Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
to avoid people pushing the mouse over and accidentally seeing them.
It took longer than I anticipated.
I mean it feels like David Fincher's desperate for an Oscar and has blunted all the edges off a really interesting idea.
For another it's very very long and ultimately you need a fucking good film to justify 2 hours 40 mins (three hours with ads and trailers) in a cinema) and it just doesn't cut it.
For a third the philosophy is very cookie-cutter and simplistic and the last speech is truly awful as the ending of an epic film.
For a fourth it glosses over the interesting parts. I mean the real interesting/fucked up part of that story is either
a) how at the age of twenty you go looking for a mother to raise you for the rest of your life
b) how a woman makes the transition from someone's lover to mothering them
and that bit got glossed over (there were a few shots of her mothering at the end but the transition was the bit that interested me
and all it felt not that interesting and, as someone said on here, an inferior Forrest Gump.
Normally I'm okay with bad films 'cos these things happen but this one really feels like an utter missed opportunity.
PS I'd like to take this opportunity to place on record that, having seen the trailer twice, I don't have words for how much Vicky Christina Barcelona doesn't appeal to me.
The Wrestler was... alright. No film without Rourke, put it that way.
I thought Australia was panned by the critics?
And I thought the Reader, which isn't on your list, had a lot to recommend it. I've not ruled out seeing Slumdog Millionaire, though the fact that twice in the last week I've considered seeing it and not done so implies it won't happen so I'm clearly not that keen.
But I'd agree the rest don't really appeal.
I think the thing is I've never tended to like award-winning films. My favourite films tend to be ones that get decent reviews but aren't highbrow enough for the awards season.
in a good way, but the ending is average, you know the awnsers of the questions and you miss out on a good 75% of the twists and suspense (like i did :() and the dance scene tacked on at the end totally blunted the impact of the film
Looking at the trailer, and considering how many critics are raving about it, I'm not sure whether it's just a botched trailer, focusing mainly on the beautiful wimmin and teh sex in the film to appeal to another audience. Or it could just be shit.
I'm by no means a Woody Allen afficionado but this is the first of his films (post-fame ) I can remember that hasn't been sold as a "Woody Allen film".
"Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz getting it on! WE GOTTA SEE THAT DUDE!". The actors all seems so irritatingly smug in the trailer too.
I think I'll stick with Annie Hall and Crimes and Misdemeanors.
one of the criticisms, by a Kenneth Turan, is that it "is too intent on being taken seriously to be more than mildly diverting". Either he's got that bit wrong, or the trailer's completely avoiding the serious side of the film and stuck all the funny, sexy and sunny bits together and set it to Spanish guitar music. I still don't particularly want to see it, mind.
that just as he's jerking off to Johansson and Cruz getting saucy, it cuts away to them all at dinner discussing Sartre, thus ruining his flow.
I mean as light comedy's go, you get the impression you could see better, without contemplating whether or not it feels like a light comedy.
Far be it for me to cast aspersions on Mr Allen but it does really seem like an excuse to create a wankbank fantasy of a middle-aged man whose so irresistable to three attractive women they end up fucking both him and each other to impress him and then present it as art/intellectualism.
we have 3000 more films for you.
for the record its the best thing he's done for 5 or 6 films, but its still not very good
I have an audio version of the original story that was free to download at the time I heard about this. Despite loving Fincher's other stuff (Alien³ excepted) listening to the story made me dread this.
It's not a bad story at all, but it's not filmic in any sense. The story in fact relies upon the idea that Button (and those around him) either don't understand what's happening to him or refuse to acknowledge it, so that very point you were interested in, Paul, doesn't come into the story.
The point of it is really the juxtaposition of expectation against reality. I.e. when the war comes again and he returns to the army he has come to the age of 16 yet is apparently a Colonol or something and they refuse to believe him; and despite him being a fully grown adult at the start they still treat him like a child.
How the hell did they ever have sex? No matter how much you love someone, if all you can think about is how old and gross they were when you first met them as a frickin' 5 year old, that is going to shit things up in the sack.
For that reason and all the many other things that were intrinsically wrong (and the DVD player used to watch this film) - I'm out.
thoroughly, brave cinema, weird, thought provoking, unremittingly depressing, beautifully filmed, and bar a few jarring early scenes technically impressive also.
Not the masterpiece I'd hoped, but very very good.
Cate Blanchett, most attractive woman ever.
Not a masterpiece by any stretch but i thoroughly enjoyed it and cate blanchett is gorgeous.
In fairness so is brad pitt for quite a lot of this film.
got to the ticket desk:
Me: "How long is Benjamin Button?"
Desk guy: "Three hours"
Me: "I'll have a think"
I didn't see it.
I think I did a DiS thread on it, seeing if anyone else felt the same. The Guardian review swung it for me too - one out of five!