Originally posted by srussell0018
Last night I watched this movie that was really really good but you've probably never heard of it.
:whip:
i watched Safe House not too long ago either. Maybe you've heard abou thtat one. It blew donkey dick
Dj Nacht
Watched The Descendants last night. I'm still trying to come to grips with George Clooney winning an oscar because of it. Yes, the movie is sad and beautiful, but Clooney doesn't even do anything. Hes like a freaking robot the entire movie ffs. Whats with him and narrating? First that airplane movie and now this .
LAdazeNYnights
Exactly. The narration felt like a cheap trick to me--its sole purpose was to up his monologue time to make his role more widely appealing and credible.
LAdazeNYnights
A quick comment: Take Shelter was the best movie of last year. More than any other, it's really stuck with me. in' nightmares focused on that movie from time to time...
Watching The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Told myself I wouldn't bother since I've seen the original, but oh well. I have one serious gripe with the film (and I guess this is true of very many hollywood films): why 'adapt' a film based on a swedish novel, for which a swedish movie with global-acclaim already exists, and still try to hang on to the swedish-ness of it? Does that really do it for some people? Hearing Daniel Craig, and everybody else for that matter, speak English while they have Swedish names, eat Swedish stuff, and buy groceries with Swedish packaging in Swedish stores?? It just doesn't make sense to me. Is the suggestion here that American people love foreign stuff but think everybody should speak English? I would've liked the movie more if it were adapted to take place in the United States. Would've felt more 'real' to me.
GoSpeedGo!
quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
I have one serious gripe with the film (and I guess this is true of very many hollywood films): why 'adapt' a film based on a swedish novel, for which a swedish movie with global-acclaim already exists, and still try to hang on to the swedish-ness of it?
The book is primarily about Sweden and its dark fascist past. Mikhael and Lisbeth not only investigate the mysterious murder that happened to this rich important family, in the process they also uncover traumatic moments of the country's history that are still hiding under the Ikea table. It even ties in with the feminist subtext where Larsson suggests that men's abusive behaviour toward women is a contemporary manifestation of this supressed trauma.
Since the story is so tightly connected to its country of origin, I don't see how could you set it in the US and still manage to maintain this level of thematic complexity. The story wouldn't even make sense, unless you do a proper rewrite and connect this to some actual problems America deals with.
Dj Nacht
quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
A quick comment: Take Shelter was the best movie of last year. More than any other, it's really stuck with me. in' nightmares focused on that movie from time to time...
+1
That scene when he finally loses it at the work party. :eyes:
It was a tough choice between this movie and Drive, but in the end, Take Shelter took first place.
kamil
Some underrated movies most of you probably haven't seen that you'll really want to:
- The Legend of 1900
- 25th Hour
- Matchstick Men
- Primal Fear
LAdazeNYnights
quote:
Originally posted by GoSpeedGo!
The book is primarily about Sweden and its dark fascist past. Mikhael and Lisbeth not only investigate the mysterious murder that happened to this rich important family, in the process they also uncover traumatic moments of the country's history that are still hiding under the Ikea table. It even ties in with the feminist subtext where Larsson suggests that men's abusive behaviour toward women is a contemporary manifestation of this supressed trauma.
Since the story is so tightly connected to its country of origin, I don't see how could you set it in the US and still manage to maintain this level of thematic complexity. The story wouldn't even make sense, unless you do a proper rewrite and connect this to some actual problems America deals with.
I understand what you're getting at, and of course you're right. Perhaps I was wrong to suggest that it should have been adapted to take place in America. A lot of the issues brought up, though, are quite universal. My point was just that it feels so wrong to speak english with so much foreign context. The movie could've been adapted into an English speaking one without referencing any exact place - I thought Feinnes did an exemplary job with this in Coriolanus. I don't think that the film would've suffered as a result of such things. I suppose the whole 'suspension of disbelief' thing doesn't work for me as well when it comes to language.
Julz
Highly recommend Take Shelter!!
Amazing movie
GoSpeedGo!
quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
I understand what you're getting at, and of course you're right. Perhaps I was wrong to suggest that it should have been adapted to take place in America. A lot of the issues brought up, though, are quite universal. My point was just that it feels so wrong to speak english with so much foreign context. The movie could've been adapted into an English speaking one without referencing any exact place - I thought Feinnes did an exemplary job with this in Coriolanus. I don't think that the film would've suffered as a result of such things. I suppose the whole 'suspension of disbelief' thing doesn't work for me as well when it comes to language.
Yeah, I think you're kind of rationalizing your own personal preference here.
I haven't seen Fiennes' Coriolanus, nor am I familiar with the original play, but knowing other Shakespeare's works and the fact this one is set in ancient Rome, I must assume that it was originally written as a timeless story - or, in other words, as a story about past that reveals a lot about present. That's not even considering the amount of time Shakespeare's plays exist in cultural discourse and how many times they were adapted and modernized. Hell, Emmerich's Anonymous even thematized this mythical nature of Shakespeare by presenting the writer himself as a (sort of) ghost we don't really know - validity of this specific conspiracy theory notwithstanding, here the true identity of the author is problematized. Shakespeare and his plays are now no less mythical than ancient legends; they share, for the purpose of this argument, the same metaphorical space.
Larsson, however, is a contemporary author writing about contemporary Sweden. Some of the themes there are definitely universal, but that's true of almost every story. The book is too recent for it to become a part of a mythical canon, and it's closely tied to a current social climate in a specific country. It would make no sense to rewrite it for a different location as well as shoot it in Swedish, since those films already exist. I think Fincher made right decisions and thematically (also formally/stylistically, of course) went further than the original movies, even though it may not be immediately apparent. The two ways of investigating (Mikhael vs Lisbeth) are fleshed out (and compared) a lot better, the role of new media is handled with typical Fincherian ease and the story is told much more confidently. It doesn't need to move from the swedishness of the original because it makes changes (and improvements) on so many different levels.
BTG
the "God bless America" gave me a boner.
oh man, i feel ashamed that this is one of my fantasies.
stren
quote:
Originally posted by BTG
the "God bless America" gave me a boner.
oh man, i feel ashamed that this is one of my fantasies.
