500 Days of Summer [Sundance 09]

[RegularKarate]

you guys take so much offense to its hipness.  can't one just be unaffected?

I'm with you, Pete.  It's a strange knee-jerk reaction to a lot of films lately.  There's a difference between gross over-quirkiness (Garden State) and a movie being "too hip"... when someone says something's "too hip", it seems like they're just upset that someone who is like a person they hate ("Hipsters", a meaningless term that should have died in 2007) is the focus of a movie.

I didn't love this movie, but I didn't hate it either.  There are some fantastic scenes and I enjoyed it overall. 

I will say that if I had been more emotionally invested in the rest of the movie, the end would have ruined it.  Instead, I was just like "oh, that ending sucked, oh well, that was fun, what's next?".

[Pas]

I bought it to my 16yo sister for christmas and it's now her and her friends' favorite film (until the next twilight I guess)

[Gamblour.]

you guys take so much offense to its hipness.  can't one just be unaffected?

Incorrect. "Hip" is just one of many words I used there, see? And actually, I mean it in a good way. It was nice to see Pixies karaoke. It's nice that the movie clearly culls a lot of visuals influences and uses them in interesting ways. That the film was hip -- and by "hip," I obviously do not mean "hipsters," because I'm using hip to mean that it's a very contemporary film, a film of its generation (a generation of whiny pixie-obsessed [different usage here] men who can't handle strong women + a fucking lot of Black Lips on the soundtrack) -- is merely a testament to the sensibilities of the writers, who strike out a lot with the emotional arc of the film, hence the shitty ending.

And since I actually liked the film when I first saw it and am now annoyed when I think about it (as I predicted I would be), I'd appreciate it some sort of actual discussion rather than a blanket argument that people are offended by its hipness, when really no one has said "omg smiths, pixies, AND black lips? too hip, therefore lame. color me offended." It's like calling a movie pretentious and having no reason for saying that.

[modage]

I didn't say it was hip, I just didn't think it was good.  ....I still liked it.

[pete]

gamblour you didn't have to say you hated the hipness, just the endless listing of pop culture references - brands songs clothes and what have you, rolling the proverbial eyes to each reference. 
I just don't get them so I'm not distracted by which song plays when, but you seem like really bothered to the degree that you're imagining the evil smugness of the writers as they type out that weighty screenplay, weighing twice as much as a normal one due to all the ink used to state every cool specific cultural artifact they must have enjoyed and want to impose on the rest of America.  Like I seriously do not understand what you mean by a generation of men raised on pixies.  why are you so annoyed by the fact that you recognize what song is playing on the background?

I was watching live hard sell hard the other night and was so stoked that they played two lines of "don't think twice it's alright" from the cool billy paul version of the song in one scene on the background.  but that does not alter my enjoyment of the film beyond those 10 seconds.

[Pas]

I don't think he's complaining about the Pixies song? He says he means it in a good way... actually I have no clue what you two are talking about because it doesn't even seem to talk about the film yet it's supposed to be.

How could someone not like the soundtrack of this film because it has too many good song? I mean, how does that work? It's too self-conscious you mean? I say whatever, I'll take a smiths song in a movie whenever I can.

[RegularKarate]

Just to clear things up, I wasn't specifically talking about anyone else.  Pete just hit on something that's been bothering me a lot lately.  Not just with films, but with a lot of things.

[Pas]

[Gamblour.]

Oh, nevermind.

[Ravi]

Reading all these comments, I was expecting another Garden State or something, but this film wasn't like that.  The only scene that was overly GS-ish was the Smiths elevator scene.

A lot of this hit home for me.  I wasn't in exactly the same situation as JGL, but the scenes where Zooey grows increasingly distant reminded me of one serious relationship, and the drunken bender reminded me of one that never even got off the ground.

I particularly liked that moment where JGL is complaining to the redhead, and she points out what he himself said about her.  So the film isn't even about her being a flake or anything.  Not only did he know her views on relationships already (at least, how she felt at the time), but Zooey took his words about knowing when you're in love to heart.  She didn't feel it in her heart that he was The One for her.

The end diminished the goodwill the film had built up until then.  Why can't the happy ending in a film be the fact that the guy learns something about himself and moves on, rather than he meets another girl?  Its a BS cliche ending that caps an otherwise smart and perceptive film.

[Pubrick]

the first kiss was bullshit.

the post-binge boardroom freakout didn't ring true, maybe because the whole greeting card career felt forced and hardly believable on any level. i didn't care for the dancing sequence other than it was nice to look at i guess. i have no special association with any of the songs featured on the soundtrack other than recognizing a few of them and being surprised that there was an australian band on it (the tempter trap with their song Sweet Disposition which played twice and is really good) but who cares about that.

a special word on zooey's character. i don't think she was underwritten because i no longer believe that actors need a lot of dialogue or backstory or internal monologue kind of motivation to be believable as characters but rather they should be well cast so they imbue whatever they possess naturally to the story -- in this sense she was not underwritten she was sposed to be cute and adorable and by god she was but i DO think she was under directed. evidence of this can be found in two BIZARRE situations where she is seemingly walking aimlessly around without any idea where she is -- firstly at the office party where she is walking around aimlessly before tom hands her some champagne or whatever, secondly where tom's friend barges in and talks about handjobs blowjobs whatever and she appears from another room, look at her, is she HIGH?

speaking of bizzare, chloe moretz and tom have no parents no mother or father or anything, she also cannot possibly hav any real interest or insight into tom's life. moreover her nostrils are fucking HUGE when she says "hey, you're sketching again!" it was distracting.

the expectations/reality sequence was genius. the official break up conversation, being the last time tom and summer talk at his favourite spot (who's stalking who now? seriously she's just been waiting behind that tree the whole time?) is actually pretty good, it's not that they switched places but that encountering each other allowed them to exchange qualities from themselves to the other and thus become more well rounded individuals. they both represented one single ideology which is still dominant by the end of the film, she still does whatever she wants, and he still falls for chicks instantly all the time, but they hav compromised their outlook too - her by accepting true love and him by AS PICOLAS SAID actually changing the slightest bit at the end, asking that chick out and accepting rejection.

nice film, will never watch again.

[Pas]

i no longer believe that actors need a lot of dialogue or backstory or internal monologue kind of motivation to be believable as characters but rather they should be well cast so they imbue whatever they possess naturally to the story

Damn, that's good. Very interesting, if you have anything more to say about that I'd definitely be a client.

[socketlevel]

i no longer believe that actors need a lot of dialogue or backstory or internal monologue kind of motivation to be believable as characters but rather they should be well cast so they imbue whatever they possess naturally to the story

Damn, that's good. Very interesting, if you have anything more to say about that I'd definitely be a client.

for the most part i agree, unless you're getting gary oldman. in that case you just cast him and it's gold.