lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 First time I saw this film I concluded it sucked, but I think that was due to the youthful need to judge everything quickly. Last night I watched it again and it left me as nonplussed as the first time. I really don't know what to make of this film. On the one hand, it can be seen as the melodramatic penis cry of a young and naive director trying to make his big statement about life. It certainly contains lots of borderline overacting by all involved. On the other hand, there's no denying Anderson's real filmmaking chops; it's a pretty brilliant example of ensemble acting and editing, just like Boogie Nights. The camera movements and framing are all really self-assured. Then there's the ending, is it a stroke of genius or the desperate grasping of a director who has no idea how to tie everything together? I dunno. What says watmm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr lopez Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 i liked the bits with ricky jay and the janitor from scrubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goffer Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 If it were an hour shorter I'd call it a fine film. As it is, I find it to be a decent film with a few fine moments... most of it is a drawn out mess of redundant regurgitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z_B_Z Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 its been years since ive seen it but when it came out i loved it. then i went through a period of bitter cynicism and came to believe it was a corny piece of shit. now, thinking back on it, i think its probably not as good as i originally thought it was but not as bad as i came to believe it to be. its a so-so film. perhaps admirable in its lofty ambitions, but really a transitional work from a talented director. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 there were moments i liked, but overall i didnt care for it. especially the end. no i dont care about the meaning, it was fucking stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goffer Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 perhaps admirable in its lofty ambitions, but really a transitional work from a talented director. agreed... here here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 btw, big fan of Boogie Nights, Punch Drunk Love and There Will be Blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 still haven't seen Punch Drunk Love, good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 if you dont like adam sandler, dont watch it. otherwise, if you have a fairly open mind its a great watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overand Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I'm gonna side with the fanboy love-in on this one. The cast is great, all the filmmaking aspects are great, the dialogue and characters are never not interesting. I don't care if its reach exceeds its grasp. I don't think it's boring for one moment. I think a lot of the writing has to do with him thinking that he has to match his cinematic prowess with equally lofty storytelling. I can see why some might find that annoying but he nails the two together pretty perfectly. Boogie Nights is still better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 I don't mind Sandler, I guess...don't really have an opinion about him. Interesting thing about Magnolia is while I found almost all the forced emotional moments completely unmoving, the cumulative effect of the film was depressing. It's a morbid film. I can't shake that all of Anderson's films seem a bit naive/oversimplistic. Yet I really like him for his raw filmmaking talent, and his passion for making original movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z_B_Z Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 i really liked punch drunk love. worth checking out if you havent. hey lumpenprol, would you say anderson took a naive/oversimplistic approach with there will be blood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehauntingsoul Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I fucking hate this movie. My buddy lent it to me, said it was really crazy and awesome and that the ending was insane. Me and some buddies gathered to watch it (without said friend) and had no idea what we were in for. We kept taking breaks and discussing why we should or shouldn't continue. We were praying for a crazy twist ending. Without spoiling anything, when this movie ended I was basically like "WHAT THE MOTHERFUCKING SHIT WAS THIS FUCKING DIARRHEA FUCKING BALL SHITTING PISS ON A FUCKING DVD DISC???????" I want those 3 or whatever fucking ridiculous amount of hours of my life back. soooo much drawn out shit, so much dramatic silence and oh my god it goes so fucking slow, the ONLY thing that kept me watching was the promise of some really blow-my-fucking-pants-off type of ending like fight club or some shit but noooooooo all you get is raining frogs and some people crying. Fuck this shit. last post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 hey lumpenprol, would you say anderson took a naive/oversimplistic approach with there will be blood? sort of, yeah. But part of that was probably due to Daniel Day Lewis. Lewis is ok - unlike some people I don't think he is a flawless actor - but he's just this huge presence that sets the entire tone of the film, for better and worse. The film opposes capitalism and evangelical religion in a fairly black and white (but certainly entertaining) way. It's also about fathers and sons and family. My favorite part of the film was probably the subplot involving Day Lewis' "brother." I liked how he handled that. There's usually one subplot in Anderson's films that I find really resonates, like the subplot in Boogie Nights involving Philip Seymour Hoffman's crush on Wahlberg's character. But in terms of oversimplistic - well take for example the scene where Day Lewis confides in his brother "I've got a competition in me...I want no one else to succeed." I think he could have found a better way to show this rather than tell it. I don't know, but I think someone with that level of self-analysis probably wouldn't be so competitive - or at the very least Anderson could have added an additional wrinkle by showing how Day Lewis' character was helpless in the face of his own competitiveness - for example by trying to create some domestic life and then failing at it. He *does* try to create a version of domesticity with his son, but somehow when he sends his son away, and then his son comes back, it all feels strangely flat. Apart from a slap across the face, there's not much indication that cutting that part of himself off altered Day Lewis' character much. And strangely, at the end of the film, Lewis' character is shown in a downward spiral before his son announces he'll strike out on his own; there's no indication of what triggered his slide or if his son had anything to do with it. Day Lewis' character is pretty much static throughout the film, and I think that lessens the overall impact. In fact the final scene is both horrific and funny, but not really moving. If he had given Day Lewis' character more of a character arc, then he could have become an epic tragic figure a la Citizen Kane. Maybe that wasn't his objective, though. Maybe he just wanted to show where a very single-minded character ends up. He certainly succeeded on that level, I just wish he had attempted a slightly more complex portrait. For example, Day Lewis is never shown interacting with women in any meaningful way. Even if we assume he channeled all his sexual energy into his work ethic, you'd still expect him to have some sort of interesting way of interacting with women, yet Anderson never touches on that. He's kept more or less at the level of an archetype throughout the film. Still liked it a lot, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremymacgregor87 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 my favourite film, ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goffer Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 if you dont like adam sandler, dont watch it. I somewhat disagree... I'd argue, if you like Sandler don't watch it. It's not a typical film of his, but that's a given... I'd argue it's not even Adam Sandler acting. I remember the myriad of moans and griefs, like stale, tarnished farts, that retreated the theater-goers as they left thinking it was to be another screwball comedy. I love pathetic characters and strange relationships... so I naturally loved the film. I'll have to rewatch it again... it's been a while. I still need to watch There Will Be Blood... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 incidentally, thinking about There Will Be Blood again, it'd be fun to contrast that with Aguirre: Wrath of God. Both about a monomaniac with an interesting relationship with his child... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z_B_Z Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 But in terms of oversimplistic - well take for example the scene where Day Lewis confides in his brother "I've got a competition in me...I want no one else to succeed." I think he could have found a better way to show this rather than tell it. ... And strangely, at the end of the film, Lewis' character is shown in a downward spiral before his son announces he'll strike out on his own; there's no indication of what triggered his slide or if his son had anything to do with it. i think in the first instance the film had already implied what you were looking for. when day lewis' character says that line, i kind of had a "well, duh!" reaction too, but this has already been made obvious by his characters actions. as far as his downward slide is concerned, i kind of got the impression that it wasnt just one or two big events that caused it. i mean, its an inevitable conclusion to a life lived through selfishness and greed. in a sense, most of the film is a slow downward spiral, making his attempts to connect to his "son" all the more poignant. and i did find the end pretty moving. i give anderson props on his dark sense of humor.. anything that equally funny and horrifying is ultimately moving to me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perunamuusi Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 magnolia is one of the better films of the last 10 years or so, but it's no Short Cuts i (usually) can;t stand adam sandler, but punch drunk love is great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 i liked Magnolia a lot when i first saw it. After repeated viewings it looses a little bit of it's charm but i think the whole John C Reily cop story part of the movie is really strong, i almost wish it had more of him in it. Of course Tom Cruise is awesome as well, almost mimicking the manic behavior of his scientology rally appearances. i do think Punch Drunk Love is PTanderson's masterpiece, and i think Adam Sandler is very unfunny i cant say i like any of his movies besides Punch Drunk Love. Basically what Goffer said above. Also for some reason no one talks about his pre Boogie Nights film 'Hard Eight' which i found pretty enjoyable, if i were to rank his films i would put Punch Drunk at #1, Hard Eight at #2 and Magnolia at #3. I respect Blood but i found it so depressing that it was hard for me to enjoy. My friend told me he's basically disowned Hard Eight because the studio meddled with it too much, understandable but still a nice simple story with good characters, i must have a John C reily hard on because hes the main character in this one. edit: also side story about Magnolia, i saw it in the theatre when i was 17 with my not so mentally stable girlfriend at the time. when the climactic biblical ending happened she started sobbing hysterically in her seat, i asked her later why she cried so much and she answered 'i felt sorry for the poor frogs' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yeah I also more or less liked the John C. Reilly cop story the best - especially the part where he loses his gun. I thought that was the most unpredictable and least cliche moment in the film. You found There Will Be Blood depressing? I though it was far less depressing than Magnolia. Magnolia is basically saying: most people are alone in this world and you better seize love where you find it or you're fucked (watching William H. Macy's sad-sack character proclaim "I have a lot of love to give!" is just so fucking sad). The point of TWBB is mostly to watch Daniel Day Lewis chomp on the scenery, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yeah if anything There Will Be Blood is uplifting to me somehow...quite an entertaining and thought provoking movie. Magnolia is good the first time but it loses its appeal on repeated views. I would say Blood is his masterpiece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yeah if anything There Will Be Blood is uplifting to me somehow...quite an entertaining and thought provoking movie. Magnolia is good the first time but it loses its appeal on repeated views. I would say Blood is his masterpiece. yeah, I agree, from his films I've seen so far. I'd say there's a pretty decent chance I'll end up like Daniel Plainview (but probably without the money, hah) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yeah if anything There Will Be Blood is uplifting to me somehow...quite an entertaining and thought provoking movie. Magnolia is good the first time but it loses its appeal on repeated views. I would say Blood is his masterpiece. yeah, I agree, from his films I've seen so far. I'd say there's a pretty decent chance I'll end up like Daniel Plainview (but probably without the money, hah) I feel the same... "I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed.... I hate most people. There are times when I look at people and I see nothing worth liking. I want to earn enough money that I can get away from everyone.... I see the worst in people. I don't need to look past seeing them to get all I need. I've built my hatreds up over the years, little by little... I can't keep doing this on my own with these... people. [laughs] " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 as much as i enjoyed there will be blood, i did find it extremely bleak. i havent seen magnolia for years, might have to give it a re-watch. i didnt realise that they were both by the same person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.