21 Grams

[NEON MERCURY]

understandably, but it felt like kind of a cheat since it was done for no discernable reason other than to 'quickly and easily' make a 'difficult art' film that engages the viewers.  i didnt see it as an aid to that particular story other than to mask an otherwise possibly melodramatic standard story of loss with that 'quick art' method.

...i see what you mean..
i guess its like how do you pronounce "caramel"
do say "care-ra-mail"
or.."car-ra-mail"

its just after knowing the writers intentions of going nnonlinnear....and unnderstanding its purpose....i'm satisfied....and i thought the he was right on about when people first meet ...you don't start from the begining....and when this method was applied to 21 grams... i thought IMO it was unique from the writer's persective.....to tell his story the way he did......

[Gamblour.]

Neon, that really helps understand their reasoning for doing this, and I like it a lot more for it. But it is asking too much of an audience when this isn't an element of the story. Just in principle, but I still love this movie.

[SoNowThen]

Just saw this on the weekend.

Overrated.


Lighting (w/ bleach bypass process) was great. But everybody and their dog wants to use the hand-held camera + quick cuts, and after a while it becomes apparent that a boring cliche is still a boring cliche even if it's shaky and cut fast.

That being said, when Innarutu (sp?) restrains himself, as he did with the WS of the leafblower guy during the car accident, wonderful things happen. Someday I hope he gets a great script that can be transcendent -- this one just didn't quite make it.

I did enjoy seeing naked NM, however. Funny, the people in the theatre were more comfortable during the gratuitous sex scene than they were during the mention of "Jesus" at the start...

I had to laugh at the looks of helpless confusion on most people's faces, as they struggled to deal with the nonlinear structure. Why does that throw so many for a loop? Oh well. Oh, that's another I liked about it, it did the flashback-flashforward stuff with a nice flair.

[godardian]

Just saw this on the weekend.

Overrated.


Lighting (w/ bleach bypass process) was great. But everybody and their dog wants to use the hand-held camera + quick cuts, and after a while it becomes apparent that a boring cliche is still a boring cliche even if it's shaky and cut fast.

That being said, when Innarutu (sp?) restrains himself, as he did with the WS of the leafblower guy during the car accident, wonderful things happen. Someday I hope he gets a great script that can be transcendent -- this one just didn't quite make it.

I did enjoy seeing naked NM, however. Funny, the people in the theatre were more comfortable during the gratuitous sex scene than they were during the mention of "Jesus" at the start...

I had to laugh at the looks of helpless confusion on most people's faces, as they struggled to deal with the nonlinear structure. Why does that throw so many for a loop? Oh well. Oh, that's another I liked about it, it did the flashback-flashforward stuff with a nice flair.

That seems a fair assessment, though I disagree that it's overrated...
Coupla things, though: I didn't find the sex scene gratuitous at all, and I'm usually quite opposed to truly gratuitous sex scenes... I guess that's subjective.

Also, you didn't mention anything about the roundly outstanding performances or the emotional impact coming from the combination of them and the style, which I think worked like matches in a tinderbox. The style alone might've been cliched, as you said, but I thought it worked extroardinarily well with the acting/mood/pacing.

To me, the linear/non-linear thing is a fairly moot issue. Who knows, it might've worked just as well telling it in order. But since it works so damn well told this way, why worry about it?

[SoNowThen]

I liked the non-linear style.

I however, found very little emotional impact.

And aside from the three leads, I thought a lot of the secondary performances showed that the director was not English-as-a-first-language, as they perhaps needed some fine-tuning to be less fake.

The drug dealer scene in the bathroom (especially that actress) was just outright bad.

[godardian]

I liked the non-linear style.

I however, found very little emotional impact.

And aside from the three leads, I thought a lot of the secondary performances showed that the director was not English-as-a-first-language, as they perhaps needed some fine-tuning to be less fake.

The drug dealer scene in the bathroom (especially that actress) was just outright bad.

Wow... I clearly remember that scene, and it didn't seem bad at all. Seemed very much like two people who haven't seen each other in a while and have just the one thing in common trying to be friendly and casual with this underlying thing in the room. The other actor didn't have much to do, but she was fine, I thought. I never got the ESL feeling at all, not once in the movie.

And this is the first movie since Magnolia that got to me on such an intense emotional level. If you don't see or feel the emotion in it, though, then yeah- I can see where you'd find it overrated. I mean, I find the film to be infinitely more than any kind of technical exercise, though as I said, I have no problem with any of the style/technique, some of which is rather impressive. My only problem was the over-reliance on coincidence and aberrant occurrence in the story, which I felt was well overcome by the execution.

[NEON MERCURY]

Just saw this on the weekend.

Overrated.

But everybody and their dog wants to use the hand-held camera + quick cuts, and after a while it becomes apparent that a boring cliche is still a boring cliche even if it's shaky and cut fast.

...oh no!!..you donn't like this one either.....

ahh......but one thing though about the handheld ...in recent times NNO ONE CAN ROCK A HANDHELD LIKE RODRIGO PRIETO(sp).....Amores Perros justified that so......i'm cool with it in 21 grams...and for me if used correctly..the handheld  heightens the dialogue...and mood..of the film...and in 21 grams it worked.....IMO........

[SoNowThen]

City Of God did it so well (and had a unique and interesting story to back it up). Other than that, I'm skeptical of this style.


Narc got over its cliche-ridden story by using some of the most hardcore hand-held I've seen in awhile. I kinda dug that.

All I'm saying about the hand-held is that it seemed to me like a very thin mask, overtop some plastic themes that were supposed to be important. I've read all the previous posts, and everyone seems to think it was such an emotional experience. I got none of that. The only thing that exhilerated me in this movie was the fact that they let the highlights blow out so much in their exposure.

[ProgWRX]

...oh no!!..you donn't like this one either.....

ahh......but one thing though about the handheld ...in recent times NNO ONE CAN ROCK A HANDHELD LIKE RODRIGO PRIETO(sp).....Amores Perros justified that so......i'm cool with it in 21 grams...and for me if used correctly..the handheld  heightens the dialogue...and mood..of the film...and in 21 grams it worked.....IMO........

true, true, also the tv show 24 has some of the best hand-held ive seen as well!

[godardian]

All I'm saying about the hand-held is that it seemed to me like a very thin mask, overtop some plastic themes that were supposed to be important.

But aren't these the same kinds of "important" themes (mortality, family, human connection) that also permeate Magnolia? That's the exact same criticism I heard from people who hated Magnolia (for better reasons than "confusing" or "frogs" or "too depressing"): "It's Terms of Endearment with fancy camerawork and editing and a good dollop of pretension." All I'm saying is, I didn't find 21 Grams's THEMES to be any less "plastic" than those of Magnolia or any film that deals with these kinds of obviously very frequently recurring (in any fictional media) human stories. It didn't have the most unique execution, but it wasn't in a contest to see who could be most unique. It was trying to tell its story in the most effective and unflinching way, and I think they hit it right on the head.

[SoNowThen]

Magnolia pulled the themes off and the whole proceedings became (to use my old, tired expression) transcendent.

21 Grams ended.

That was the difference for me. I was looking at that snow covered pool at the end, thinking "I should be feeling something right now, but I don't at all". PTA shows way more heart and wisdom, and, well, trust to the mystical unknown, for his age.

On the flip side, City Of God had all the style and a much cooler, more interesting story than 21 Grams, and that director didn't feel the need to justify it with any heavy "important" themes and bog himself down. When Lil Z had that tiny kid in the corner, with the gun to him, and he was crying and babbling, I just about puked from nerves. When NW heard about her family dying, I thought, "well, yeah, that happens all the time, she's gonna cry now, what else is new... man this lighting looks nice".

I don't think it was a bad movie. Just far from a brilliant one.

[ono]

Today, I saw a man operating a leaf blower outside a quaint little inn.  I immediately thought of 21 Grams.  So kudos for Inarritu for that.  Now if he could only focus that kind of skill to a more solid, tight story.  I see the potential 21 Grams had, but still, I feel it's overrated.

[cron]

i'm not sure if this is in the thread already because i haven't read it (don't want any spoiler at all)  but i'm posting it, just in case.

from AINC:

Question and Answer session with Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, director of 21 Grams

At the Museum of Latin American Art (MOLAA) in Long Beach, California

November 25, 2003

First, I didn't have a recorder, nor am I that fast at writing in the dark, so I'll just say that I'll give you an impression and paraphrase of all that happened that night, very few actual quotes.

First the Museum director introduced AGI, saying that his background is in music, drama and comedy. The director was very casual in dress (black jeans, boots, black leather jacket) and relaxed. He stated the following:

The process was not a rational one, it was more of an intuitive one.

It took 3 years to be made from script to shooting.

Motion conveyed emotional states of characters. Graininess in the film conveys extreme emotion. When people are calm, the grain is clear. When the characters are in extreme emotional states you'll see that the grain is very gritty.

He tried very hard for it not to seem an intellectual piece and for the audience to forget about the structure the piece was being told in and to concentrate on the emotions of the characters.

The plot is universal and the story could be told in any country in the world

That spiritual connection all people can feel is an awareness present at the end of the movie

He had a freehand with the studios and as such has a positive experience with Hollywood which many had warned him was a corrupting influence. He has artistic lisence.

He got to pick the city he wanted to film in. Felt as independent as in Mexico in the U.S. only difference were all the red tape and rules of the unions in the U.S.

He mentioned two directors he admired were Polanski and Coppola

Was asked what the significance of the car crashes in both films he said that both films have a tragedy element and something that's our of our hands. Death can happen at any time you just need to be in the wrong place at the wrong time or conversely at the right place at the right time and "the bad guy is God". What he liked to see is what people will do with their free will after. He said he thinks "accidents are our payment for using technology." Cars are the number one metaphor of how an accident can change your life in one second and he uses that.

When asked why he liked to come up on people's faces and get right in there, he says that it he likes the handheld because it gives movement to everything. "I see things like you. I have never been a tripod or a dolly", and he likes that feeling the handheld gives like our own body where we look down just an inch and we see a difference and it adds meaning to it. "a little movement says things about you." He said he has the best DP(Director of Photography) in the world. He says Rodrigo makes himself invisible. The actors loose consciousness of the camera after a while which is hard with the hand held (made little hissing sound of film rolling next to his ear)

He feels telephathically connected with those he cares about. For example, he was in love with a German production designer, Bridgette Rock, also did Moulin Rouge and pulled a book out for R to see and he also pulled out the book.

His film works like a cubist painting or "puntis" where you see just dots up close but as you stand back further and further you see more and more of the picture until finally you see the entire picture.

Someone asked if Rulfo was an influence on him (Mexican director) but said he would like to "big time" but he didn't feel that feeling of existentialism and loneliness was so from "el campo" (the country) of solitude. He felt his work has a more urban feel to it.

When asked who chose the script he said Guillermo dreamt in on a train ride in Spain and called him up immediately to pitch the story to him and he was in.

When asked if there were any other choices for the main actors he said he has done a broad search of unknowns in the theater but said there's a reason why people don't get discovered after 30 years. He heard Marlon Brando say Sean Penn was one of the most brilliant actors of our day and he felt Marlon Brando should know. He always wanted to work with him. When he sent Penn the script he would call him every twenty pages he was so jazzed about the script "like a child" wanting to know how it would all play out and (laughing) was told "keep reading". He liked Del Toro's work in Traffic and Naomi Watts in Traffic.

On being asked about the dedication at the end he said it's to his wife who was a constant consultant on the film and a brutal necessity in the editing process. It refers to their third child being born. Apparently they had lost a child the year before this and he had had a really bad time dealing with it and she helped him through it. It reads something like, Maria who planted a crop while my corn plants burned, or something to that affect.

When asked if the script was written completely in Spanish and then translated, he said yes and it was fairly easy translated once it was finished. He said an hour was lost from the three hours on the cutting room floor and when someone asked if there was any improvisation he said the script was solid and it really wasn't the type of film you could improvise in.

There was a little bit more, but I'm sorry, my pen ran out. I hung around for a little while after and overheard him say to a fan that commented on the fact that the rain at the end was a brilliant piece to signify the renewal process that the rain (though I could swear he said snow) was an accident. The sun was out and it was chilly and for about five minutes it suddenly turned and the camera crew filmed it. He saw it while editing, liked it and put it in. Also, the birds were real; someone commented that it was brilliant the way they were shot and the fact that they were going down instead of up, he just grinned and broke in to a laugh. Some people brought their copies of AP for him to autograph and he did. Then the man was being gracious, but kept inching to the door, so not to add to the nuisance factor, I left.

[Jeremy Blackman]

Now if he could only focus that kind of skill to a more solid, tight story.

That kind of sense and order would be completely wrong for 21 Grams. It would forsake the whole unreliable and unresolving feeling of the movie.

[billybrown]

Spoilers possible.

Just saw this tonight, along with five other films in the past two days.  It's been a great weekend.

what i kept asking myself during the movie was, does showing us this out of order actually do anything? like, would this have been just as good or made any real difference in telling this story had it just been told in order? and i am not sure of the answer.

Same thing I was thinking.  And for me, this movie didn't work nearly as well as I was led to believe it was.  The first 30-40 minutes were really clunky, and it was all because of the director's insistence on telling a story in this non-linear fashion.  Soon enough though, I did get in a groove and was able to follow without thinking about it, but I felt the technique was more distracting than helpful.  I'd want to see a linear cut of this movie to measure it on its own.  Yeah, Naomi Watts was amazing.  The swimming scenes reminded me of Kieslowski's Blue, but I don't know if that's just a coincidence.  There's a lot that this movie could make you think about, but a lot more that makes you wonder if the actions of the characters are really believable.  Since we must suspend disbelief in a film, that really is a moot point, but if we've thought about it, it brings up a weakness in the film.  So I'm not sure what to make of that.  Needless to say, the ending was weird, bittersweet, and gave us a bit to think over, and I felt a bit cheated at the little surprise twist at how Penn's character got shot.

I really don't know how to "evaluate" this film.  It seems in some ways to belie that because it is so unique.  I admire it a lot, and finally felt some sort of smile of appreciation creep up on my face once Penn's and Watts' characters interacted more.  Don't know why that is.  But still, I feel a lot of people are overpraising this, just like they overpraised City of God.  Still, a good film.  ***½ (8/10)

Without repeating my previous posts on how I think this an exceptional film, I'll just speak to how you "felt a bit cheated" by the "little surprise twist" about how Penn's character got shot. Through the various flashbacks and flash forwards during the film, you can more or less discern what happened to Penn before the grand reveal, so to speak, so I don't quite see how that would qualify as a knock against the film.