quote:
The story is bad, predictable, uninteresting. It's the kind of story that makes decent stories look like great stories.
It's the most compelling story that's been released since May.
quote:
A good performance doesn't save a bad story. And so, despite the good performance of Gosling, this movie will perpetually be an average movie, brought down by the story and buoyed by the performance.
Do you know who Albert Brooks is?
Posted on 9/19/11 at 9:58 am to Pectus
Stories I believe are better that have been told at theaters since May:
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
One Day
The Debt
Sarah's Key
The Guard
Crazy Stupid Love
Harry Potter (the last one)
Midnight in Paris
Keep in mind, I haven't seen every movie at the theater since May, but I've seen most.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
One Day
The Debt
Sarah's Key
The Guard
Crazy Stupid Love
Harry Potter (the last one)
Midnight in Paris
Keep in mind, I haven't seen every movie at the theater since May, but I've seen most.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:01 am to TulaneLSU
those are for the most part average pieces of mainstream filmmaking, with exceptions (Midnight in Paris).
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:02 am to Leauxgan
What makes the story in Drive compelling?
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:03 am to TulaneLSU
quote:
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
I was thinking when I wrote that that Planet of the Apes would be pretty close.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:08 am to TulaneLSU
the revenge tale. it's pretty clear before all hell breaks loose that you don't know what the Driver is capable of besides confidence and stoic intensity, so there's a tension of what sort stakes are present (hinted in the diner scene where the Driver threatens death to the guy that did a job with him once) or the foreshadowing of Perlman and Brooks' characters that they will crack down at the blink of an eye (the story of "did shannon tell you how we know each other?" and describes how they broke his pelvis after an underhanded business deal). when the two forces collide, it creates an amazing dynamic imo.
admittedly the first act is slow in order to establish plot and character ties, but in the 2nd and 3rd acts the Driver's actions and motives are unraveled at an uncomfortable but exhilarating intensity.
admittedly the first act is slow in order to establish plot and character ties, but in the 2nd and 3rd acts the Driver's actions and motives are unraveled at an uncomfortable but exhilarating intensity.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:14 am to Leauxgan
I would argue that what you find great about the story is actually what is great about Gosling's performance. It's not the story; it's the character. And while stories are often given form by characters, in Drive, I saw focus only on character. That things happen is only incidental, only done so that we can learn more about the character. We're not supposed to care about the story at all, IMO, and that's what makes this movie disappointing, because had there been an interesting narrative, it would have been a great film. Instead, I felt like the movie was a portrait.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:19 am to TulaneLSU
quote:
I felt like the movie was a portrait.
Like Forrest Gump?
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:20 am to Pectus
Forrest Gump was also a great story.
Posted on 9/19/11 at 10:35 am to TulaneLSU
quote:
I would argue that what you find great about the story is actually what is great about Gosling's performance. It's not the story; it's the character. And while stories are often given form by characters, in Drive, I saw focus only on character. That things happen is only incidental, only done so that we can learn more about the character. We're not supposed to care about the story at all, IMO, and that's what makes this movie disappointing, because had there been an interesting narrative, it would have been a great film. Instead, I felt like the movie was a portrait.
So none of this rings a bell when compared to Forrest Gump?
This post was edited on 9/19/11 at 10:36 am
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News