|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.168.77.34
Just got around to watching this one. What a tedious, predictable, plodding bore this film was. I think it tried way too hard to be a "great film", and failed by taking itself so seriously. Hard to believe it got so many accolades, I was expecting much more.
Follow Ups:
...that ultimately failed. The script, especially, tried way too hard.Director Inarritu and screenwriter Arriaga aimed for something rich and complex and profound, but Babel proved to be a strained effort overall and ultimately disappointing to me.
I've said below, that each of the Three Amgigos stepped up to the plate in 2006.
Del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth) and Cuaron (Children Of men) knocked their balls outa the park. Inarritu (Babel) swung hard...and missed. But if you don't swing hard, you never knock one out of the park.
Ironically, Babel was nominated for more awards in US than the other two, much better films from Inarritu's compatriots. So it goes.
I want to see Pan's Lab again before I comment, but Children of Men was weak and I had major problems with it. Talk about a script that takes itself too seriously, that aims to be rich and complex and profound, Children of Men was a real disappointment. Granted, Cuaron took more chances in that story...and I wish he didn't.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Stephanie Zacharek in her Salon review says pretty much everything I feel about CoM - only she says it much better than i ever could. (See below). There's not many modern movies I'm passionate about but this is one. Thrilling. To me, anyway.This and Pan were the only films I saw in 2006 where I immediately wanted to run back in and see them again.
Clark and I and several others here will never get over CoM not being nominated for BP or Cuaron fro BD, though of course as I always say, there are far more great movies that didn't won the Oscar than there are great movies that did.
As for CoM, be careful how you interpret what's up on the screen - Cuaron deliberately leaves a lot open to interpretation by the viewer. CoM can be a difficult movie to read because it is so very dense (not necessarily complex, as it's essentially the story of one man's inner journery). The story is told primarily visually, much of it in the corners and margins of the frames. And there is a *lot* going on, if you read it. CoM infuriated hardliners on both the left and the right, a sure sign to me that it's doing something right. Finally, CoM is a genre film, and unashamed of the confines that imposes.
I'm delighted that HD DVD threw in the towel so now I can look forward to owning this someday sooner on BD. You can keep Babel, as I'll never want to own it.
Cuaron is my favorite Amigo, for this film, and for Y Tu Mama Tambien, HP3, The Little Princess and a very underrated (if slightly flawed) modern version of Great Expectations.
I even liked his Harry Potter film, especially compared to the other Potter films (which may not be saying much). But the reason CoM upset people on the left and right is because it cast the terrorsts and government as equivalent. And while the left might believe that terrorists have greater justification in their actions than government, and the right may believe the opposite, I am so tired of the Hollywood premise that "both are equal", which appeared to be a theme of CoM. It is such an easy idea that it requires and commands no real thought. The story was empty rhetoric about saving the world in the backdrop of this human impotence that was never explained and only served to emotionally manipulate the audience about the hopelessness in the future.The roles played by race and gender were not interesting. If the movie really wanted to make a gutsy statement about a black woman or baby being the future or the savior of humanity, why did we need a white male to protect them until he became a martyr? I saw the entire vision of the future and salvation of humanity as nothing but a cheap attempt at transgression to make up for the ills of the past. The Michael Cain character was like a John Lenon figure, smoking reefer and getting martyred himself. It really bothered me, and not because it was good but because it was so superficial. It may have masqueraded as a complicated exposition, but the story was simple and the message was telegraphed right down the name emblazoned on the ship at the end.
It wasn't only the story but many of Cuarón's choices that I didn't like, including the shakey/handheld camera during the action sequences.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Not.
The hype machine these days for Hollywood crapola truly is artful. It seems there is no shortage of whore-like film criticism.
"The Departed" a masterpiece!
"The Valley of Elah" a terrific and moving story of a father's anguish!
"There Will be Blood:" the best film of the decade!
"No Country for Old Men:" another classic from the Coens!
All okay films but, because of the ridiculous expectations reviews such as I parodied create, eminently disappointing.
I purposefully stayed away from "Half-Nelson" because the hype was so intense and I didn't want to be disillusioned yet again.
That film was the exception.
Not a film, necessarily, for the ages but a very well crafted and acted one. Actually, it's one of the VERY few films from that year which I'd like to revisit: it had complexity which a second watching would reward.
That one was absolutely a masterpiece.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
rate the far more complex, nuanced, and satisfying "Fargo?"
We are set up--- remember the sheriff's story about the lawman shot from the porch?--- for a reckoning that never arrives. Now, evil may triumph but a lawman whose cowardice leads to a woman's brutal, cold-blooded murder? That's nihilism and I don't like it.
"Fargo" was just as brutal, more realistic, but it didn't leave one with the feeling that evil wins out, that even the best of men must genuflect to evil incarnate.
Imagine, if you will, Gary Cooper's sheriff in "High Noon," scooping up Grace Kelly and decamping before the showdown. Or "Shane" deciding that he's just going to wander on after hearing about the brutal Jack Palance.
Sorry, I don't need a happy ending but this one was false to the expectations it raised.
"False Expectations" would have been a better title.
One can argue that No Country is the first serious film from the Coens, in which they've told an entire story without relying on their trademark film devices or humor. Even if you don't want to admit it's their masterpiece, you have to say it's a very balanced, powerful film that dispenses with their "cute" ideas. Like when Marge says in her North Dakota accent, "and I suppose that's your partner in the woodchipper back there." That kind of comic relief is hugely entertaining on repeat viewings, but it effectively castrates the horror of the moment and to some extent is a copout. In No Country, the Coens didn't cop out and for the first time the film we got from them doesn't flinch from its own narrative flow.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
nt
I would've called it "irony", surely a Coen trademark, evident to some degree or other in all their movies. But Fargo is quite serious about the tragedy of its characters...in a Coen sort of way.
Fargo is quite different in tone from the operatic Millers Crossing, which is different again from the suspense of Blood Simple or the theatricality of Barton Fink. Raising Arizona is one of the most forthrightly comic, if you gotta have comic Cohens. Arizona is gleefully over the top, as is The Big Lebowsky, and to a lesser degree, Oh Brother Where Art Thou.
I don't think I'd agree NCFOM is the first serious Coen film. But I do think NCFOM, by taking much of its tone from the source novel,is by far their least self-consious effort, their most straightforward movie. Of course it is also imbued with the Coen's unbsique sensibility. But it does seem to me like a different, more restrained, tauter direction from their previous work.
I probably don't like it as much sa you but I like it better than Tin does ;-)
hardly are knee-slappers.
You didn't address any of the critical points I raised.
It's a nihilistic film.
I don't think anyone could see "Fargo" and think it was comedic. It was terribly brutal but it also showed some human feeling, expressed most often as humor, though the sheer number of murders and their brutality were as dark as those in any film. Hell, even Shakespeare, in a tragedy such as "Hamlet," balanced it with a few sprinkles of humor. Did those ruin the tragedy for you?
Film noir classics almost always had the bad guys get their just desserts. Showing them getting away, after a terrific shootout, rarely occurred but NEVER did they escape because of the cowardice of their pursuers.
It's an entertaining film, JI, but art shouldn't debase humanity.
No doubt there is a sardonic wit that runs through their films. Even in Miller's Crossing, when Turturro is pleading for his life, it's a very thin line between his acting there and outright farce. I didn't say the comedy ruined anything. The first time I ran through Fargo, I didn't even catch the humor. Now I can't see Buscemi's face without cracking up. As in Shakespeare, those levity devices make the tragedy easier to take and let's face it: part of the Coens' gift is their sense of humor and timing. But to really tackle a story like No Country, they needed to dispense with it, and I'm glad they did. Had they made this film in the 90s, scenes like the coin flip scene in the convenience store would have been peppered with humor. Instead, the Coens made sure the drama escalated with no hint of levity. That is a great achievement.As for debasing humanity, far from it. The protagonist and Llewelyn and his wife each faced inhumanity without giving in to it. Evil can never be defeated, but when you're no longer gung-ho to face it and fight it, it's time to step aside. That was part of the message of the film.
-------------
"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...taking a nap in Crawford...)
Too many films and idiots are not in their right places, it seems.
Regards
BF
Some humorous moments to be sure, but not a comedy.
There's a muscle on her arm
With a red and blue tatoo
That says
Fort Worth I love you
.
which for me greatly reduced it in all of those areas.AI couldn't leave well enough alone, or trust his audience... the film was just so full of itself... so thick with it's sense of itself (virtually every frame dripped with self-importance) that it kept feeling contrived and manipulative which created a barrier... which is a shame because it could have been excellent and it wasted many fine performances.
I don't mind director's trying to hard or over-reaching if what they're trying to do is truly bring something special to life but in this case the trying to hard and over-reaching seemed to be in service of being seen as an important film... and that left a bad taste in my mouth.
"You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."
I didn't know how the first few stories would end. The last one, I thought the girl would jump off the balcony. It was a gutsy film that took a lot of chances. I usually dislike Pitt and Blanchett, but even they did alright. Most of all, I loved the cinematography and was blown away watching the Blu-ray version. It was filmed expertly.
Excerpted from my review:
In the Book of Genesis, the story of Babel reveals how mankind's push to overachieve backfires, leading to the spread of divine confusion and spiritual pain. The biblical story has inspired many artists over the centuries and director Alejandro Iñárritu is certainly an artist. If there was any doubt of that before, he dispels it here. His vision is powerful, his actors perform magnificently and his story, despite flaws and risky subject matter, is accessible and even noble, if not rising to its spiritual inspiration. Iñárritu achieves riveting performances from his entire cast--from children and foreign actors never before seen in Hollywood to superstars Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett.
The film weaves tales of confusion, miscommunication, terror and alienation in Morocco, Tokyo, San Diego and Mexico. It begins as an arab father buys a rifle for his two sons to protect a goat herd from jackals. In a horrid test of target practice, the boys take aim at a bus winding on a mountain pass below. With dramatic camera work and haunting music that bring audiences into the characters' locales and psyches, Iñárritu creates a strong gravitational force that moves through an ultradramatic narrative.
The stories unfold in a nonlinear way as Iñárritu attempts to weave together the seemingly disconnected subplots. He valiantly attempts to link them together. Perhaps the strands should have been left separate and produced as different vignettes, each in a linear way, from beginning to end. But I admire Iñárritu for attempting to resolve a tricky narrative with so many unrelated characters. Whether he pulls it off is debatable, but his skill and vision is beyond doubt. The film is not for everyone and has some disturbing content that portrays violence and nudity in ways that audiences are unaccustomed to seeing. For those of us who like to be drawn into a truly inspired cinematographic experience, Babel comes strongly recommended. And Paramount did a fine job with the Blu-ray.
Alienation, pain and miscommunication are universal themes, common to all humanity. Babel captures these themes well and weaves adept, muscular stories around them. The film does not achieve absolute spirituality and timelessness, but the stories are handled with great care and artistic vision. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker than Iñárritu, these plot lines would have come unglued, but we are treated to a film of ample quality and of emotive, spellbinding content. The book of Genesis tells of mankind's push to build a city, a tower, reaching to the heavens. In the modern world, many of our cities have such towers. And Iñárritu's stories come to an end on one of these high risers, looking out over the lights of Tokyo at night.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...in 2000's Amores Perros, and to some extent in 21 Grams. IMO he did the same sort overlapping, complex story lines more powerfully in these earlier films. (BTW, I would imagine most audiences would find certain imagery these two films much more "disturbing" than Babel. But they are also much better movies.)
Inarritu (who, along with Alfonso Cuaron and Guillermo del Toro, is one of the celebrated "Three Amigos") is certainly one of the most talented directors in the world. His nerve and cinematic chops are beyond question. He surely deserves all praise for tackling this multilayered, interconnected, complex narrative with its interweaving stories, overlapping time lines and disparate characters.
Parts of Babel are certainly beautifully told (such as the Japanese story). But some of it feels rather trite (such as the Mexican chapter). Where Inarritu's previous films grabbed me and held me byt the throat for their entire length, Babel often annoyed and irritated me, taking me out of the story by calling attention to its own impotance. I bought Amores Perros right from the git go. I didn't buy Babel, not completely, not ever, although I wanted very much to like it.
For me, the script is the weak spot, never quite succeeding in tying this ambitious film together. I found the American characters in particular rather one dimensional and their reactions/responses often implausible. Too often Babel strains for its effects where the previous films created a more telling emotional truth.
For this I place much of the blame on Inarritu's close collaborator, screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga. Arriaga also wrote Amores Perros and 21 Grams, but it seems to me he bit off more than he could chew with Babel. Where Amores perros was content to trust the audience and let the characters and story tell us everything we needed to know, Babel keeps uderlining the message and adding exclamation points, just to be sure we "get it".
I get it, I just don't like it.
Come back, Inarritu, I miss your unique voice - leave the baggage behind this time.
What made it work for me was to view the separate storylines as unrelated vignettes. Thankfully, Babel did not try to force a greater link between them than the meager thread that existed. But you have to admit, the common denominator of desperation was communicated brilliantly, if not in the script than in the skill of the actors and director, whose chops are immense, as you say. Yes, I like Del Toro and Cauron very much.
Maybe what made Babel work for me is that I had such low expectations going in. I had heard it was a mess and didn't work at all. And I was pleasantly surprised.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...that Pan & CoM were slighted in critical polls and award noms by what I suspected was 2006's "Crash". And maybe I was hoping for too much.Babel is a much better movie than Crash, a film I also found pretentious and unsubtle. But after the brilliance of Amores Perros I was really hoping for something special.
OTOH, I was more than willing to give this movie a fair shot, since I'm a big fan of the Three Amigos and Inarritu's previous efforts.
Like I said above, if you don't swing hard, you never knock one out of the park. Inarritu swung hard - and IMO missed. But I like that he keeps on swinging.
The next movie I think will be key for him.
I meant predictable in the sense that you knew all the story threads would come together in the end, all the connections would be made, etc. There were no real surprises, other than the few moments that could be chalked up as shock value (uncomfortable nudity, violence, etc).
The scenes were way too long and drawn out, as if somehow lingering on them longer could make them better. Just didn't do it for me.
Yep...pretension AND Brad Pitt...YIKES!
"...You're all welcome to stay for the next set...we're going to play all the same tunes, but in different keys..." -Count Basie
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
I remember wondering what kind of mind could write a script with a couple having passionate sex after the woman's been seriously wounded with a high-power rifle.
Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy - WB Yeats
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: