Author Topic: Boyhood  (Read 7422 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2420
  • Respect: +1462
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #15 on: July 12, 2014, 03:17:20 AM »
0
first impressions seem a lil negative

max from fearless

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 261
  • Respect: +201
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #16 on: July 12, 2014, 03:27:58 AM »
0
Looking forward to this even more now....

03

  • SBD
  • ***
  • Posts: 1701
  • positive energy;
  • Respect: +455
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #17 on: July 12, 2014, 04:31:54 AM »
0
let me provide a cliffs notes: it sucks

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11001
  • Respect: +1383
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #18 on: July 12, 2014, 10:50:17 AM »
0
first impressions seem a lil negative

Well, for what it's worth, 100% on Rotten Tomatoes with 96 reviews.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Mel

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 444
  • Edgy TV show-watching Russian bodybuilder cartoon.
  • Respect: +168
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #19 on: July 12, 2014, 12:15:29 PM »
0
Simple mind - simple pleasures...

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2420
  • Respect: +1462
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #20 on: July 12, 2014, 01:25:27 PM »
+1
my idea is to do zen breathing exercises before i see the movie. imma get emotionally centered and be ready for the power of now™

Tictacbk

  • The Magic Flight
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Respect: +186
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2014, 02:43:52 PM »
0
Man I had read/heard nothing but extremely positive reviews until I cam here. Thank you for tempering my expectations.

Cloudy

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
  • Respect: +270
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2014, 01:02:35 AM »
0
Been watching the Satyajit Ray trilogy....finding a lot of connections.

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Respect: +90
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2014, 11:10:38 AM »
+2
I'm ten years older than both kids in the film (who, in reality are only about 3 months apart), so I could vividly relate to a lot of what they went through while being able to empathize with the characters played by Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke, though I'm not a parent. Older viewers would probably relate more strongly to their characters, and I'm sure my own take on the film will change if I see it years from now.

MILD SPOILERS





As exciting as it was to see Mason change from a kid to a college student, it was particularly poignant to see Arquette and Hawke throughout the film. Hawke starts out as a father who only sees the kids on weekends and isn't particularly responsible. Arquette is doing her best but repeats major mistakes in the kind of men she marries. Hawke's transformation into a more responsible father took a long time, and if he was like that from the beginning perhaps he and Arquette could have made it work. But sometimes the timing is wrong like that. It looks like he finally found some peace and settlement in his life that Arquette has been working towards, but hasn't quite found at the end of the film.

There are some awkward and contrived moments here and there, but overall it was a wonderful film. And if I'm making the film sound like a downer, it isn't. There are some absolutely hilarious moments.

I just wish it were something different, something more creative than it turned out to be. If you took away the real life aging aspect Boyhood wouldn't be that special. Nothing it shows is very confrontational...not that a movie has to be to be good but...it was just all very expected.

It didn't have a revolutionary outlook, but what it did it did extremely well. The dialogue was terrific, and it captured well how people and relationships change over time. The real-life aging aspect is important to the film. If you take something important out of ANY film it's going to suffer.

Been watching the Satyajit Ray trilogy....finding a lot of connections.

I saw shades of the Apu Trilogy, the Antoine Doinel films, This Boy's Life, and even The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +1765
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2014, 11:52:40 AM »
+1
It didn't have a revolutionary outlook, but what it did it did extremely well. The real-life aging aspect is important to the film. If you take something important out of ANY film it's going to suffer.

The issue is that the aging aspect is relied upon as a point of interest because the kid himself is so arbitrarily chosen. Who is this kid? Why him? He's practically the perfect son, absurdly well-adjusted given his upbringing. The worst things he ever does are drink underage and flake out in one of his classes. Scintillating. He has a penchant for photography and appears a bit confused about where he'll go in life. How specific. I don't understand why out of all renderings of adolescence that were possible, Linklater chose to make the kid generic as fuck. The movie might be called 'Boyhood', and attempt to wrangle everyone around their own feelings of nostalgia and transience etc., but drawing the kid so obliquely and passively, even saintly at times in his strange ability to always have a relatively mature outlook given his age, doesn't have the effect of universality as was maybe intended, it just makes the journey less impactful than it could have been.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2420
  • Respect: +1462
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2014, 01:30:53 PM »
+2
^you've described it as both a generic childhood, and as stemming directly from linklater living in austin

sounds like a normal person to me

i feel generic all the time. i wonder what i add to the world, for sure. sometimes i don't feel like i add anything and that's such a bummer state. then anyway i continue to live, i live here in los angeles and i'm trying my best, which feelings of personal best become different while i learn about myself and i learn about world things

during this too, i have that question about whether i scintillate enough. can anyone even see my scintillations? other people are better than me, others are badder than me, and i can't impact any of them. born to grow and grown to die. that's me

the universal as specific, the stupid human challenges of meaning and importance

put together into a single cohesive movie shot over a stretch of time with a non-actor

03

  • SBD
  • ***
  • Posts: 1701
  • positive energy;
  • Respect: +455
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2014, 02:16:23 PM »
0
i like your point, jenkins, it made me reconsider how i feel about the film.
but honestly, i really didn't enjoy it very much. not to echo wilder too much but it just felt like a very generic film whose only significant quality was the way they shot it. i would have liked much more from it.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
  • Respect: +1765
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2014, 04:25:43 PM »
0
^you've described it as both a generic childhood, and as stemming directly from linklater living in austin

Yes...and that's part of the problem. But I should have elaborated. The Austin perspective I meant blanketly, as applying to every character in the movie: it was like Portlandia if that show lacked the irony, or felt to me like a more deserving target of the criticisms leveled against Rachel Getting Married for portraying some sort of ideal vision of multiculturalism or universal acceptance that just rings as false wishful thinking (not in reference to Rachel, but in this) ...and the boat never rocks and "it's all good" so pass the joint, man, so chill, so contemplative. "It's just life, man."

Mason himself is an extremely interchangeable character, though, apparently unaffected by the environment he grew up in and by most of the relationships he has. Even his rebellion is weak because the things he's (barely) rebelling against are so loosely defined. He's coasting. We're all coasting. But why watch?

the universal as specific, the stupid human challenges of meaning and importance

I can't agree with this. "Meaning" and "importance"? In what context? Of course everyone struggles with these things, but as related to their own specific millieu. I'm trying to think of other "aimless" characters I reacted to positively, and my mind keeps wandering back to Gus Van Sant. But think about the specific circumstances shown in Paranoid Park or My Own Private Idaho, or leaping ahead to a later stage in life a little bit, Leonard's conundrum in James Gray's Two Lovers. The idea that by being deliberately vague we're allowed to project whatever we want onto Mason strikes me as a cop-out.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2420
  • Respect: +1462
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2014, 04:31:28 PM »
0
well you prefer the specific as universal. understandable

03

  • SBD
  • ***
  • Posts: 1701
  • positive energy;
  • Respect: +455
Re: Boyhood
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2014, 04:43:41 PM »
0
Quote
The idea that by being deliberately vague we're allowed to project whatever we want onto Mason strikes me as a cop-out.

that is exactly what i was trying to say, thank you.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy