 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)big recycle ...and 445 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614083 Today 3 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Okay I finally got a chance to go and see this movie..and here is a quick review as promised to Le Coeur.. Excellent start to the movie...the whiny self loathing inner dialogue bit is right there with one of Woody Allen's stuttering outbursts, Nicholas Cage's acting is quite outstanding..he is gradually redeming his postion of high esteem (Bringing out the Dead.. already did a lot of Damage Control) that was due to his Hollywood hokum in my eyes..but dont expect a hunky turn girls..Cage as Charlie Kaufman is fat, bald, ugly , weak, undignified and pathetic..and both physically and intellectually repellant...in short..brilliant.....while the twin Donald is identical physicaly is poles apart character wise...I may be harping on about Nic Cage a bit..but that's probably because he is the best thing about the movie...the so called revolutionary narrative and plot..is far from it..at it's best it's mildly diverting..and narrative of the film being generated on screen has been done with a lot more visceral punch on at least three previous occassions..Prospero's Books...Barton Fink....and Naked Lunch..lets put it this way..the film is a diluted amalgam of the later two..and this mildly daring narrative device is wholly compromised in the third act..where it trampled on it's logic that it painstakingly invented and elaborated on in the first two acts...some would call this clever and inventive in it self..but to me..this just made the whole thing that much ordinary..saying anything more would spoil a lot of the fun of the movie..you will understand what I am getting at when you watch the movie... This was the same problem I had with The Royal Tenenbaums..first two acts..lovely.. the final act...apalling and undoing much of the inventive ground work... so is it worth a watch..yes..a good movie...just dont expect to be blown away by it..like I did... and those reviewers going around saying that it surpassed..Being John Malcovich.. bzzzt..wroong... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i haven't seen this one and i doubt im going to, since i can stand to watch cage he is one anoying guy... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i loved it... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Been looking forward to seeing this for ages..... being john malkovich is my fave film of all time... so I'm expecting alot from adaptation......opens here feb 28th ..... thinki |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I finally saw it and have to say it was fucking awesome...I think I analyzed it for an hour after seeing it, well done...I do agree on "the final act...apalling and undoing much of the inventive ground work" but still an awesome movie....-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ehheheh did ya get RED some orchids?? hummmm ehhehe thanks for the thorough review, i planned on seeing it last week, but missed the showing =/ i definately wanna see it, nick cage is a fav, as are all the preformers i've read are in the film. plus i've heard so much about this REAL life writer i wanna know whats up. odd thing about this movie is when i saw the trailer i had NO DESIRE to see the movie, it's really true how a trailer can make or break a movie.......it just didn't look interesting. i'm glad to hear otherwise =0) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I thought it was pretty good, but I liked being john malkovich better, anyone seen the other film out by kaufman? hes wrote a new one that comes out that has jim carrey in it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its excellent. i think it is probably one of cage's best performances ever. i really hate that character he does in movies like "snake eyes" or "face off." it was refreshing to see him in a new role. and really he is playing the part of two diametrically opposed personalities and he pulls it off with out a hitch. I think spike Jonez could become my next favorite director. So early in his career and already he has a couple excellent. some directors put out dozens of films and never even approach the caliber of Adaptation and Being John Malkovich. Look at Joel Schumacher for example. that guy couldn't direct cheese onto a cracker. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hehe yeah that movie was fuckin' sweet 'i don't want this to turn into some childish movie about drugs, that has a pop song in it' (or something to that effect) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Lots of people seem to have a problem with the final third of the movie, but in my opinion that's because they're not looking at it the right way. What happens on screen in that third isn't really important. Right up until Charlie attends McKee's seminar is a true story (Donald aside) of Susan Orlean researching The Orchid Thief and Charlie trying to adapt it. Bar some dramatic licence, everything up to there really happened. It's only after the seminar that he accepts that he can't adapt the book and will have to make stuff up in order to finish the screenplay. He has to adapt. The final third is Charlie playing this out. That's the true tale of the final third, not what happens to the characters on screen. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I was aware of the implications of the seminar on the third act..I didnt want to go into the details of it in order to avoid the "spoilers"... but I still say as I said before... *in the third act..where it trampled on it's logic that it painstakingly invented and elaborated on in the first two acts...some would call this clever and inventive in it self..but to me..this just made the whole thing that much ordinary* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
okies i FINALLY saw this movie last night! and i have to say the explanation you give about the 3rd act (which i found to be outter limit like) makes A LOT of sense. this was in no way CLOSE to the originality and complete joy of 'being john malkovich' but it was entertaining on other levels. and i have to say i loved the QUOTE that Donald said: "you are who you love, NOT who loves you" it was sooooooo perfect. i also really liked the musings of the 'orchid thief' i could totally understand the characters fascination with him, and the intelligence that seemed to emminate from him (especially describing pollination....ahhahha).....very interesting indeed.....and the ORCHIDS......damn i wish i could have some in every room!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
loved it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I thought it was ok... a little dull! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i thought it was great on first viewing. but it doesn't really have much repeat watchability for me. i have to disagree with you about royal tennenbaums though. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
danbrusca: true. but i think this is where the movie loses repeat watachability. like in Memento, once you know how it's going to end, the film just kinda frustratingly crawls along. (my opinion of course) so yeah, good movie. but not really one i will likely watch many more times. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I liked it. and I did like the third act, yeh yeh yeh. I agree with the fleaster on The Royal Tenenbaums, although I think the problem with that film isn't so much the third act, but the whole film is kind of flawed. I think RT tries too hard to be "out there" - wacky characters, wacky presentation, wacky storyline. it tries to repeat what "Rushmore" did with much gusto, but fails. I hope Anderson doesn't make the same mistake with "The Life Aquatic". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I liked it and ..... man that whole car crash scene as to how that guy got fucked up teeth was something else. I like how the movie you are watching is the script that the writer wrote himself into. Or so it comes across. good movie none the less |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i agree that Royal Tennbaums is a bit "over the top" compared to Rushmore, kinda like, less innocent, more ambitious. but i don't think it's a failure. I like Rushmore better but one thing i really like about RT is the ensemble character dynamic. how a series of family tragedies kinda simultaneously causes this awkward homecoming. and i especially love the photography. i love how so many of the scenes are filmed with such symmetry. so yeah, while i don't necessarily like it better than Rushmore, i still really love Royal Tennenbaums. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Adaptation = good, possibly great Rushmore > Royal Tenenbaums My opinion = worthless My post-rate = decreasing |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i liked the ending. it was unexpected, and while it may make the movie seem more "average" to incorporate the cheesy car chase type of shit, it uses it in an abnormal way to poke fun at movies in general.. the kind that don't have something worth thinking about in them at all and rely heavily on special effects, stunts, and stupid-assed twists at the end of the movie which reveal that a good percentage of the movie or its characters where generated by the main character's mind. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I must see this movie now. Im normaly not a Nicolas Cage fan tho , hes a bit of an "over actor" , this might be good tho. I miss leceour =( Her posts where so uplifting. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but i'm not saying all movies that contain car chases/stunts, special effects, twists, etc, are bad. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
