Review the movie you just viewed (all the way to) 11

[gump]

What takes a little bit from my admiration of The White Ribbon is that I never fully bought the underlying political argument. I admire Haneke for tackling the issue of religion, sexual repression and its ultimate consequences, but I think something is missing there. He never associates this explicitly with the rise of Nazism, but I think it's fair to say that this point sort of permeates the whole film, and I find this "explanation" a bit simplistic to my tastes, although courageous nonetheless.

 

[Lancemc]

I'm not sure the underlying point of the film is so much a linear causality as that, which is what a lot of critics seemed to jump right to. I mean, it's obviously an implication, though it feels like more a single facet in the general rumination on the same sort of particular social complexes Haneke has been interested in for the majority of his career. It's been too long since my one viewing of the film to expound much further on that, but I've always found that particular reading a bit too narrow.

 

[Lancemc]

Anyway, Cache has

 

[powerhour24]

So, Team Cache then Lance?

 

[powerhour24]

So, Blue Valentine. At first I was digging it, then I started to think the back/forth timeline thing has been played out, as compelling as the performances were, the director's choices of ridiculous closeups and dialog overdubs were irritating me, later on it started coming off as a modern day Revolutionary Road without all the subtext, but finally during the final scenes it really became its own thing and the inter-cutting made it all the more powerful. Not that you don't feel for the girl, but man all I could think half the time was how much he threw his life away for her, he gave her his whole heart and she grew indifferent because he didn't flourish into something more than your average person. The story leaves it up to the audience to guess where the real tension and breaking point came in the couple's relationship because we only see it blossoming and falling apart, not any of the in between. Michelle Williams is competent, but save for a few very well done moments I think it's sad her performance is getting far more credit than Gosling's as this might be his best outside of Half Nelson.

Gorgeous end credits as well, though they kind of come out of nowhere considering the gritty style of the actual film.

 

[Saracene]

I find fascinating the different responses different viewers had to the couple in Blue Valentine. Personally, I was quite sympathetic to Cindy and her complaint that she was raising two kids instead of one. Though I did feel for Dean, I could easily imagine how, once that first rosy glow wore off, living with him would do her head in, probably because someone like him would do my head in. I also thought that Michelle Williams slightly outshone Gosling, but really they were both fantastic.

 

[powerhour24]

Different genders, different sympathies maybe? I don't think he should have married her, granted the kid would have grown up without a dad, but they barely new each other, and didn't have the time for their relationship to go from infatuation to strengthened maturation before the pregnancy and marriage came into it. They couldn't have seen what happened coming, but they could have given themselves time before making the situation permanent.

 

[powerhour24]

As to why I thought Gosling outdoes Williams, his is a performance of so many subtle character changes, often critics talk about a performance that shows a wide range, but this is the quiet perfect example of that type. Williams relies a lot on the audience sympathizing with how the character is written, holding so much back, there were fewer moments where I could see in her face/body language how we're supposed to feel for her (as opposed to what the scene is already telling us) than with Gosling, but I'm not trying to sell her short, when she did connect with me it was riveting. I just think it's a shame since she's much more likely to end up with a (fucking!) Oscar nomination than he is, when one performance really doesn't work without the other. It's the same reason I was so pissed that Rachel Wesiz got all the credit for The Constant Gardener when Ralph Fiennes gave one of the most heartbreaking, quiet performances of all time, and if you don't buy into his performance/grief, her's is almost irrelevant. When both leads connect, both should be recognized.

 

[gump]

I'm not sure the underlying point of the film is so much a linear causality as that, which is what a lot of critics seemed to jump right to. I mean, it's obviously an implication, though it feels like more a single facet in the general rumination on the same sort of particular social complexes Haneke has been interested in for the majority of his career. It's been too long since my one viewing of the film to expound much further on that, but I've always found that particular reading a bit too narrow.

This is a fair assessment. I didn't mean to imply that I find the film simplistic, it's just an impression that Haneke at times wants to make some grandiose statements but he manages to control these impulses. I think I'm being more influenced by some of his interviews, where he seems to make these claims more directly, than necessarily the film itself. One of the aspects of the film that jumps at me (if I'm remembering correctly) is that the ending coincides with the outbreak of WWI, which makes the historical connection harder to ignore (including the implication that the children would grow up during the Weimar years and become adults just by the time fascism is on the rise). Anyways, this is still a minor issue for me, the film is far from simplistic and I find it brilliant. The blu edition is fantastic, I strongly recommend it.

 

[powerhour24]

I took the town's society as a microcosm of pre-fascism based solely on what was on screen, so I think that ambition is largely realized. It's for that reason that I said I admired how much he accomplished within this film.

 

[lazarus]

And like Cache, it's also very effective as a thriller.

 

[powerhour24]

True. I seriously think I will have a Cache/TWR double feature soon.

 

[bono_212]

The Social Network

It was pretty straightforward, nothing to hate about it. It told a good story, and it made you feel for the characters. I don't really understand why it's being toted as the film that will define our generation or whatever, unless that's referring to the fact that it's about something that is defining our generation...if that makes sense.

I was kind of unhappy with the way the film was lit. I've never had a complaint about something like that before (unless you're talking The Incredible Hulk or Godzilla 2000 where the film's too dark to even see) so the fact that I kept being bothered by it was something to me. Andrew Garfield was brilliant. I had no idea that someone else would end up carrying the film to such an extent, and really this was almost more his story than Mark Zuckerberg.

8/10

The Kids Are All Right

Not much to say. I enjoyed it, but felt like they left a lot out at the end of the film. I hate when movies have a character like Ruffalo's that ends up without any sort of resolution.

I don't know if it was just the presence of Annette Bening, or what, but I couldn't help but draw a lot of comparisons to American Beauty, which left the film feeling a little played as well. Anyways, I thought it was an interesting story and a fun watch.

8/10

 

[Lancemc]

I don't really understand why it's being toted as the film that will define our generation or whatever, unless that's referring to the fact that it's about something that is defining our generation...if that makes sense.

Neither does Fincher apparently.

Fincher calls it down the middle

 

[powerhour24]

I don't think it defines this generation, so much as lives in it more authentically than any other film. Here's a quote from a review on the DVD cover that calls it emblematic of its time and place, and that I agree with.

 

[MMP]

Just watched The White Ribbon. As I was expecting it's a beautiful film. Perfectly paced and with a strong script. It goes in many directions and manages to tight them all together at the end through its underlying theme. Haneke is simplistic, and in that simplicity makes almost every shot as beautiful as the previous one; and all actors are great, especially when it comes to the Pastor's family, himself included.I wish I would feel like writing a review right now, this film deserves one.
Anyway, 9.3 to this one.

 

[corianderstem]

I saw that The White Ribbon is going to be on one of the cable movie channels I get next week, so I'll be DVR-ing it.

 

[LemonMelon]

I don't think it defines this generation, so much as lives in it more authentically than any other film. Here's a quote from a review on the DVD cover that calls it emblematic of its time and place, and that I agree with.

Yep, Social Network feels pretty authentic, which is one of its major selling points. Of course, the film is shot in the context of the most distinctly upper class schools in the country, so it's hard for me to consider that an accurate depiction of the college experience, but it ticks a lot of the 21st century boxes in the meantime.

I will say that there are many elements of the film that I passively dislike, although the story is functional and the acting doesn't take me out of the film. It holds up, but I can't help but disagree with any assertion of creativity or ingenuity in the film's storytelling. It follows the exact same pattern of power n' corruption that cinema has run into the ground since Citizen Kane, only this time the protagonist is almost entirely unlikable. Mini House needed a punch in his midget face from frame 1.

What I did love was the ending. Whether Zuckerberg wants to admit it or not, the concept of him starting a social networking site in order to ultimately burn someone and/or gain approval is powerful when placed in the light of that final scene, with him repeatedly hitting refresh, no one left in the large, empty building to comfort him. As Fincher said, the concept of social networking destroying a friendship is incredibly interesting, but the decadence in the interim isn't taken far enough (I mean, come on, Zuckerberg was an asshole from day 1, what's a few months of further assholery supposed to show?), and the inevitable disintegration feels like something to be checked off, rather than a fulfilling culmination of a great story, which I felt it generally was.

It's decent. Fincher has been more ambitious in the past and proved himself more than capable of dreaming big. This film tells a great story in a rather perfunctory manner, but that's not so much my issue (although I do have issues with critics placing a film following an obvious template on a high pedestal); I simply didn't like the characters, and I felt the ones that attempted to deviate from the "everyday 21st century college kid" thing were forced in there for unnecessary comic relief. Well, OK, Timberlake amused me greatly.

 

[Saracene]

I wouldn't say I liked the film's Zuckerberg, but I thought he was one of the most memorable and compelling characters I've seen onscreen. His sheer unlikeability and prickliness is somehow weirdly compelling to me, but then I also like Harry Potter's Snape a lot (that is, the book character and not Alan Rickman's cuddlier version).

 

[lazarus]

What I did love was the ending. Whether Zuckerberg wants to admit it or not, the concept of him starting a social networking site in order to ultimately burn someone and/or gain approval is powerful when placed in the light of that final scene, with him repeatedly hitting refresh, no one left in the large, empty building to comfort him.

This would have more resonance if it were, you know, actually true.

In real life, I imagine Zuckerberg had his girlfriend to comfort him.

 

[Saracene]

I thought it had resonance within the film's universe and the story it was telling, regardless of whether or not it was true to real life In general the accuracy of events/characters was pretty much irrelevant to me.

 

[lazarus]

No you're right, thematically it worked. It was very appropriate based on the structure they chose. But I guess I have issues when they're taking liberties with something that just happened a few years ago, when they could have made their points without that "never got over the one that got away" B.S.

 

[powerhour24]

However, whether their was a breakup or not, the blogs he's writing in the beginning of the film while creating Facemash actually happened, and you can find them somewhere, I remember coming across a link to it when the film first came out. I also don't think it's fair to say that the film isn't ambitious simply because its a character study instead of something as distinctive as some of his past work, in other hands, even with the brilliant dialog, this would fall a part. Turning what could have been done as a character drama, a biopic, a college comedy, etc into more of a thriller of betrayal to me is what sets the film apart from the pack. It is not your traditional true-account film by any means. Watching it again this week, it is the editing that is being criminally underrated here, I hope it wins the Oscar for that category.

I gotta dig up the thoughts I posted on it initially in a different forum, I feel like I'm being more rambly than anything else tonight.

 

[lazarus]

Hey, I was reluctant to see this film at first because of the subject matter, but I'm not going to downgrade it now because of that. I just don't like seeing Fincher subjugate himself to a writer's film, which this was. It could have been worse with a different director, for sure. But it's still not what I would have preferred him to do.

I've enjoyed ALL his films a great deal, the most minor being Panic Room. And call me crazy, but I think I even prefer The Game to The Social Network. It's a gimmick-based film, for sure, but there's also a lot in there to chew on about mortality, materialism, etc. which is a nice warm-up for Fight Club. Very underrated and I'm really glad I picked up the HD-DVD.

 

[powerhour24]

See, I would say his involvement lifted it from being just a writer's film, but then again it's also an acting showcase. I also think it's kind of pointless that you so often deride what he's chosen to work on since BB, unless you're a personal friend and don't understand his choices, simply watch his films and judge what he's chosen to make. It's one thing to think he could be making something else, but you the tend to bring it up every time either TSN or Dragon Tattoo are mentioned. The man obviously so potential in each of them, and he's yet to come off as a mere gun for hire on any project he's worked on, so I'll respect what he chides. Though it's funny that we joke he makes too many serial killer movies, but they're arguably his best work (though at this point I rank TSN over Seven) and the Eliot Ness serial killer project seemed pretty cool, so in the end I wouldn't care if he made 4 serial killer films. Though I would think he'll be locked into making the rest if the Millennium trilogy shortly after the first one.

That said, I agree that The Game is underrated and containing more substance than the gimmick makes people think. I was actually considering watching that this weekend.

 

[lazarus]

The films may not seem like the work of a hired gun, but they're still scripts that were brought to him. One could say the same thing about the last three features that Scorsese has worked on, and one of them was also a remake of a foreign hit which was in very familiar territory for the director.

I just feel that both directors have enough clout at this point to initiate their own projects and that's what I'd prefer to see them working on instead of just choosing something that happens to fall onto their desk at the urging of an agent or producer.

Oh, and BTW, I don't know if you saw what Fincher is doing after Dragon Tattoo, but it's an prequel to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. Sigh. Though at least that's something different for the guy.

 

[LemonMelon]

It could have been worse with a different director, for sure. But it's still not what I would have preferred him to do.

I couldn't really get past this myself. Having seen a couple of his previous works, I found this one a little thin as far as ambition and thematic weight are concerned. He's capable of more. That said, it's a functional biopic and deserves a viewing from most. Best Picture, not so much.

 

[lazarus]

Because of the weak year, I don't feel there's any other serious contender that deserves it more. I may personally prefer Inception, Black Swan and True Grit, but I'm not so sure that I'm comfortable with any of those winning the big award.

 

[LemonMelon]

The Elephant Man

I've always liked David Lynch. Prior to viewing this film, I considered him a playful if forcefully eccentric director with a skill for startling, memorable images and thoughtful plotting. However, this film is my favorite of the four I've seen (Eraserhead, Elephant Man, Blue Velvet, Mulholland Drive), and it has given greater depth to how I perceive his works. It reminded me of what I find so thrilling about cinema.

It's to Lynch's advantage that few watch his film's for a fully-formed plot, so for this one it's gravy. The original story was already fascinating, but Lynch makes it into an excellent flick with all the trimmings. It's juicy drama, but it has incredible emotion and sophisticated direction, balancing a realistic 1920s aesthetic with modern techniques and clarity to create a dazzling visual experience. I mocked it before, but I can't wait to see the BRD version now.

Of course, what I love most about the film isn't in the technical aspects but in its aforementioned skill at reminding me of what makes movies worth watching in the first place: namely, cinema's way to take a story, at one time just headlines, and make your heart beat right along with the protagonist's. Thanks to the film's pacing, Merrick's first words become an event, and some of them happen to be inherently profound. "I am happy every hour of the day...because I know I'm loved" would wring tears even in the driest of contexts, but the supporting cast really makes you believe it's justified. I did, and tears were wrung.

Overall, truly remarkable. You feel for the character, but it hits deeper than sympathy thanks to the unexpected depth of Merrick, as well as Lynch's own eccentricities. The film wouldn't have felt the same shot by any other director, and it's fun to watch the greatest moments of Eraserhead be appropriated to the world of Elephant Man (which is, itself, just an island in the greater world of David Lynch). In some cases, they're even bested: Merrick's surreal dream sequences will stick with me for quite some time.

9/10

 

[bono_212]

Obviously I too am out to review The Elephant Man:

I won't say too much to save on redundancy, but my favorite part of this film came from the fact that fall semester of my senior year, I took a biopics class, and in it we viewed The Story of Louis Pasteur. While far more emotional, and with a great deal more depth, Lynch told this story, I was amazed by how much it reminded me of Pasteur. It says a lot to the aesthetic of the film how well he made it look like something that may have come out in the 30s or 40s, and it set a nice surreal feel as well, as I kept expecting the film to be an average 30s/40s picture, and then every so often, you'd get a Lynch curveball, like the dream sequences. Another interesting moment (to me at any rate) was when LemonMelon told me Anne Bancroft was Mrs. Robinson. I couldn't pick her out in the film because I kept expecting her to be younger than her character in The Graduate. The film just felt that autentically old.

I was a bit sad to discover how much of this film was liberties taken by Lynch, but in the end, I don't care, because the story was just so very moving. I wish they'd explored a bit more Treves' concerns as to wether he was a good man or not, I felt like that was never really that hard a question to find the answer to, and maybe if it had been fleshed out a bit more, it could have been a greater character study.

I won't pretend for a moment that I liked/enjoyed Eraserhead, but it was very cool to see so much of that film in this one. I liked the way it worked here, and it added so much to what I was earlier talking about, as far as Lynch's fingerprints on the film.

Anyways, I've been pretty adamant in the past that Blue Velvet was my favorite of his films, but this just might have passed it.

9.5(10?)/10