Quote from: pete from the Edge of Darkness thread on March 01, 2010, 12:51:13 PM
I like this return to "proper" screenwriting - it's good to see that people still haven't forgotten how to set up something suspenseful and deliver a satisfying revelation.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1132620/
I just realized Millenium has not been seen at all here I think, or no one talked about it as far as I know. It's strange because I've been telling all my french friends about my love for the film(s) non-stop for months but never mentioned it here, but I know why now that I think of it:
Millenium is originaly a swedish trilogy of books that was a HUGE (like, insanely huge) success here in Quebec. EVERYBODY has read them, probably even more popular than Da Vinci Code. I think it was also huge in France and of course Sweden.
However, most of my english speaking friends have never heard of it though. It's strange because it was written in swedish so it's a translation anyway... maybe the french one is better, we just are better at it.
Anyway, to come back to Pete's quote, this delivers on suspense and satisfaction. Two parrallel stories that tie up together in midfilm with a good punch at the end. Bam. Violence, sex, politics, it's all there.
The main character, Lisbeth Salander, is the best woman character I've ever seen in a film. She kicks so much ass in the trilogy, it's not even funny. Americans doing tough chicks is often ridiculous, bordering on offensive. She is tough, but does not revendicate anything. She does what she has to do. Nobody ever mentions ''how tough she is for a girl'' or whatever. Anyway, she's great.
I would suggest avoiding the english translation which looks totally inane. The first film in french would be literally translated to Millenium - Men who hate women ..... but americans have decided it shall be ''The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo'' (WTF?) ... the second film would be translated to ''The girl who dreamed of a barrel of fuel and a match'' and it was translated to : ''The Girl Who Played with Fire'' ..... not as bad, but still less punchy. The second film is a lot less good than the first though, sadly. The books are just as good but the second film lacked the talent of the original director.
fucking crazy, I just started girl with a dragon tattoo this morning.
I picked it up at the airport, a Chinese translation. I know a Spaniard who also reads it and that's it. I tried reading it on the plane, but the names of the characters got really confusing, especially when sounded out in Chinese. He said he had the same problem in Spanish, so I didn't start reading until this morning, a few months later.
I heard it was meant to be 10 books - as the Swedes crime writers usually aim for 10.
The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo is a horrible, superficial, bland, emotionless piece of shit. It and Nobody to Watch Over Me were the two worst films of last year.
I'm not trying to be rude, I just hated the movie. And I know I shouldn't come in here and say this without giving reasons, but I can't think of a single quality even worth discussing. The filmmaking is ordinary, untalented, and unimaginative. The story is sensational but tiresomely and laboriously so. Lisbeth Salander is a movie universe female character without any dimensions (Niels Arden Oplev was at my screening and said the ending of the film was reached by a vote among the producers...I don't want to spoil what kind of movie nonsense note the movie ends on, but it's just, ugh...).
But Pas Rap you do say the English version looks inane. It is inane. I'm confused as to what's good, the book?
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 03:37:47 PM
fucking crazy
Indeed!
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 03:37:47 PM
I heard it was meant to be 10 books - as the Swedes crime writers usually aim for 10.
Yeah, the author died after 3 sadly :(
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 03:53:10 PM
Lisbeth Salander is a movie universe female character without any dimensions
How long was the movie you saw? Maybe it was a weird cut or something? It's supposed to be 2h30... because I can't think of any other reason for saying Lisbeth is without any dimension. I don't want to spoil anything, but you do realize she is a lesbian hacker working illegally (won't say more not to spoil anything) who is on probation for a fucking awesomely weird crime (won't spoil it either). When she exacts bloody vengeance... and what she does at the end? No way, you can't see she is without dimensions that's just wrong.
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 03:53:10 PM
But Pas Rap you do say the English version looks inane. It is inane. I'm confused as to what's good, the book?
Well, dubbed translations are usually the worst, especially in english, so even if the translation sucks I'm sure it's not as bad in subtitles form than in dubbed form.
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 01, 2010, 04:18:33 PM
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 03:53:10 PM
Lisbeth Salander is a movie universe female character without any dimensions
How long was the movie you saw? Maybe it was a weird cut or something? It's supposed to be 2h30... because I can't think of any other reason for saying Lisbeth is without any dimension. I don't want to spoil anything, but you do realize she is a lesbian hacker working illegally (won't say more not to spoil anything) who is on probation for a fucking awesomely weird crime (won't spoil it either). When she exacts bloody vengeance... and what she does at the end? No way, you can't see she is without dimensions that's just wrong.
2 1/2 hours.
You're describing Lisbeth's context, which is a single dimension of her character. It's as deep as the film goes. There's nothing about her that makes her feel real, and there's nothing the film gives me which allows an emotional entrance. She's pure circumstance. She's trapped in her movie and reacts in plot-oriented and destiny-guided conventions. Which, I don't know, is that what you and pete (sorry to rope you in) are missing, imaginary people reacting in imaginary ways? Predictability and artificiality? Character molds and narrative restrictions? Because that's all I see when I watch the movie, and I think it can go much further, even within the limitations of traditional storytelling. Polanski does it, for sure, and I haven't seen Ghost Writer but I wouldn't be surprised if he did it again, Ford, Hawks, Ray, etc, it was/is possible, but to me this film is a horrible example of structuralism and rigidity. There's not an instance of honesty in the whole film.
I have not seen the film and I don't plan on watching it after you talked about it like that.
but I do like these old timey thrillers, the ones that are done well, where suspense and revelations are guided by conflicting and intertwining motivations, that play out in a logical and hopefully surprising manner. I think my nostalgia began after The Wire. which has much more time and freedom to craft the characters, and for 90-minute movies, I guess I don't mind the shorthands. I agree with you that there's nothing worse than one-dimensional creatures that behave according to the needs of a convoluted plot, but since we have not brought up a film in common, I don't know how far I can go along with your argument.
do you just have problems with that genre in general? Or was it more specific to the film because it's worse than average?
I think the joy of the genre is how a seemingly ordinary person can logically be sucked into this much drama against this much odds just by having a little bit more wit and curiosity than the viewer. sometimes it can lead us to actual revelation, but mostly it's a fun escape and it's the only studio format that I can really admire, because just crafting one that's convincing (that's without superfluous truthfulness or revelation) is hard enough, and I admire anyone who does that just to deliver 2 hours of smart entertainment. anything else that follows a format to me is laziness. this is my only exception.
and you have maestros like Elmore Leonard or the 90s coens who subvert it in the funnest ways, but that's for another conversation. I just love the crime genre.
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 04:41:51 PM
You're describing Lisbeth's context, which is a single dimension of her character. It's as deep as the film goes. There's nothing about her that makes her feel real, and there's nothing the film gives me which allows an emotional entrance. She's pure circumstance. She's trapped in her movie and reacts in plot-oriented and destiny-guided conventions.
Are you saying that every action the movie makes her do is only to advance plot and not shape the character? If so, I disagree completely. The main story is the investigation for the missing teen, all that surrounds Lisbeth in the first hour or so is purely to make us know the character, her shadowy past and how she reacts to stuff. She feels very real to me, especially in the whole rape scene and how she reacts to it. Your lack of emotional entrance is purely intentional: she's a cold hard bitch. Her past is so fucked up (as it is hinted in the first film and revealed in the second)
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 04:41:51 PM
Which, I don't know, is that what you and pete (sorry to rope you in) are missing, imaginary people reacting in imaginary ways? Predictability and artificiality? Character molds and narrative restrictions? Because that's all I see when I watch the movie, and I think it can go much further, even within the limitations of traditional storytelling. Polanski does it, for sure, and I haven't seen Ghost Writer but I wouldn't be surprised if he did it again, Ford, Hawks, Ray, etc, it was/is possible, but to me this film is a horrible example of structuralism and rigidity. There's not an instance of honesty in the whole film.
Look I am not a film theorist, I don't have a clue what you are talking about with narrative restrictions and such so I won't address these points. But, I can see how some action of the film can seem artificial because much information is held out of the film compared with the books so I realize I had more knowledge of the characters than what the film was giving me.
I don't know if you've seen Millenium 2 yet, but there is a good example in that film: when the big guy who doesn't feel pain sees Lisbeth in the barn, she is almost dead and hurt as hell. He could kill her so easily, but he flees the scene. Everyone who hasn't read the book will scream ''Come on!'' because it looks like a deus ex machina and it's really stupid. BUT in the book, we know that the big guy is retarded and is mentally 5 years old so he's really afraid of ghosts and he's sure he had killed Lisbeth so she must be a ghost.
So, anyway, I kinda get your point but it didn't affect me as much. I can't believe it would make the film unwatchable by any means though. A lot of people have seen it without reading the book and they enjoyed it much.
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
I have not seen the film and I don't plan on watching it after you talked about it like that.
...
I just love the crime genre.
With the amount of good crime movies that are made these days (i.e.:few) you should still give it at least a try. Maybe after reading the book though if you plan on doing it despite the confusing names (it's not as bad in the film, there are less characters)
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
and you have maestros like Elmore Leonard
speaking of him, he mentioned in an interview that his favorite book ever was The Friends of Eddie Coyle... the DVD of the adaptatiob is out on criterion, it's fucking amazing.
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 01, 2010, 06:48:40 PM
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
and you have maestros like Elmore Leonard
speaking of him, he mentioned in an interview that his favorite book ever was The Friends of Eddie Coyle... the DVD of the adaptatiob is out on criterion, it's fucking amazing.
The Friends of Eddie Coyle is such a great movie. One of my favorites, easy.
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 01, 2010, 05:18:52 PM
Quote from: Captain of Industry on March 01, 2010, 04:41:51 PM
You're describing Lisbeth's context, which is a single dimension of her character. It's as deep as the film goes. There's nothing about her that makes her feel real, and there's nothing the film gives me which allows an emotional entrance. She's pure circumstance. She's trapped in her movie and reacts in plot-oriented and destiny-guided conventions.
Are you saying that every action the movie makes her do is only to advance plot and not shape the character? If so, I disagree completely. The main story is the investigation for the missing teen, all that surrounds Lisbeth in the first hour or so is purely to make us know the character, her shadowy past and how she reacts to stuff. She feels very real to me, especially in the whole rape scene and how she reacts to it. Your lack of emotional entrance is purely intentional: she's a cold hard bitch. Her past is so fucked up (as it is hinted in the first film and revealed in the second)
But again this is about the shape of a character, and really nothing from the beginning has emotional value later on, it's simply narrative fodder, like Mad Max back story stuff. The theory is the more extreme the back story the more justified the existence of the character, and this film's theory was that if you show the back story it intensifies your commitment to the character. And to me that's really transparent and not immediately equal to insight, compassion, understanding, or depth. It's not about how batshit crazy the character's past is, it's about how well the writer/filmmaker understands the character and the value of their tribulations. Which this film didn't.
A great film with a cold hard protagonist is In a Lonely Place. I can relate to and sympathize with the Bogart character, even while being repulsed by him. That's great story telling.
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
do you just have problems with that genre in general? Or was it more specific to the film because it's worse than average?
I don't have a problem with any genre, period. Definitely specific to the film. Another recent genre film I despised (though less severely) was Kaméleon. Some recent genre films I've admired are Reykjavik-Rotterdam, Down Terrace, Mother, A Prophet, The Human Centipede, and About Elly. And why be pretentious, yesterday I saw The Crazies and didn't hate it at all.
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 01, 2010, 06:48:40 PM
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
and you have maestros like Elmore Leonard
speaking of him, he mentioned in an interview that his favorite book ever was The Friends of Eddie Coyle... the DVD of the adaptatiob is out on criterion, it's fucking amazing.
that movie was great. and took place in boston. which rocks. the streets of boston are built for films. every corner is old and dirty and oughta belong in a movie. the dialogue is amazing, and I've finally realized why david mamet tried to hard to sound so awkward. unlike these young filmmakers who rip off 5-10 films, mamet's only been ripping off this one (which he gushes over for just a brief paragraph in one of his books), except mamet's too nice of a nice guy to really write for any tough guy. and peter yates is now one of my all time favorites. to do eddie coyle and breaking away, you have to be a master.
so I'm halfway through the girl with the tat. I half understand what captain means about her. she's like encyclopedia brown meets oliver twist meets fiona from burn notice...a miyazaki character is more believable than her. she's (like my constant bringing up of zooey daschanel in those movies where she kisses the boy first) a pure middle-age man fantasy. it seems like when a young male writer like zach braff or the 500 days of summer guy is clueless about how to write a girl character - he just glorifies a bunch of stuff he likes and hope that a sexy enough actress will flesh out the rest. but when a middle-aged man is clueless, he usually crosses his daughter with his sex fantasy, which results in awkwardness and eye rolling. this is a character straight out of a young adult vampire fiction novel. and I have read one because one of the kids I was mentoring made me read it. it's her favorite.
Quote from: pete on March 09, 2010, 02:48:57 AM
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 01, 2010, 06:48:40 PM
Quote from: pete on March 01, 2010, 05:06:14 PM
and you have maestros like Elmore Leonard
speaking of him, he mentioned in an interview that his favorite book ever was The Friends of Eddie Coyle... the DVD of the adaptatiob is out on criterion, it's fucking amazing.
that movie was great. and took place in boston. which rocks. the streets of boston are built for films. every corner is old and dirty and oughta belong in a movie. the dialogue is amazing, and I've finally realized why david mamet tried to hard to sound so awkward. unlike these young filmmakers who rip off 5-10 films, mamet's only been ripping off this one (which he gushes over for just a brief paragraph in one of his books), except mamet's too nice of a nice guy to really write for any tough guy. and peter yates is now one of my all time favorites. to do eddie coyle and breaking away, you have to be a master.
did you just see it or did you see it before? Because I find it so surprising that I just heard of it recently by pure coincidence/chance and nobody ever mentions it. It's such a pure gem and great and rewatchable. There must be a thousand good quotes from it too. Even the bank heist sequences, which I read were the most criticized parts, I really enjoy because they felt pretty fresh. The cars are also great in this film.
The Mitchum character is just the best but all the secondary characters are really interesting and easy to imagine a backstory for. You got Jackie Brown, awesome character. The cop who's also great, Coyle who's a dick but good character, even that Bonny and Clide couple is pretty decent.
What I like best is that it really shows the inner workings of small time criminal rings. Like, the thief to the fence to the dealer... the relations between police and criminals... no honor among thieves really, it's just staying alive. It's also really believable because the guy who wrote it was an assistant D.A. I read.
The Mamet connection is there, definitely.
lol sucks that I decided I would hate you a couple weeks ago because we have been agreeing a lot these past days haha ok I forgive you for saying I was adorable. :boxing: