Christina Ricci Neked in Monster?

[godardian]

I'm glad that two of the very best films of the year were made by female directors.

also American Splendor was co-directed by a female...so perhaps 3 of the better films of the year.

and van sant is queer, so that's another 2 great movies for the ladies.

[Recce]

well for women, nudity gives you oscars
and for men, retarded gives you oscars

Look forward to Sean Penn and Halle Berry in "Retard's Ball", the heart-felt story of one woman's journey to Alabama, her battle with racism, and her inevitable seduction of an innocent, yet wise man-child.

Man, you guys were on the ball that day. I've been laughing for 20 minutes.

[Recce]

Still laughing.

[Chest Rockwell]

I just saw this Saturday, and I thought it was quite overrated. I thought it dragged on and Charlize Theron's acting was inconsistent: good at parts to the point where it seemed she became the character (which I'm sure is due mostly to the physical change) and then other parts where she overacted terribly. Ricci was OK, not great or bad. But what I guess is most important is that I thought that as a whole the film was lacking a certain something and I couldn't connect with it. It just didn't work for me, though I'll admit it was better than I thought it'd be; it was maybe good, but it didn't leave me amazed even in a humongous theater. And does anybody realize this film is getting any hype because Theron became ugly for it? How lame. Maybe I'm just bitter over the fact Scarlett wasn't nominated for anything.

[ono]

No, you're right.  Uglified hookers and compassionate retards are usually shoe-ins for Oscar nominations.  I haven't been able to see this yet, so I still can't judge.  I'm just noticing a trend.  It left my local arthouse the day before I planned to go, so now if I wanna see it, I'll have to drive a while.  We'll see.

[ono]

Well, Monster came back to the local arthouse, so I got to see it this afternoon.  It's an overrated film with an overrated performance.  Imagine, for a minute, if Charlize didn't alter her appearance.  We'd have an average performance of a woman in a downward spiral.  Nothing we haven't seen before.

I kept thinking of Boys Don't Cry when I was watching this film.  And Boys Don't Cry sucked for the same reason as this did: a lack of sympathetic characters.  Now, I was with Aileen for awhile.  She didn't have any choice for the longest time, and her station in life sucked.  The first murder was totally justified, though she would have a hard time being found innocent in a trial only because of juries natural prejudices against lower-class people.

Docudramas are hard because of the fact that sometimes it is necessary to portray unsympathetic characters in a sympathetic light.  At one point, Aileen is thinking of killing a john, yet he stutters, seems a bit slow, and we feel for him, and for Aileen, and we see a bit of a change, a show of heart in her.  She spares his life.  Ah, the noble hooker.  But later on, she goes out seeking men who mean her no ill will, and just want a fuck.  Regardless of how you feel about prostitution, the johns or the hookers, she wasn't justified in any of the latter killings, and the attempts of the director to insinuate that because of her past, it's okay that she does this is just unfortunate.  And then finally, her character loses all redeemability when she kills the man who was trying to help her.  I kinda just lost all interest after that, though it was heartbreaking seeing Selby turn on her.  The whole story was tragic in that Boys Don't Cry way, but the situation could have been avoided had these characters made better choices even in light of their harsh circumstances.

My favorite part of the film was the rollerskating scene.  Here we see these two characters personalities come out, and we actually care for them.  The Journey song was a nice touch, and not really all that out of place, and the love scenes between the two were nice, though they couldn't save the movie.  **½ (6/10)

[Ghostboy]

I think the rollerskating scene is actually my least favorite scene in the movie. I think if it had been exactly the same, though, only without the Journey song, it would have been my favorite. I would have loved to see the momentum of the two characters, both emotionally and physically, with only the sounds of the rollerskating rink accompanying them. It would have lacked the visceral thrill that the song provides, but in its place there would be this unpredictable and raw sense of desperate attraction that would climax in the equally quiet shot of them making out behind the building.

I know that's not what Patty Jenkins was going for, though, but I don't think that scene has the depth that it could have had either.

[Chest Rockwell]

I think the rollerskating scene is actually my least favorite scene in the movie. I think if it had been exactly the same, though, only without the Journey song, it would have been my favorite. I would have loved to see the momentum of the two characters, both emotionally and physically, with only the sounds of the rollerskating rink accompanying them. It would have lacked the visceral thrill that the song provides, but in its place there would be this unpredictable and raw sense of desperate attraction that would climax in the equally quiet shot of them making out behind the building.

I know that's not what Patty Jenkins was going for, though, but I don't think that scene has the depth that it could have had either.

Well I don't know if I'm alone here, but this film wasn't really anything amazing for me. The director failed to reach any of my emotions, and Theron's performance seemed so lauded simply because she became ugly for it. It was a good movie, sure, but you can bet I'll never see it again unless forced or invited to see it with friends. But I liked the rollerskating scene; that one scene nearly reached me.

[Pedro]

I think the rollerskating scene is actually my least favorite scene in the movie. I think if it had been exactly the same, though, only without the Journey song, it would have been my favorite. I would have loved to see the momentum of the two characters, both emotionally and physically, with only the sounds of the rollerskating rink accompanying them. It would have lacked the visceral thrill that the song provides, but in its place there would be this unpredictable and raw sense of desperate attraction that would climax in the equally quiet shot of them making out behind the building.

though technically you're correct with this...it would've been great that way.  fuck off, because that song rocks.

enough said.

[MacGuffin]

Imagine, for a minute, if Charlize didn't alter her appearance.  We'd have an average performance of a woman in a downward spiral.

Acting is more than make-up and Theron uses her eyes, her body language and speech to complete her 'transformation'. I just saw the character in her performance, not the prosthetics.

[Kal]

I didnt see this movie yet but they both look horrible in the pictures... I hate when they get a beatiful acctress and put enough makeup to make her horrible so then she wins an Oscar...

Hmm... Nicole Kidman... Halle Berry... damn

where is that pic of Christina naked?

[godardian]

Imagine, for a minute, if Charlize didn't alter her appearance.  We'd have an average performance of a woman in a downward spiral.

Acting is more than make-up and Theron uses her eyes, her body language and speech to complete her 'transformation'. I just saw the character in her performance, not the prosthetics.

I agree with this. I also can't countenance Ono's insistence on "likeable" characters- that criteria has always seemed much too subjective for me to be relevant to a proper analysis of a film, and I've had many an argument with friends/fellow film-lovers about this. The whole point of the film is that this person was sympathetic, whether or not she was "likeable." I've actually come to loathe the word "likeable." It's represented in the film by the people who are most callow towards Aileen when she's trying her hardest to be "likeable" (and failing): They can't or refuse to see a human being there. Though the films may be dissimilar in more ways than they match up, Boys Don't Cry presented the same thing: A person who is treated as less than human for failing to fit some very arbitrary, very preconceived and small-minded view of what a human being is and what their worth is based on. I guess some audience members are just complicit in this; they share the view that the filmmakers are trying to reveal as untenable, inhumane, and irrelevant, so of course they don't like the film.

I'm not saying that the film is great, but it is definitely worthwhile, and MacG is right about the performance. The kind of perception that says it was all just the makeup is the same perception that let that goddamn prosthetic nose supercede in their minds Kidman's wonderful performance, makeup or no, in The Hours.

Yes, Monster is an unpleasant story about some often unpleasant people. No, it is not a perfect film. But it is a good and promising film, and the only real complaint about Theron's performance that holds any water with me is that it's so incredibly good, it dwarfs the film around it and the other actors, which are not good to the same degree her portrayal of this human "monster" is.

P.S. I'm also getting very sick of this completely unfounded assumption that the Oscars like "beautiful women to get ugly" and base awards around that. That has happened so fucking rarely that it's a laughable complaint. If you have some personal issue, only to do with your own notions, with hot ladies not playing up their hotness because they're not playing sexier-than-average people (it's called "acting," everyone!), it's incredibly false to project that onto all of showbiz, a place where there is absolutely no proof that physical beauty is ever really held against you. I'm sure there are plenty of fine actresses who looked like Aileen without makeup, yet Charlize Theron got the part (and did an astounding job with it). Point is, no matter how talented or not you are, or how "ugly" the ROLE is, you have to be much more good-looking than average to even get your foot in the door of an audition. I've just about had it with people overreacting, apparently resenting an actress for not looking hot enough for their fantasy-wish-fulfillment projections onto cinema, which is something cinema is hardly there to serve.

I also wonder whether anyone read the EW cover story with Theron, Watts, and Connelly, where the former two complained bitterly about people saying to them, "You're so brave for looking so ugly! [in Monster and 21 Grams" They were completely insulted that they'd ripped themselves to shreds mentally and emotionally to get to the places these characters are at, really traumatized themselves at some points, really stuck their necks out to play these roles, and all fucking shallow pundits can focus on is how they look, one tool of many in shaping their performances?? Some serious re-assessment of the way we see actors/performances seems in order, if this is what it's come to. You can see beautiful Theron and beautiful Watts in magazines and on TV on an almost daily basis- they are beautiful. But though their beauty may have helped them realize their vocation, it is not their vocation. It's not acting.

[MacGuffin]

'Monster' Movie Sets Off Debate Over Accuracy

Yet another based-on-fact movie has touched off a firestorm of debate over its accuracy in advance of the Academy Awards. ABC's 20/20 on Friday maintained that there is no evidence that serial killer Aileen Wuornos was ever attacked by any of her victims, as depicted in the movie Monster, and that it in fact defames those who died at her hand. Interviewed by 20/20 co-host John Stossel, family members of Wuornos's victims denounced the film. Mike Humphreys, whose father was robbed and killed by Wuornos, commented: "I don't think that [the filmmakers] ought to do this to the victims out there." Letha Prater, the sister of another of Wuornos's targets, remarked: "This movie is portraying her as a victim. She isn't. She was not a victim. My brother was a victim." The film was also condemned by the Florida state attorney who prosecuted Wuornos and who said he was never consulted by the filmmakers. John Tanner called their depiction of what occurred "a total lie." In response, film producer Brad Wyman did not defend the accuracy of the film, telling Stossel, "It's not a documentary. ... It is a dramatic portrayal searching for a greater truth than a factual truth."

[Chest Rockwell]

'Monster' Movie Sets Off Debate Over Accuracy

Yet another based-on-fact movie has touched off a firestorm of debate over its accuracy in advance of the Academy Awards. ABC's 20/20 on Friday maintained that there is no evidence that serial killer Aileen Wuornos was ever attacked by any of her victims, as depicted in the movie Monster, and that it in fact defames those who died at her hand. Interviewed by 20/20 co-host John Stossel, family members of Wuornos's victims denounced the film. Mike Humphreys, whose father was robbed and killed by Wuornos, commented: "I don't think that [the filmmakers] ought to do this to the victims out there." Letha Prater, the sister of another of Wuornos's targets, remarked: "This movie is portraying her as a victim. She isn't. She was not a victim. My brother was a victim." The film was also condemned by the Florida state attorney who prosecuted Wuornos and who said he was never consulted by the filmmakers. John Tanner called their depiction of what occurred "a total lie." In response, film producer Brad Wyman did not defend the accuracy of the film, telling Stossel, "It's not a documentary. ... It is a dramatic portrayal searching for a greater truth than a factual truth."

People need to grow up. The whole purpose of the movie was to make Wuornos "sympathetic." Just think of how much more it would have sucked if each of her victims came off as a saint-who-picks-up-hookers.

[Cecil]

hm. i liked both main characters and found the film to be quite romantic. oh well. crimson and clover. over and over