|
Author |
Message |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:11 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
shannon wrote: Requiem for a Dream is little more than an artsy Reefer Madness. You do drugs: you will end up performing sex shows in front of creepy, old black men; your arm will rot off; you will be lobotomized. Scarrrry
It is well-made and well-acted (if not taking into account Jared Leto - he's terrible), it's just dumb as dirt.
Disagree with all of the above except the assessment of Reefer Madness. Requiem does not suggest that all drug-taking leads to emotional and personal meltdown any more than Days of Wine and Roses suggests that about drinking alcohol. There is recreational drug use and there is drug addiction. There is social drinking and there is alcoholism. Shannon's reaction seems the paranoid response of a stoner--not to make any assumptions about my man Shannon.
Oh, almost forgot. Nor is Leto terrible. He's excellent. Though word is he's an asshole off screen. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
shannon |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:46 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 1628
Location: NC
|
I'm not a stoner. Not lately anyway. Stoners do LOVE Requiem for a Dream, though, so there goes your theory. That's why I've been subjected to it against my will so many times.
I much prefer Trainspotting to Requiem. It realizes that drug use is less about addiction and more about just plain boredom. Our man sees what drugs are doing to he and his friends, kicks them, goes straight, gets a job and becomes a normal adult, thinks to himself "is this really that much better?" All I got out of Requiem is "drugs aren't good for you." |
|
|
Back to top |
|
marantzo |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:23 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
Funny that a movie that was directed by Darren Aronofksy that was said to be terrible was Requiem for A Dream (which I haven't seen) and nobody mentioned Fountain, which I did see and it is God Awful! I checked who the director was and when I saw it was Aronofsky I found it hard to believe as I had seen The Wrestler and though it was dynamite. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
inlareviewer |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:16 pm |
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Marc wrote: Set in the cultish world of ballet and revolving around a performance of Swan Lake, Darren Aronofksy’s The Black Swan may be the best Dario Argento movie that Argento didn’t direct. It’s a psychological horror/thriller that recalls the finest of the Italian giallo films. Or imagine The Red Shoes directed by Hitchcock at his most demented and you’ll get a sense of the spinetingling creepiness and ravishing visuals served up by Aronofky’s wonderfully warped cinematic mindfucker.
It’s rare for a film these days to actually be scary. Most contemporary horror flicks are repulsive rather than frightening, repelling the viewer instead of seducing them. The Black Swan is jump-out-of-your-seat scary and it achieves its scares honestly, through evocative storytelling and crafty film making. In addition, it’s sexy as hell, full of gothic atmosphere and genuine eroticism - a fairytale for adults.
Natalie Portman, Barbara Hershey, Wynona Ryder and Vincent Cassel deliver terrific performances. Matthew Libatique’s cinematography is stunning. The sound design is effectively spooky and David Stein’s art direction evokes the technicolor magic of a Michael Powell film (as well as Argento).
Aronofsky, who directed one of the worst films ever made, the loathsome Requiem For A Dream, has now redeemed himself with two extraordinary films in a row: The Black Swan and 2008’s The Wrestler.
I’m rather certain my Argento comparison will hold up to careful scrutiny. I need to see Swan again, but on a first viewing, many of Argento’s stylistic flourishes, both psychological and visual, permeate The Black Swan like an intoxicating cloud of opium smoke: the surrealistic dreamscapes, the lethal eroticism of sharp-edged objects, a virginal heroine in the thrall of suppressed sexuality, setting the action in a theater, windows and mirrors as portals into the subconscious, mother love, lesbianism, Catholic guilt, secret societies, occultism, the id on fire, blood, blood, blood….The Black Swan would make a great companion to Suspiria and Opera.
At the end of tonight’s screening of The Black Swan at the Austin Film Festival the audience cheered loudly in a spontaneous eruption of delight. We all felt the kind of giddiness one feels after being manhandled by a master filmmaker. Aronofsy may not quite be a master yet, but he’s getting there.
Oh, how cool, am very excitable over this. Haven't seen a good scary ballet movie since Spectre of the Rose, and that's not that scary, unlike, oh, I dunno, Leslie Browne's non-acting in The Turning Point, or various oddities in the documentary field, tee-hee. Can't wait.
Edited for insufferable tongue-in-cheekery |
Last edited by inlareviewer on Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:21 pm; edited 2 times in total _________________ "And take extra care with strangers/Even flowers have their dangers/And though scary is exciting/Nice is different than good." --Stephen Sondheim |
|
Back to top |
|
bartist |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:20 pm |
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6958
Location: Black Hills
|
Nobody mentions The Fountain because no one could make any sense out of The Fountain. It's visually inventive as hell, but to what purpose? A love/hate experience, for me.
Unlike Hereafter, which I just saw, and sorta liked...as one of those slowly-paced contemplative things that turns out to be not so much about death, but about (as usual) stitching lives back together and moving along in life. As with another film "about death," "21 Grams," this brings several separate lives together on a (contrived, yes) collision course. There is some sloppiness (one character, Damon's new friend he meets in a cooking class, just disappears after his "gift" sours their date and turns up her dark family secret), and perhaps an excess of sweetness in its later romantic trajectory.
The visual artistry is undeniable, from the opening tsunami scene, to well-crafted urban cityscapes, and you can just sit back and enjoy them without having to develop any opinions about the reality of what the central characters have experienced. Who doesn't like to see Paris in the rain, and a lovely French lady walking through scenes like some exotic species of antelope that you have only glimpsed in dreams as you....wait, what was I saying?
Never mind. Her portion of the story is a bit absurd (it's okay, they're French, right?) as she takes time off her job as a news anchor to write a book about Francois Mitterand, then changes her mind and writes about her near-death experience in the tsunami, and somehow charms her publisher into accepting this shift of topic, even after he's already given her a big advance for a Mitterand book.
Yeah, I write this down, and I think maybe Eastwood has trouble juggling three separate narrative threads and really keep them all in the air (to mangle a metaphor hideously). I think he could have managed two, and given the viewer a better chance of connecting with all the characters, but as it is, you tend to sacrifice someone in the scope of your caring. |
_________________ He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days. |
|
Back to top |
|
carrobin |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:07 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
As a publishing professional for 40 years, I think any publisher would much rather have a first-person life-after-death-experience book than a biography of Mitterand. Unless Mitterand was much more interesting than I've been led to believe. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
Marc |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:19 pm |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
Films about married couples grieving the loss of a child are a dime a dozen. Really really great ones are not so common. Rabbit Hole is more than uncommonly good. It's terrific. A powerful film without a false note, expect it to gather up some Oscars for this year. Certain nominations are: director John Cameron Mitchell, Nicole Kidman, Aaron Eckhart, screenplay David Lindsay-Abaire. Likely nominations are: Dianne Wiest, Miles Teller.
Rabbit Hole is extraordinary. 4 stars. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
mirgun |
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:45 pm |
|
|
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 165
Location: New York City
|
"Rabbit Hole is extraordinary. 4 stars."
I totally agree , Rabbit Hole was flawless. I've never liked suburban-life stories, Nicole Kidman or Sandra Oh ...but this movie changed my mind.The acting was superb,the screenplay was excellent... and oh, yes..I had tears in my eyes.. |
_________________ Mirgun |
|
Back to top |
|
bartist |
Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:52 am |
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6958
Location: Black Hills
|
carrobin wrote: As a publishing professional for 40 years, I think any publisher would much rather have a first-person life-after-death-experience book than a biography of Mitterand. Unless Mitterand was much more interesting than I've been led to believe.
Car -- sorry, I should have given more context for that...the firm, a French publishing house, does only political books and has given her an advance for a book on Mitterand that (explained in the movie) is apparently a big deal and everyone is excited about. She is known as a hard-hitting news anchor who asks the tough questions and the book is supposed to reflect this approach.
[there's also a Derek Jacobi cameo, in case anyone is interested -- he plays himself, reading Dickens at a book fair...] |
_________________ He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days. |
|
Back to top |
|
inlareviewer |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 4:44 am |
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Marc wrote: Films about married couples grieving the loss of a child are a dime a dozen. Really really great ones are not so common. Rabbit Hole is more than uncommonly good. It's terrific. A powerful film without a false note, expect it to gather up some Oscars for this year. Certain nominations are: director John Cameron Mitchell, Nicole Kidman, Aaron Eckhart, screenplay David Lindsay-Abaire. Likely nominations are: Dianne Wiest, Miles Teller.
mirgun wrote: "Rabbit Hole is extraordinary. 4 stars."
I totally agree , Rabbit Hole was flawless. I've never liked suburban-life stories, Nicole Kidman or Sandra Oh ...but this movie changed my mind.The acting was superb,the screenplay was excellent... and oh, yes..I had tears in my eyes..
This echoes all colleague-eal comments thus far, and having vaguely admired the play, though unable to escape a whiff of teleculture-angled aspect and overrate to Mr. Lindsay-Abaire's pointedly nuanced old-school dramaturgy -- from MTC via the pirate-vid circuit (insert salaam to Cynthia Nixon, John Slattery, Tyne Daly, et al, here) to South Coast Rep to the Geffen (Amy Ryan's Becca and Tate Donovan's Howie beyond praise) to Anaheim's Chance Theatre, am most heartened to read these encomiums, thanks ever so, M & M. Am particularly gratified to note the adaptation incorporates characters only mentioned onstage, not to mention, Tammy Blanchard as Izzy? Oh. Mah. Gah. Can. Not. Wait. Am. So. There. |
Last edited by inlareviewer on Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:32 am; edited 1 time in total _________________ "And take extra care with strangers/Even flowers have their dangers/And though scary is exciting/Nice is different than good." --Stephen Sondheim |
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:12 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Tammy Blanchard's presence gets me so there too. After a smashing breakthrough as the young Judy Garland in that television movie with Judy Davis, her career has somewhat stalled (the Bernadette Peters Gypsy did little for her). Blanchard is a great actress who needs and deserves notoreity. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
marantzo |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 7:11 am |
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Blanchard is a great actress who needs and deserves notoreity.
Do you really mean notoriety? I don't understand. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:25 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Yes, I meant notoriety (and thanks for spelling it correctly, which I didn't originally). The word has the meaning simply of "fame," quite apart from the common connotation of "unfavorable fame." |
|
|
Back to top |
|
carrobin |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:43 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
Which reminds me of some of the writers at my last magazine job, who thought "infamous" meant "very famous." My favorite was the caption "Monet's infamous Water Lilies." |
|
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 11:13 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|