David Gordon Green's "Undertow"

[Thrindle]

Thrindle, I'm always here for you.

Dude, I don't have my glasses on, couldn't quit make out what you said.  

[MacGuffin]

quit

Exactly.

[meatball]

quit

Exactly.

I jest, McG.

[Pozer]

let me just say:  all negative art used (the kid throwing the rock, the man running) was absurd.  The fact that Green can't even pull it off is enought to convince me that it should never ever even thought of being used in any legitimate movie again.

I loved this. I totally thought he pulled it off. that whole sequence felt like a nice way to open the movie. maybe i liked it so, because it is a technique that maybe you'd see used in a pop gangster film or something, but never in a southern tale such as this. i can't really explain why, but it really worked for me.
why would you call it negative art?

He means when the image actually converts to negative (the colors reverse).  Or like when he throws the rock it's (color change) THROW (color change) THROW (color change) THROW (color change) THROW.

Riiight.

[meatball]

I hope this isn't Green's best movie, because I didn't enjoy this at all. I've heard so much positive buzz surrounding Green and his work, that this was a very sorry introduction. The cinematography was gorgeous and I've always admired Philip Glass. But it felt so staged at times, then completely shoddy and boring at other times. Dare I say, Undertow was film student quality. Not the level of a film that involves Terrence Malick.

[RegularKarate]

Picture in sig: -5 points
Changing to 1 letter name (that's already been used): -15 points
Being far too avatar/sig obsessed with a mediocre popcorn movie yet thinking something that has an ounce of artistic merit is "filmstudent quality" -10 points

We'll just add that up... yes, that's minus thirty points there.  I don't think you're going to be able to make that up in time.  I'm afraid you're going to have to just drop out.

[meatball]

Picture in sig: -5 points
Changing to 1 letter name (that's already been used): -15 points
Being far too avatar/sig obsessed with a mediocre popcorn movie yet thinking something that has an ounce of artistic merit is "filmstudent quality" -10 points

We'll just add that up... yes, that's minus thirty points there.  I don't think you're going to be able to make that up in time.  I'm afraid you're going to have to just drop out.

Glad you feel that way about me, RK.
How do you feel about the movie Undertow?

[RegularKarate]

has an ounce of artistic merit

[meatball]

What ounce of artistic merit? I don't care if the film was awarded the medal of honor for saving Mother Teresa's life, my opinion stands. Please explain yourself further than just quoting a blurb from your happy-to-be-a-smug-shit comments. And if you want to attack HG2G, attack it under the right thread.

When I said it was film student quality, what I meant is that Undertow feels too academic. There was nothing to connect me to the story, or to care for the characters. Technically, it's superb. But, all the character relationships seemed too familiar. I was fine with it, in hopes that it would soon go somewhere fresh that transcends the whole "dysfunctional family and all it's amazing fuckups" angle.

It didn't do that.





*Spoilers*

Instead the boys find a camp of vagrants and the older boy falls in love with a girl, while his uncle is a few hundred miles away asking fishermen the whereabouts of his two nephews. I don't need to see this dramatized. Where's it going? All it went was to the river ending. And the ending was fine, but the film could have skipped the black couple and vagrant camp, and ended an hour earlier without the aforementioned parts being missed.

[RegularKarate]

Well, I didn't LOVE the film.  I've only seen it once, but I'd like to see it again.  My issue was with the comment you made with no real backing.  Now you've provided your side... good job?

"Academic"?  I think you're firing that at the moon in hopes that people will run.  The characters are very natural and realistic... people... only someone who knows what they're doing could make it so.

This is, by far, his worst film, but I don't think you're grasping the good enough to even get to the bad.  You're dismissing it as a "dysfunctional family and all it's amazing fuckups" film.

***SPOILS***

Obviously, the "black couple" scene couldn't have just been cut... this showed parents who truly loved children... it was an angle.  It was also necessary plot-wise because that's who tipped the uncle to the boys' whereabouts.

and I placed my comments on Hitchhiker's in the proper thread already.

I don't have strong feelings about this film... I was just adding up your final points as they laid.

[The Perineum Falcon]

Obviously, the "black couple" scene couldn't have just been cut... this showed parents who truly loved children... it was an angle.  It was also necessary plot-wise because that's who tipped the uncle to the boys' whereabouts.

I don't remember exactly why or what it was, but I do remember feeling that what was cut probably coulda/shoulda stayed in. After watching it, the scene made more sense.

Don't ask why, cause, you know, I can't remember.

[Ghostboy]

The scene with the couple was beautiful, and that he included it is one of the things I love about Green. I'd say their presence, in a sense, warrants an entire half star in my own four star rating of the film. The Cain/Abel father/son dynamic is established with mythic solidarity, and then Green adds padding to this already established through line by including scenes like the black couple, or the homeless girl (herself filling an established type, admittedly, but one filled out beyond what is required by genre).

[matt35mm]

Plus, if it was cut, we wouldn't get the "All right, y'all, eat some of this shit!" line.

[matt35mm]

I'm gonna go ahead and guess from your avatar, Meatball, that you liked (maybe even LOVED) All The Real Girls?

[meatball]

..