THE SHAPE OF THINGS

Started by godardian, May 12, 2003, 01:44:27 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

godardian

May 12, 2003, 01:44:27 PM
I'm going to see it tonight. I'm really hoping it will be a return to form for Neil Labute, because I hated the anonymous Possession, and I thought Nurse Betty wasn't much, but I absolutely loved In the Company of Men and especially Your Friends and Neighbors. He's finally doing something he wrote again, so I'm hoping for the best. I'll have the scrumptious sight of Paul Rudd, regardless.

Has anyone seen it yet?
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

cowboykurtis

#1
May 12, 2003, 01:59:17 PM
i saw it at sundance -- i really liked it -- it was my favorite film at the festival -- i think it owes a large debt to nichol's CARNAL KNOWLEDGE -- you'll defianately see him returning to the style of in the company of men -- very similar in form -- as you know THe SHAPE OF THINGS  was adapted from one of his stage plays -- if you like labute's earlier work, you won't be disapointed...
...your excuses are your own...

Ghostboy

#2
May 12, 2003, 02:07:29 PM
I saw it last night. It's really good, and is definitely sort of a full-circle kind of thing, completing his misanthropic trilogy. I would have liked to see it on the stage.

Paul Rudd was great. I've never seen anyone say "Fuck you, you cunt" so powerfully.

There's a moment where Rachel Weiz addresses the audience, just for a moment, that is just awesome. I need to see the whole movie again just so I can get a better understanding of that moment.

godardian

#3
May 13, 2003, 05:24:18 PM
Saw it last night. Overall, I liked it, but it's probably my least favorite of Labute's "trilogy." I liked the second half lots better. Overall, it was the least taut in pacing and structure of the 3, and these things live or die by pace and structure.

Things I loved:

-Weisz's address to the audience, as mentioned by Ghostboy.

-The final scene in the gallery.

Things I didn't love so much:

-The music was the least appropriate of all 3 films. I didn't care for it so much, especially after the music being so sharp and appropriate in the last 2 films.

-It was by far the "stagiest" of the 3. As much as I think the actors bore up and tried to do a good job, it might have worked better if he had gotten people who hadn't performed the piece so many times on stage. A lot of it really seemed like stage acting- especially Rudd's nerd act- and could've been more effective if toned down for the camera, which comes closer and exaggerates things that don't seem exaggerated at all across the distance between audience and stage.

I think it might have been one for Neil Labute fans only.  :|
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

MacGuffin

#4
May 14, 2003, 02:16:56 AM
Sandra Bullock and Ralph Fiennes Inhale Vapor

Sandra Bullock and Ralph Fiennes will star in Neil LaBute's Vapor for London-based Renaissance Films, reports Variety.

The pic, budgeted just below $30 million, is based on Amanda Filipacchi's novel about a struggling actress who saves the life of a stranger. He turns out to be an eccentric scientist who, in a surreal variation of the Pygmalion myth, offers to use his bizarre techniques to transform her into a star.

Warner Bros., where Bullock has a production deal, is a favorite to pick up North American rights, although three other U.S. distributors are also said to be chasing the project. The film is set to shoot in September.
"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

Ghostboy

#5
May 14, 2003, 02:27:34 AM
Sandra Bullock doing a good movie? What gives?

It's great to see LaBute so busy. He's got this, The Wicker Man, and then the Mercy Seat, all in various stages of pre-production. I can't wait to see all of them. The Wicker Man is the one I'm most curious about. I didnt' like the original too much (those musical numbers!), but it was very interesting.

mutinyco

#6
May 15, 2003, 08:48:23 AM
I interviewed the cast of Shape. If you'd like to read it go to:

http://www.movienavigator.org/shapeofthings.htm

-JS
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

cowboykurtis

#7
May 15, 2003, 10:20:27 AM
Quote from: GhostboyThe Wicker Man is the one I'm most curious about. I didnt' like the original too much (those musical numbers!), but it was very interesting.

i agree. i thinkt he premise could make for a amazing film -- it hought hte tone of the first one didn't do the story justice -- i think this film is worth remaking, however do not feel labute is the best man to steer the ship. as cliche as it sounds: if burton signed on, it could be quite interesting...
...your excuses are your own...

godardian

#8
May 15, 2003, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: mutinycoI interviewed the cast of Shape. If you'd like to read it go to:

http://www.movienavigator.org/shapeofthings.htm

-JS

I did enjoy reading that. Thank you. That must've been an exciting experience to meet the actors, unless it's something you're really used to.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

mutinyco

#9
May 16, 2003, 10:18:22 AM
Yeah, actually, I do interview lots of people. A friend and I operate a tiny site called MovieNavigator.org. The Shape article is linked. You should check it out.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Cecil

#10
May 19, 2003, 04:49:09 PM
i thought it was okay, couldve been alot better if the translation from stage to screen had been less... awkward. some very funny moments. i was the only laughing out loud.

godardian

#11
May 19, 2003, 04:53:24 PM
Quote from: cecil b. dementedi thought it was okay, couldve been alot better if the translation from stage to screen had been less... awkward. some very funny moments. i was the only laughing out loud.

Yeah, the awkwardness was my main problem with it, too. I thought the second half was better. Some of the editing having to do with Rudd's overdone-nerd performance could've been a little sharper; it almost felt bad-sitcom at times. But overall, I cared for more than I didn't. It was just more of a mixed bag than I'd hoped.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

MacGuffin

#12
September 27, 2003, 06:51:22 PM
I hope Rachel Weisz gets some recognition at the end of the year for this performance; a IFP or XIXAX nomination, something. The screen was just electric whenever she was on. Paul Rudd was solid too. I'm a fan of Neil LaBute's writing and I would rank this one right below "In The Company Of Men". Yes, at times the acting was a bit 'stagey', but it was really no different than Mamet's early films. Could end up on the top ten for the end of the year.
"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

godardian

#13
October 01, 2003, 09:03:57 PM
Quote from: MacGuffinI hope Rachel Weisz gets some recognition at the end of the year for this performance; a IFP or XIXAX nomination, something. The screen was just electric whenever she was on. Paul Rudd was solid too. I'm a fan of Neil LaBute's writing and I would rank this one right below "In The Company Of Men". Yes, at times the acting was a bit 'stagey', but it was really no different than Mamet's early films. Could end up on the top ten for the end of the year.

I remember thinking that Rudd's "nerd" act was straight outta Revenge of the Nerds. I love LaBute's writing, too, but I'd put this below Your Friends and Neighbors, which is my favorite LaBute. It's hard for me to criticize Paul Rudd for the same reason it's hard for Camille Paglia to criticize Susan Sontag (i.e. I think he's extremely attractive, I mean I actually get excited when he's on Friends, okay?), but I really didn't feel like he was up to being a loser. Later on, he was okay.

You're right about Weisz, though; I thought she showed the other actors up. In a weird way, she defeated the "point," because she had so much energy and magnetism compared to the others, you almost felt like she was the "hero."

As for the Mamet comparison, I'd say House of Games does everything right that Shape of Things doesn't when it came to the static-minimalism thing. The LOOK of LaBute's film doesn't hold a candle, which I think makes a lot of difference. They're such differerent stories, too.  LaBute does very well with a terse, sharp, stabbing pace and dialogue, but this one felt slack to me when compared to his others.

Still, it's better than Possession, which I thought was a whole lot of hooey.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

MacGuffin

#14
October 01, 2003, 09:14:55 PM
Quote from: godardianAs for the Mamet comparison, I'd say House of Games does everything right that Shape of Things doesn't when it came to the static-minimalism thing. The LOOK of LaBute's film doesn't hold a candle, which I think makes a lot of difference. They're such differerent stories, too.

I'd compare it more to Mamet's "Oleanna".
"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
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions