not the most popular thread anymore, donnie darko and homos.

[Xixax]

The movie has the opposite effect on me. The more I watch it, the more I love it. And, like Mulholland Drive, the more I understand it.

My wife hates it, and I can definitely see her reasoning. She says "if you have to listen to the commentary to figure it out, then the story wasn't told well to begin with."

To a point, I completely agree. However, after hearing the commentary, it was almost like I was let in on a big secret. And after hearing Richard explain the film in the commentary, upon further viewing, I find myself able to connect the pieces much better.

I still think that my attraction and love for this movie is more about the visuals and the music and the overall production rather than the story. Although certain aspects of the dialogue I still find amazing.

As an exercise in filmmaking, I have considered recreating the Smurf scene - just for fun. I still find that a great bit of dialogue.

Don't try to dampen my love for Donnie Darko or Richard Kelly, because you will fail miserably.

 

[phil marlowe]

Gary Kelly

I don't think the person you're referring to is Gary Kelly. Grace Kelly I believe.

[snaporaz]

overrated garbage?

boondock saints.

that movie was shit.

but yeah, donnie darko was cool. a bit on the "fan boy-legacy" side, but, who gives a fuck what fan boys think. it's the movie that counts.

[polkablues]

overrated garbage?

boondock saints.

that movie was shit.

I don't think anyone ever claimed otherwise.  Hence the straight-to-video-ness of the whole thing.  Though you gotta admit Willem Dafoe's performance was just insane enough to be pretty cool.

[jmj]

I’m with Xixax on this one.  I guess it depends on how you judge a movie.  You can say that whatever you see in front of you from the opening to end credits is what should be judged or you could say that everything surrounding the movie as it came into being should be taken into account also.  Those of you who are filmmakers that have actually made and screened a film will know what I’m talking about.  When your making your first short with $500 dollars you kind of ask people to take that into account when you introduce the movie.  In this case you have a first time director taking a classic question of science fiction (time-travel) and making it into a character driven drama instead of a sci-fi plot driven film.  I think Donnie Darko is wonderful and I appreciate as a filmmaker the techniques he applied and as an audience member him respecting my intelligence and ability to piece together clues.  Honestly you can take any film by any filmmaker and pick it apart until you find flaws of all sorts.  It all boils down to whether you believe a director is honestly trying her/his best to give you a good film.  I believe whole-heartedly that Richard Kelly was doing that.

BTW- I agree that boondock saints was a complete piece of shit and Dafoe was wasted in an over the top fake ass performance.  Also, Daredevil is the worst POS I've seen in a really long time.  It's the first time I've been pissed off walking out of a movie in a good long while.  What the fuck was Harry Knowles thinking in his review on AICN?  And what the fuck is up with all the invalid sessions?

[Xixax]

And what the fuck is up with all the invalid sessions?

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=608&p=9155#9155

[tpfkabi]

i just saw DD. has there been a discussion over the meaning, etc here yet?

i don't think i'll ever fall in love with it til i figure it out. i'm the kind of person that questions things a lot and wants to know a definite answer. that doesn't mean i don't like random things in film, but with this film, the random things ARE the plot. i would like to discuss the film, and if it hasn't been done here already, i'll start a topic unless there are objections.

[polkablues]

Also, Daredevil is the worst POS I've seen in a really long time.

I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm the only person in the world who really liked this movie.

[polkablues]

Augh... Double post!  How do I delete this thing?

[jmj]

I'm the only person in the world who really liked this movie.

Different strokes, different folks...

[Raikus]

I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm the only person in the world who really liked this movie.

I had a decent time. Some aspects of the movie were good. It was better than I thought it would be (I had very low expectation entering the theater).

Of course, I went in with the mindset of having a good time, not with my critic's hat on.

[jmj]

I went in with the mindset of having a good time, not with my critic's hat on.

How could you have a good time with that god awful music.  Trust me, I tried to overlook as much as possible and at least enjoy the action sequences but that fuckin' soundtrack killed it.

BTW- very nice avatar.

[Raikus]

Oh, make no mistake. The music was plenty awful. I just was having a good night with my girl and not even Affleck screeching "Justice" could mess it up.

I walked out with a smile on my face and a hop to my step. And while Daredevil was no gold nugget, I had a good time. Simple as that.

[bonanzataz]

I LOVED daredevil because it was just so fucking bad, and as we all know, bad movies make me smile.

[snaporaz]

i have a quick question and i didn't want to make a thread just for it, but...

did anyone else find the cinematography and editing in requiem for a dream flat-out annoying? i mean, usually, i love crap like that. unconventional, different camerawork is usually great in my book. i saw pi a few years ago, before requiem came out, and i loved it. i think it's alot better than requiem and, to be honest, if pi lacked the photography it had [high-contrast b&w/handheld crap/that wierd harness cam], i probably wouldn't enjoy it as much. but with requiem, i felt aronofsky just went overboard with it. i still love the movie. great, horrendously depressing movie. and i really love it. i just have to not be distracted by it's eye-candy to really enjoy it.