|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:The more I think about it, the more I like how he just regresses back into a moody little boy in Batman 3. I like movies where the protagonist learns jack poo poo. That's not true. Bruce learns that hanging out in Italy with Anne Hathaway is better than being Batman. Which is a lesson we can all relate to.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:24 |
|
|
Not sure how Fargo hasn't been mentioned under Coen movies that end on that note, since I think it's the only one besides Burn After Reading to say that. iirc there's a similar monologue at the end talking about how people sure are stupid and life goes on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No Country wasn't really like that, True Grit wasn't either. Raising Arizona had Nic Cage still being a little foolish but he definitely learned something by the end of it. What exactly do any of the characters in No Country learn? It was the first Cohen brother film I watched and the main reason I liked it was that it had absolutely no message. Tommy Lee Jones even admits to chatting bullshit at one point and we all know what happens to Javier Bardem. I then saw The Big Lebowski, Fargo and Burn After Reading and since then I've assumed that the Cohen brothers aim to make films that carry no meaning. Meh, maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
asap-salafi posted:Meh, maybe I'm wrong. You are very wrong. Characters not growing is not even close to the same thing as "films with no meaning."
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
I don't know how you could watch No Country for Old Men and think that it doesn't have a message.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:Any other examples of films where the protagonist learns absolutely nothing in the end? Dr. Strangelove. "Mr. President, we must not allow a mineshaft gap!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
CPFortest posted:I don't know how you could watch No Country for Old Men and think that it doesn't have a message. There's a big clue in the title! CPFortest posted:That's not true. Bruce learns that hanging out in Italy with Anne Hathaway is better than being Batman. Well, he trades one adolescent fantasy for another, one is just more healthy and less destructive than the other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:There's a big clue in the title! So he learns that adolescent fantasies for young men are better than adolescent fantasies for psuedo-Fascists. e: fixed for accuracy
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
CPFortest posted:I don't know how you could watch No Country for Old Men and think that it doesn't have a message. That movie's one of the all-time great ones, I think. I love it but I've never taken any message away. What do you think they were trying to say with it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 09:40
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:The Perks Of Being A Wallflower. A coming of age film where nobody actually comes of age. I'm pretty sure the people who made it disagree with me, because they literally end it with Bowie's Changes - but I guess the author's dead and also wrong. I mean yeah, everyone's still a dumb teenager at the end of the movie, but I really don't think you can say that Charlie doesn't change. He has friends, and confidence, and is getting psychiatric help. That's nothing if not change. LtKenFrankenstein posted:Young Adult, kind of. This one is my favorite, because the main character goes through all of the motions, actually makes the change, and we can see it starting to take effect, and then one conversation with one stupid character and it all goes flying out the window.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 09:48
|
|
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:I see your point, and while I agree with everything you said, if they did change the line, it was for the better. Sorry to drag this up again, but I missed yesterday's threadsplosion from my original question. If that line was changed, obviously the filmakers agreed with you feeling that it was out of character (or redundant) and decided to make a 13th hour fix for better or worse. Personally, I prefer the line as "WHERE IS SHE" just from the notion that it shows how much the Joker has really gotten under his skin. He can beat on this psychopath all he wants but there is literally nothing he can do with all his strength. He's so blinded with rage, panic, and frustration that Mr. World's Greatest Detective can't think clearly enough to realize that the Joker may have lied about who was in which warehouse. When he gets there to find Harvey, the audience is left thinking "well of course he would have lied about that", then BOOM fresh baked Rachel. So back to my question: was the line was ever "WHERE IS SHE", or am I going crazy? (granted those two may not be mutually exclusive) So far only one person remembers it like I do. Anyone else?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
pookerbug posted:Sorry to drag this up again, but I missed yesterday's threadsplosion from my original question. If that line was changed, obviously the filmakers agreed with you feeling that it was out of character (or redundant) and decided to make a 13th hour fix for better or worse. I feel like that was the line too but it's also a phrase that could've been uttered by a million other characters in movies or TV so there might be some confusion. It wouldn't be out of place in Batman Begins, actually.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
asap-salafi posted:Cohen Cohen Cohen Cohen Cohen
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
csidle posted:A heads up, it's Coen and not Cohen. No H. A lesson Bill Murray has learned all too well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
pookerbug posted:Sorry to drag this up again, but I missed yesterday's threadsplosion from my original question. If that line was changed, obviously the filmakers agreed with you feeling that it was out of character (or redundant) and decided to make a 13th hour fix for better or worse. I just had a look at the original screenplay and he yells "where are they?" twice at the Joker.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:A lesson Bill Murray has learned all too well. Easily one of the top ten stories I've ever heard about the making of a movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Easily one of the top ten stories I've ever heard about the making of a movie. Do go on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
quote:Well, how about Garfield? Can you explain that to me? Did you just do it for the dough? The best part is that he was approached in the first place because on the Garfield cartoon, they got the guy who voiced Dr. Peter Venkman on the Ghostbusters cartoon, who does the same Bill Murray impression for Garfield.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:Do go on. He said he didn't realize that Joel Cohen and Joel Coen were two different writers, and signed on to Garfield based on the fact that it was being written by a Coen brother. It's a ridiculous story and was clearly meant as a joke, but because of this whole bizarre and stupid "Nobody will ever believe you" legend the internet has created around Murray lots of people took it seriously. e: wrong Cohen. Though Etan Cohen and Joel Cohen should totally team up to be the dark mirror version of the Coen brothers. feedmyleg fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Feb 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
Bill Murray claimed he didn't read the Garfield script properly and thought it was a Joel Coen film he was signing up for. http://www.vulture.com/2010/07/bill_murray_only_did_garfield.html copying a url obviously takes time :/
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:I mean yeah, everyone's still a dumb teenager at the end of the movie, but I really don't think you can say that Charlie doesn't change. He has friends, and confidence, and is getting psychiatric help. That's nothing if not change. But what felt grating to me was the complete lack of responsibility surrounding Charlie, not just in the usual teenage way, but with the writer creating and seemingly approving this even when he's not trying to get into the teenage psyche or whatever. 90% of what Charlie does or what happens to him is caused by an external factor and can't be blamed on (or attributed to) him. The other 10% is magically without consequences for him. Charlie stumbles through the entire plot without having to take responsibility for anything, good or bad, while this is an important part of any coming of age film. It's like the author (who obviously based Charlie on his own experiences and fantasies) felt the need to protect his character from the outside world. Examples abound. You've got Sam and Patrick adopting him. He's not responsible for anything he does at the party because he's stoned. Sam kisses Charlie and not the other way around. Charlie gets pressed into the RHPS because a regular got sick and only after they basically force him on-stage. His LSD-trip. Mary Elisabeth asks him to the prom and declares them to be dating and he passively goes along with it. He beats up a lot of dudes, but he blacked out so he's not at fault! It was just his combat training kicking in. They should be glad he didn't have his hanzo steel on him. Patrick kisses him and not the other way around. And maybe a bit controversially, even his suicide attempt was caused by external factors (his aunt), instead of what I would have found more interesting story-wise: an 'ordinary' depression. Even the one action during the entire film which you could say had consequences - the Truth or Dare kiss - is tainted by this. For starters, it happens during Truth or Dare, the traditional fantasy where you don't have to feel guilty for doing something because hey, you were dared to. It also had the whole 'Jesus Christ Mary Elisabeth, shut the gently caress up already' montage before it, so she 'deserved it' kinda. His mom even told him to break up with her. But still, ostensibly there's fallout. Charlie is sent out into the wilderness. Poor him. But then, suddenly, out of nowhere: the nonsensical Black-Out Kungfu Master scene. (Did I mention he didn't seem to get in trouble for beating on a bunch of dudes in the middle of a school?) By doing this non-action, he's back in the group with no real negative consequences at all. Sam and Patrick respect his dude beating skills so much (and the fact that he stood up for Patrick yada yada) that they happily forgive him for dropping that dramabomb in their small group and betraying basically everybody's trust. Mary Elisabeth doesn't care because she's so fickle and changeable and 2D and she has a new boyfriend so she forgives Charlie. Don't ask questions about how Mary Elisabeth now feels about Sam. Just don't. What it comes down to is that this film isn't just about self-centred teenagers, it was also written by one as some sort of escapist fantasy where he's the star, where he can't be blamed for everybody and where everybody wants to smooch him. Charlie really doesn't change during the film, except that after his suicide attempt, he can talk about what he couldn't during his previous therapy sessions which I assume he had what with all the talk about him 'seeing things again' - his aunt. But does that indicate that he 'came of age'? Did he mature? Or did he finally get run into a corner where the only thing he could do was face this reality, instead of avoiding it like he did with everything else in his life? You can call that change, I guess. I wouldn't. But it all depends on how you look at it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Perks is handled pretty poorly, if you ask me Maybe it's because I'm old, but the suicide comes out of pretty much nowhere. He's supposed to be "depressed" but he's more just mopey throughout the film. Then his two friends and he decides that's it? Throughout the film he seems to be having a pretty good time even when he's having his worst times. I'm not familiar at all with the book, but am decently familiar with the types who read it, who generally think that a suicide can be a 'beautiful' thing, or that it can teach a lesson to people around others. Speaking from experience, I can say neither of these things are true. The films made like a teen drama, and it's supposed to be "about" teen depression, but it's never handled well at all. Even with all of the voiceover in the film, you never get into the headspace of the character the way you do in, say, Take Shelter, or even Silver Linings Playbook. I don't really get it, I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
I think you're misinterpreting the purpose of the Bad Relationship montage. That scene is not to show that Charlie is justified in how he acts during Truth or Dare. That scene is itself the consequence for the mistake he made earlier. After the Sadie Hawkins dance Charlie was clearly not interested in making out with Mary Elisabeth, because he's only really interested in Sam. But he didn't voice any of this and instead went along with it, giving her the wrong impression. Then when she upped the ante by declaring him her boyfriend, he still said nothing. Rather than experience a moment's discomfort and tell her right then that he wasn't interested, he kept quiet and effectively led her on, setting her up for larger heartbreak. During the montage, his mother tells him that he should break up with Mary Elisabeth because the relationship clearly isn't right. He ignores this and still keeps quiet. He says nothing until he reaches his breaking point during the Truth or Dare scene, where he insults and humiliates Mary Elisabeth in front of all of their friends. Even if she was a lovely girlfriend, she didn't deserve that. And as a consequence, Charlie's friends cut him off. He loses his support structure, and his mental problems get worse. Things get worse, but he never says anything to his parents or his brother or sister about it. Everything comes to a head in the cafeteria when he blacks out during the fight. Charlie's main problem in the film is that he ignores his issues. Whenever he starts seeing things he tries to just shut it off. He doesn't talk to people about his problems. At the end of the film he has taken the first steps towards fixing that. Keep in mind that while all of Charlie's friends are seniors, he is only a freshman. At the end of the film, he is still only at the beginning of his arc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
As soon as I saw who was playing Mary Elizabeth, Charlie's first girlfriend, I blurted out, "Her?" without even realizing what I was doing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:The films made like a teen drama, and it's supposed to be "about" teen depression,
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
cloudchamber posted:I just had a look at the original screenplay and he yells "where are they?" twice at the Joker. Well that settles it. I'm fuckin' bonkers. I'll be in my room pissing in milk bottles and making a vest out of hair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
cloudchamber posted:I just had a look at the original screenplay and he yells "where are they?" twice at the Joker. I just re-watched the scene too, Joker responds with "Killing is making a choice." & "Choose between one life and the other." Which doesn't fit quite as well with the "WHERE IS SHE?!" as "WHERE ARE THEY?!". Even if he's taunting and ignoring a specific question. That being said, knowing what we do about Batman and Bruce and the whole choosing to reveal his identity just a short while before, it puts a different spin on the Joker's last line there. "Choose between one life and the other" means Harvey vs Rachel, but it could also mean choosing between Batman and Bruce.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Mescal posted:That movie's one of the all-time great ones, I think. I love it but I've never taken any message away. What do you think they were trying to say with it? To quote Hundu, who put it so succinctly. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:There's a big clue in the title!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Oh, and duh: Observe and Report. Consequently: Taxi Driver. And GoodFellas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:Consequently: Taxi Driver. Most James Bond movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:Consequently: Taxi Driver. Goodfellas is especially fun knowing how the real Henry Hill ended up (kicked out of the Witness Protection program for constantly going back to his old ways.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Goodfellas is especially fun knowing how the real Henry Hill ended up (kicked out of the Witness Protection program for constantly going back to his old ways.) Then making porno
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
Not sure if this is the right thread, but I saw part of a film a few years ago I'd very much like to identify so I could see it in its entirety now. I believe it was filmed in the 70s, and the premise reminded me of Synecdoche, New York. But it featured a black director, filming some kind of film, but it became "meta," as if he was trying to film the act of the film crew filming a movie about which they have no clue what the hell was going on. I remember seeing shots of the film crew discussing the director being lovely. He was basically being a horrible director on purpose, and I believe trying to capture the actual film crew's reactions to the premise. I seem to recall it having a strange title, I could've sworn it, too, was called Synecdoche something, but I believe I'm mistaken, as my Google-fu attempts have been turning up unsuccessful. I am pretty positive it has a rather strange title, however. Any help would be much appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
corpsed posted:Not sure if this is the right thread, but I saw part of a film a few years ago I'd very much like to identify so I could see it in its entirety now. Symbiopsychotaxiplasm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Symbiopsychotaxiplasm. This sounds kinda cool. Is it any good?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
I love it. I maintain it's a great double feature with Blair Witch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
When do we first see those silencers/suppressors for firearms turn up in films? You know the sort, they make the pistol or sniper rifle sound like a tiny kitten coughing, and are about as loud. I'm thinking James Bond, but maybe there is something earlier than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 10:48
|
|
|
Project1 posted:When do we first see those silencers/suppressors for firearms turn up in films? You know the sort, they make the pistol or sniper rifle sound like a tiny kitten coughing, and are about as loud. Speaking of this, I was watching Universal Soldier: Day Of Reckoning where a silencer is used and it produces a realistic sound. It sounded like a loving gunshot, is what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 11:44
|
|
|
pookerbug posted:Well that settles it. I'm fuckin' bonkers. Apparently we're not the only two people who remember it that way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ3ninO2aXc
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:24 |
|
|
At 23:00 in Steamboat Bill Jr., Steamboat Bill takes a bite out of something and offers it to his son. What is it? I can't tell if it's some kind of beef jerky or tobacco product or anything. The film is on Netflix Instant for those who want to investigate: http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/999095?strkid=1387992741_0_0&trkid=222336&movieid=999095
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 18:40
|
|
