Author Topic: 127 Hours  (Read 8322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

picolas

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Respect: +105
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #45 on: November 30, 2010, 08:39:06 PM »
0
Yeah, seriously: all Pic asked for was a modicum of expansion on an opinion. Surely that can be reasonably hoped for, and would have been entirely satisfied if even a short response had shown up before all this debate kicked off over its lack. Squints can't be blamed (we've all got other shit to do), but neither can Pic (he requested a very reasonable thing). Expressing reasons behind judgments, even if only brief, can only help the quality of discussion on the board.
thank you

squints' lack of explanation isn't great, but i'm more bugged by people suggesting that my need to know what he's talking about is somehow wrong. or some form of me lashing out at him! it's, like.. :shock:

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5798
  • Respect: +180
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #46 on: November 30, 2010, 11:27:23 PM »
0
Yeah, seriously: all Pic asked for was a modicum of expansion on an opinion. Surely that can be reasonably hoped for, and would have been entirely satisfied if even a short response had shown up before all this debate kicked off over its lack. Squints can't be blamed (we've all got other shit to do), but neither can Pic (he requested a very reasonable thing). Expressing reasons behind judgments, even if only brief, can only help the quality of discussion on the board.
thank you

squints' lack of explanation isn't great, but i'm more bugged by people suggesting that my need to know what he's talking about is somehow wrong. or some form of me lashing out at him! it's, like.. :shock:

Yes, but what if an explanation is all generics and is relative to how someone feels and cannot be argued or defended? Someone could write 5 sentences beyond, "I didn't like it" and still be saying the sum of those four words. There are some movies I can't explain why I reacted a certain way. I'm not trying to crucify Picolas, but I feel a little lack of understanding is ongoing in all the responses. Squints may have more to say on the subject. I have no idea, but I have carried negative and positive feelings around about a film that were wholly based on what my gut was telling me. I can't write those feelings.

squints

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
  • Respect: +77
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #47 on: December 01, 2010, 03:15:07 AM »
0
I've changed my mind. I didn't like this movie at all.
“The myth by no means finds its adequate objectification in the spoken word. The structure of the scenes and the visible imagery reveal a deeper wisdom than the poet himself is able to put into words and concepts” – Friedrich Nietzsche

Stefen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 7778
  • smh
  • Respect: +193
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #48 on: December 01, 2010, 03:16:27 AM »
0
lol.
Let's go to a motel. We don't have to do anything -- we could just swim.

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5894
  • :boxing:
  • Respect: +20
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #49 on: December 01, 2010, 02:44:33 PM »
0
Why do our discussions of films often delineate into the concept of discussing films rather than just discussing what we liked and didn't like and what worked for us and what didn't?
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 7224
  • Respect: +1982
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #50 on: December 01, 2010, 02:48:27 PM »
0
We're hardcore meta.
First things first, I'm surrealist

children with angels

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Respect: +7
    • The Lesser Feat (blog)
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #51 on: December 01, 2010, 07:51:36 PM »
0
Why do our discussions of films often delineate into the concept of discussing films rather than just discussing what we liked and didn't like and what worked for us and what didn't?

Well, this time it happened because someone didn't discuss what they liked and didn't like or what what worked and didn't work.

Triple hardcore meta.
"Should I bring my own chains?"
"We always do..."

http://www.alternatetakes.co.uk/
http://thelesserfeat.blogspot.com/

MacGuffin

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 22985
  • Respect: +641
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #52 on: December 01, 2010, 08:06:02 PM »
0
I'm hardcore mecha...


“Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.” - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

picolas

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Respect: +105
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #53 on: December 01, 2010, 08:32:19 PM »
0
Yes, but what if an explanation is all generics and is relative to how someone feels and cannot be argued or defended?
let's say it was a 100% physiological reaction that can never be explained or understood by anyone other than squints. it just. felt. okay. well, fine. but why would you post that?

Someone could write 5 sentences beyond, "I didn't like it" and still be saying the sum of those four words.
i'm not talking about length. i'm describing content.

I feel a little lack of understanding is ongoing in all the responses.
i know the feeling.

Squints may have more to say on the subject. I have no idea
Hence, my question to him: do you have more to say on this subject?

I have carried negative and positive feelings around about a film that were wholly based on what my gut was telling me. I can't write those feelings.
so.. you didn't post them? i do that all the time. i'm familiar with not being able to articulate exactly how i feel. that's why i avoid writing about those kinds of movies on here. because i know it won't be interesting or valuable to anyone else if all i can say is "this was okay." it's not exactly a mortal sin to write that, but it is very closely related to sloth. why would it ever be wrong to ask someone to explain their opinion further? squints initiated the conversation with potentially everyone on xixax by posting a message. i asked if he could elaborate. maybe i could've responded if i understood why he felt that way, and a discussion could've happened. all i'm trying to do is facilitate discussion on a discussion board. why is that so weird?

Pozer

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2289
  • Respect: +143
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #54 on: December 01, 2010, 09:11:39 PM »
0
really 127 hours later and still on this

pete

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5555
  • freakin huge
  • Respect: +453
    • my site
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #55 on: December 01, 2010, 10:33:43 PM »
0
if you actually wanted a discussion on the film, you probably wouldn't've called squint out like that.  you don't get someone to chat with you by demanding him to explain himself.
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.”
- Buster Keaton

picolas

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Respect: +105
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #56 on: December 02, 2010, 07:27:33 AM »
0
i was definetly peeved by the vagueness of the post, but there's nothing unreasonable about asking someone to make their volunteered opinion make more sense. i couldn't know if i wanted to discuss anything specifically with squints cause there was nothing specific to discuss. and by facilitate discussion, i don't just mean potentially between me and squints, but anyone on this board. there's no room for give and take if you're that vague. expect to defend what you're saying if you're going to put it out on a discussion board. if someone like me is DEMANDING an explanation there's no need to hide in a corner and never explain anything. i hope. was it that scary? i just asked for justification so someone could glean some value from the post other than critics are wrong.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10832
  • Respect: +806
    • Floating Heads
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #57 on: January 17, 2011, 09:27:03 PM »
0
Simon Beaufoy Talks Alternate Ending To ‘127 Hours’ That Was Cut (Poor Lizzy Caplan)
Source: The Playlist

When we first saw Danny Boyle’s survival tale “127 Hours” at TIFF, we called it “Lean, efficient, despairing, thrilling and ultimately life affirming” as well as one of the best films of the year.  By now you know the film is the true story of Aron Ralston (James Franco) who was stuck in a Utah canyon for days after his arm became trapped under a boulder.  Little did we know at the time that the film’s leanness was partially the result of a major trim to the third act of the film.  The film’s writer Simon Beaufoy recently spoke with the NYTimes about this last minute alteration. “We had a much more resolved ending, so they [the audience] had an emotional connection. There’s a long scene with his mother in the hospital, there’s a long scene with the ex-girlfriend where she told him a few hard truths, there was a scene at his sister’s wedding, which he referenced in the movie. So we had this very unusual movie, and we resolved it in this very Hollywood way.”

Apparently the film had even been shown to test audiences in this form when Boyle and Beaufoy had the revelation that they didn’t need it.  “Everyone was happy, but the day before we were due, we were looking at it in the cutting room and we had been debating it and we said, it’s a great ending, but not for the movie that we made. It felt dishonest. So we cut it. We felt that the movie really needed to – once he got rescued, it needed to punch out. I felt, emotionally, the movie was over when he says the words, ‘I need help.’”  After they realized this, they re-edited the film and screened it once again for test audiences.  “It all happened very late in the day. It’s a very weird thing making a true story, because you need your freedom, as filmmakers, to do what you need to do.”

Good news for the film but bad news for the cast portraying Ralston’s family including Lizzy Caplan (“Party Down”, “Cloverfield”) seen in the finished film only briefly as Aron’s sister Sonja. The real-life Aron Ralston was “very precise” about getting all of the details of his story right in the film, down to the color of his bicycle and whether he had turned left or right. Beaufoy said that this worried him at first but eventually told Ralston “Listen, to honor the greater truths of your experience, we have to tell it this way.” He continues, “When you make a movie, a dramatization based on the real experience of a living subject, you can’t airbrush that away into to a perfect movie arc. So I think the end of the movie nods to that, it nods to that ambivalence that’s still in him. In life, unlike in movies, people don’t change – what’s the word I’m looking for? – absolutely. They change a bit, slowly.”

The finale of the film now fits so perfectly it’s strange to imagine the film continuing on for an entire act.  No word whether any of this footage will turn up on the film’s upcoming release on DVD/Blu-ray in the spring. The picture seems to have lost a little of its momentum throughout awards season which is a shame because it really is a solid film.  If you haven’t seen “127 Hours” yet for some reason, (especially if that reason is you don’t think you can handle the “arm scene”), you should really catch it while the film is still in theaters.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

I Love a Magician

  • The Ultimate Boon
  • ***
  • Posts: 588
  • Respect: +5
    • daniel chase peach photo
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #58 on: February 06, 2011, 07:50:21 PM »
0
i feel like there's a good movie in there somewhere but it's been obscured by boyle doing his boyle thing all over it. there were some things i liked about the movie but for the most part franco was the only thing that kept me interested.

ElPandaRoyal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1724
  • Respect: +121
Re: 127 Hours
« Reply #59 on: February 23, 2011, 04:29:07 AM »
0
i feel like there's a good movie in there somewhere but it's been obscured by boyle doing his boyle thing all over it. there were some things i liked about the movie but for the most part franco was the only thing that kept me interested.

I mostly agree with this, but I'd say that in the end, my take on the movie is positive. But I also agree when a few posts back the word 'cheating' was used, because that's what Boyle did. This movie could have been bigger and unforgettable and way more intense with a different approach. I was just writing about Somewhere on that movie's thread and in some places I could feel more the loneliness on Dorff's character in that movie than I could feel in 127 Hours. I just don't think Boyle is consistent and doesn't trust the audience to just look at a shot for more than 5 seconds without cutting. I could understand that in the earlier scenes with him exploring the wilderness, but I just don't think he was successful since Franco fell on the cave (although the fall moment was perfectly shot and edited and made me gasp). That said, Franco is great in this, and I mostly enjoyed the movie because of him, even when sometimes his character starts speaking to himself in the cave only for the audience to know exactly what he thinks (no, not the hallucination parts of it, or when he talks to the camera, but the parts where he, like, gets tired and just says 'I'm tired' or something like that out of the blue).
Si

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy