Christina Ricci Neked in Monster?

[Sanjuro]

Those of you who had problems with the pacing, could you please elaborate?

It's just that for me the pacing seemed  off.  i know its based on a true story and so it should be episodic, but some transition into it would be nice.  it felt like each scene did not connect to the other scenes
. i didnt think it was establishing anything, jst showing these bits of parts which didnt seem to play well into the whole picture and which i was forced to just take for face value.  

and moreover as i said before there was something non fluid about it.  the picture didnt seem to flow.  it was offbeat  in an irritating way (unlike godards offbeat where from this he creates pacing and storytelling) and very jumpy that it really does affect the story.  the story turned out so unclear to me.  i was being spoon fed these bits of performances by theron and ricci which i couldnt even get into from the start.  so much gaps could have been filled in with better pacing imo and this in turn would have added to a more solid storytelling style (this is where my problem with style comes in i guess).  

i guess it works for some people though.  

honestly i really thought it was a great idea, great story to be told, but everything seemed to be hindered by its pacing, from Theron's performance to the whole story itself.

[Ravi]

I think this is the first time I slightly disagree with you.
I also don't understand why people keep mentioning the pacing. Can you explain the pacing you were looking for. Did you think it was too slow or quick?

Overall, I'd say it moves too quickly and then slows down for big dramatic scenes. It felt to me like there are big chunks missing. This was most exemplified in the scene where they go to the amusement park, which fluctuates between being a scene of romantic bonding (being with Selby on the ferris wheel), personal growth (getting on the ferris wheel, the titular monster, in the first place) and painful separation (Selby running off to hang out with the other lesbians) -- all very important points for the film to hit, but all crammed awkwardly into one scene.

Good point.  I didn't find it to be a big problem, but the amusement park scene was an odd fit.  I expected Selby's embarassment (for lack of a better word) about Aileen to be more of a factor in the film, but it is left solely in that scene.

[Pozer]

I think this is the first time I slightly disagree with you.
I also don't understand why people keep mentioning the pacing. Can you explain the pacing you were looking for. Did you think it was too slow or quick?

Overall, I'd say it moves too quickly and then slows down for big dramatic scenes. It felt to me like there are big chunks missing. This was most exemplified in the scene where they go to the amusement park, which fluctuates between being a scene of romantic bonding (being with Selby on the ferris wheel), personal growth (getting on the ferris wheel, the titular monster, in the first place) and painful separation (Selby running off to hang out with the other lesbians) -- all very important points for the film to hit, but all crammed awkwardly into one scene.

see, but I think that example worked really well in the movie. after reading what you wrote, I thought back to that amusement park scene and remember that I was really feeling for these two characters in these moments. I think the cramming worked because I remember feeling happy for them finding happiness in eachother one moment and the next feeling that painful seperation when she ventures off with the other lesbos. I thought it was a nice way to demonstrate those moments, but also, I think stuff really does happen quickly like that in a relationship.  
I really didn't think about the pacing at all after watching this film. I was so wraped up in the characters and felt the story was moving along fine, keeping me into it the whole time.

[Pedro]

I have to know what mr. goldy thinks about this movie.

i really have a feeling he'll dislike it.

[SHAFTR]

I have to know what mr. goldy thinks about this movie.

i really have a feeling he'll dislike it.

Everyone insults his opinions yet everyone looks forward to them...makes me laugh.  Often I disagree with GT, but he backs up his points.  One reason he is one of my fav xixaxers.  Been a lot less GT than normal around here.

[Pedro]

I have to know what mr. goldy thinks about this movie.

i really have a feeling he'll dislike it.

Everyone insults his opinions yet everyone looks forward to them...makes me laugh.  Often I disagree with GT, but he backs up his points.  One reason he is one of my fav xixaxers.  Been a lot less GT than normal around here.

word.

[Gold Trumpet]

As I watched this film, I kept thinking of Monster's Ball. That film had a heartbreaking story with excellent performances, but a story structure not up to the same temperature level as the themes and performances. As good as Halley Berry's performance was (and I thought it was excellent), her portrait was limited enough in screen time to disallow her from transforming the film into its whole being an appreciation for one performance. Its focus was more on Thorton and though Thorton is capable, his character seemed to stare off into space as much as he would deal with his issues and problems. Charlize Theron's performance is one of the best of the year and she does transform Monster. She's in the film so much that I thought it was living for her. Ricci does fine for her role, but dramatically its a fillibuster role to give the film some convential shape. The greatness in the film is just watching Theron's performance of near perfection and not being interrupted too much by everything dangling from that role.

[cine]

So, GT, did you not like anything about the story? Or how Jenkins gives us a surprisingly sympathetic look at Wuornos?

[modage]

So, GT, did you not like anything about the story? Or how Jenkins gives us a surprisingly sympathetic look at Wuornos?

its like, "unfortunately Jenkins thought she was making a horror movie."  chicks, when will they learn?  

[cine]

I'm glad that two of the very best films of the year were made by female directors.

[modage]

why?  and was this one?  sofia coppola is/has been the only exception i have come across to the rule.

[cine]

why?

Um, because there isn't enough female directors?

and was this one?

Yep.

[Gold Trumpet]

So, GT, did you not like anything about the story? Or how Jenkins gives us a surprisingly sympathetic look at Wuornos?

I just thought the story was straight forward and the obvious avenues that could tell the story were taken. Its not that I really disliked it, but it obviously in my mind didn't match the intensity Charlize Theron delivered. I thought she was most worth commenting on than anything in the movie.

[SHAFTR]

I'm glad that two of the very best films of the year were made by female directors.

also American Splendor was co-directed by a female...so perhaps 3 of the better films of the year.

[Pubrick]

I'm glad that two of the very best films of the year were made by female directors.

also American Splendor was co-directed by a female...so perhaps 3 of the better films of the year.

and van sant is queer, so that's another 2 great movies for the ladies.