Author Topic: Wonderstruck  (Read 1004 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3544
  • Respect: +1641
Wonderstruck
« on: May 12, 2017, 04:36:32 PM »
+3


Set in 1927 and 1977, the film centers on Ben (Oakes Fegley) and Rose (Millie Simmonds), two deaf children from two different eras who secretly wish their lives were different. Ben longs for the father he has never known, while Rose dreams of a mysterious actress whose life she chronicles in a scrapbook. When Ben discovers a puzzling clue in his home and Rose reads an enticing headline in the newspaper, both children set out on quests to find what they are missing that unfold with mesmerizing symmetry.


Directed by Todd Haynes
Starring Julianne Moore and Michelle Williams
Release Date - October 20, 2017




matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3229
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +463
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2017, 09:59:31 AM »
0
Why is Todd Haynes so good?

Just Withnail

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1631
  • Respect: +458
    • Truls Krane Meby's website
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2017, 05:22:31 AM »
+5
Yeah really. That clip tickles me.

It's quietly cosmic in the way it juxtaposes the time periods, 70s/ancient history, 20s/ancient history, 20s/70s.

We get a sense of the things that pass away: Fashions, technology (b/w vs color), species.

And we get a sense of something constant: human curiosity and play, the museum itself (a safeguard against entropy, the passing-away of things, collective forgetfulness).
My short WORLD WIDE WOVEN BODIES is now online:

Watch it here!

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3544
  • Respect: +1641
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2017, 03:54:07 PM »
+1

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3544
  • Respect: +1641
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2017, 11:51:22 AM »
0

Something Spanish

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 150
  • Respect: +54
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2017, 07:04:13 PM »
0
Not the biggest Todd Haynes fan, but will always watch his features. Somehow I saw this one twice over the weekend. I really liked the idea of alternating constantly between two time periods, especially where one is a B&W silent film, but Wonderstruck did not work for me at all. The silent scenes in 1927 were nicely done, but that only plays in the film to a certain point and ultimately the whole movie felt meandering and pointless. I understand what he was going for as far as making connections, with other people as well as the past and present, but everything just felt so forced and unnatural here. The kid Millicent Simmonds was great, and the rest of the actors believable enough, the story just could not keep my interest and felt so pandering, felt like so much time was spent writing on a little pad that by the time the climax hit I really did not understand the need Haynes had to make it. While I'm Not Here felt like a failed experiment, this just felt like a failure.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3544
  • Respect: +1641
Re: Wonderstruck
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2017, 02:10:51 AM »
0
This was so disappointing to me. Todd Haynes seems to have two main modes - stories sharply focused on single characters (Safe, Far From Heaven, Mildred Pierce, Carol), and stories that are tapestries or mosaics made out of one person (Velvet Goldmine, I’m Not There, Wonderstruck). I can never seem to get fully on board with the latter. I didn’t feel anything during this movie, and was even let down by the cinematography (although the 70s NY stuff looked great).

It was such a missed opportunity. The characters’ deafness was a great foundation for visual storytelling, and yet the black and white stuff felt like a parody of silent film in the same way people try to make something 'noir' by desaturating their footage instead of shaping with light and shadow. It was all characters talking to each other exaggeratedly and then title cards of what they were saying. Wtf. And you know Haynes is capable of more. The scene with Julianne in the museum with the models was cool aesthetically, but not really fitting with the rest of the film. It just seemed like an excuse to go all Karen Carpenter Story. Tonally it was all over the place (that ending title card?!). Maybe the weirdest film I’ve seen in recent memory.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy