Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
(MILD SPOILER) esp. any scene relating to his daughter
Not seen it since I first saw it. Think it's time for a re watch
it's just come to my attention that the guy playing the minister also died very recently (coincidentally, he also acted alongside Hoffman in the Master as the person who accuses Dodd of being a cult leader).
RIP to them both.
ive ever swallowed.
It was so bad that after watching it we were all just really angry that it had been allowed to exist. Just a douchebag film
hard to follow
I understand why it's not for everyone by any stretch of imagination but what aspect did you fin so objectionable?
It's going on for 4 years since I watched it now, but to boil it down into one word, we thought the film was 'stupid'. It tried to be a russian doll and make all of these grand sweeping points about life and existence and be really clever in the process... But as far as we were concerned it was just a big mess that was near impossible to follow, it was also boring as all hell.
I remember vaguely there being a lady who's house was on fire for 17 years. Probably there was some high concept for this, and maybe the idea behind it was a good one, but like everything else in that film its buried beneath layer after layer of drivel
About equating the film's intentions with that of it's protagonist.
Caden is "pretentious" and trying to make all these grand sweeping points about life and existence and trying to be really clever in the process. But he's utterly self-absorbed and narcissistic and fails through his refusal to see anything other than his own life as important. I think the key thing about the whole film is that he's trying to make this grandiose artistic statement about life as a whole but all he can ever focus on is his own specific role within it. The film itself is kind of a meta, self-deprecating version of the "play" I think.
Of course, the merits of depicting something like that within a film are going to be very much subject to taste etc and it is difficult to follow and wilfully confusing which I can understand people being put off by but I always find it odd how the depiction of "pretentiousness" (for want of a better word) is vilified as if it was, in itself inherently "pretentious."
(I realise that all of the above comes across as pretentiously as anything in the film)
Hating this film is just as fine as loving it, it's failure to engage with it that I find bewildering though. Too many people just land on "I don't get it" as a response (not saying you're doing that btw) which is just utterly, utterly pointless.
Long overdue a re-watch of it
I think I appreciate it for being as bold as it is, but at the same time I can't work out if it's a bad idea done well or a good idea done badly. It's a shame that it lost as much money as it did as Kaufman hasn't been able to get anything else off the ground since, but at the same time I think one of the reasons Adaptation and Being John Malkovich worked as well as they did is that Spike Jonze moderated Kaufman and stopped him from disappearing too far down the rabbit hole/up his own arse.
I love his scripts in general, but Synechdoche is definitely the pinnacle of his work because it's so unrestrained and ambitious
Deeply flawed film. Admirable in scope and ambition - ultimately poor in terms of execution. But, y'know, fair play for having a crack.
It angered me but I did admire it, in a way.