wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 346
|
Post by wattsnew on Sept 14, 2019 20:26:41 GMT
My grandma really wanted to see this so I decided to take her. We were literally the only two people in the theater and she fell asleep 20 minutes in. I can’t really blame her, as this was mind numbingly boring and horribly written. Should’ve took her to Hustlers instead! Anyway... I believe this has to be one of the worst opening weekends ever for a movie that opened in more than 2,500 theaters.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Sept 14, 2019 22:02:19 GMT
Something something something, throwing stones, glass houses.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Sept 14, 2019 22:05:19 GMT
Something something something, throwing stones, glass houses. Is death a metaphor, Hazel Grace? EDIT: I haven’t actually seen it, but I never miss an opportunity to mock Ansel Elgort.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Sept 14, 2019 22:20:01 GMT
Something something something, throwing stones, glass houses. Is death a metaphor, Hazel Grace? EDIT: I haven’t actually seen it, but I never miss an opportunity to mock Ansel Elgort. Don't remind me. The fact that I'm still planning on seeing this and hope WB doesn't cancel the international release because it flopped in the US, even after they cast fucking Ansel Elgort as the lead, and after the reviews, and after the news that they straight-washed the story, and after getting halfway through the novel and realizing that the chances of this turning out solid are slim to put it mildly... is very much testament to my love for Kidman.
|
|
Drish
Badass
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 1,749
|
Post by Drish on Sept 14, 2019 22:22:37 GMT
My grandma really wanted to see this so I decided to take her. We were literally the only two people in the theater and she fell asleep 20 minutes in. I can’t really blame her, as this was mind numbingly boring and horribly written. Should’ve took her to Hustlers instead! Anyway... I believe this has to be one of the worst opening weekends ever for a movie that opened in more than 2,500 theaters. Giirl whyy? It's not like our favorite is starring in superhits either! Do you like people bashing Watts? Stop being happy on her friend's failures. She's already given one of the best performances of the year in BLL!
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Sept 15, 2019 19:47:16 GMT
My grandma really wanted to see this so I decided to take her. We were literally the only two people in the theater and she fell asleep 20 minutes in. I can’t really blame her, as this was mind numbingly boring and horribly written. Should’ve took her to Hustlers instead! Anyway... I believe this has to be one of the worst opening weekends ever for a movie that opened in more than 2,500 theaters. Giirl whyy? It's not like our favorite is starring in superhits either! Do you like people bashing Watts? Stop being happy on her friend's failures. She's already given one of the best performances of the year in BLL! Tell em’ babe!
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Sept 17, 2019 0:00:38 GMT
I saw it earlier today, and I just typed the word “Oats.” Because it is. It’s rough, it’s flavorless, it doesn’t linger, it isn’t satisfying, and digesting it feels like a chore. In broader terms, what is with this movie misplacing it’s unjustified - in its current state - running time? Why can it not write genuine human beings, some of whom are only elevated by pure virtue of their performers? Why does it put so much focus on the most banal sections, when there are much more ripe possibilities barely touched on? Why establish seemingly important character traits only to discard them immediately? (It *was* straight-washed. That kiss from the trailer, that’s as far as Ukrainian guy’s sexuality goes, and it’s never brought up again. Why even include it then?) Oh, and my personal favorite, THIS FUCKING MORON HAS NEVER ONCE UNWRAPPED THE DAMN PAINTING, OR NOTICED IT’S WEIGHT SHIFT? And then it turns into Life Itself at the end. What a goal to aspire to. I could actually feel my time being wasted watching it.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 17, 2019 2:38:21 GMT
This was a massive bomb.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 18, 2019 20:36:13 GMT
My main reason for watching it was Roger Deakins. While this isn't his most notable work, the high-class cinematography of the film was easily its very best and pretty much only remarkable aspect. And honestly, it made the whole thing feel more accomplished and classier than it deserved. I haven't read the novel but from the sound of it I probably wouldn't have been that into it. That it resulted in a somewhat pedestrian and mediocre film is no surprise. But I wouldn't say it's really a bad movie. It fell off the rails in the last 30 minutes or so and overall the Ansel Elgort stuff is just not as compelling as the Oakes Fegley portion of the film...But I did find myself kind of engaged in the childhood sequences, particularly the Las Vegas segment. It's not a story-driven movie at all, nor did it really feel character-driven either...It's this collection of encounters, of hang-out episodes, of vibes...Until it takes a turn to some heavy plotting which simply doesn't fit with its overall feeling. I didn't enjoy the plot stuff all that much but the long meandering chunk of the film surprisingly pulled me in. And can someone please give Sarah Paulson a proper role on the big screen? Acting-wise she was easily the most memorable one from the ensemble, making gold from a pretty nothing character.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Sept 18, 2019 21:01:56 GMT
JangoB, I don’t know. I was honestly flabbergasted when I saw his name. You know the saying “if you didn’t already know, you’d never guess it was him?” I *didn’t*know, so this felt like the epitome of that. It seemed really... C-level for him, like anyone could have shot most of the film. I didn’t feel his flair, and it seems like a paycheck gig.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 18, 2019 21:27:14 GMT
JangoB , I don’t know. I was honestly flabbergasted when I saw his name. You know the saying “if you didn’t already know, you’d never guess it was him?” I *didn’t*know, so this felt like the epitome of that. It seemed really... C-level for him, like anyone could have shot most of the film. I didn’t feel his flair, and it seems like a paycheck gig. That's interesting for me to read because I felt it had his fingerprints all over it. Deakins is one of the cinematographers who have a style and a look that can be seen in everything they do, no matter which director they work with. And I had no doubts I was watching his work here. The presence of slow camera movement in quieter scenes, the signature golden/grey hues, the silhouettes, the overhead lying-in-bed shots... It's definitely less flashy Deakins but it's still very much him.
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Sept 19, 2019 7:12:40 GMT
Oh honeys...
|
|
|
Post by evilbliss on Sept 19, 2019 14:05:28 GMT
Is death a metaphor, Hazel Grace? EDIT: I haven’t actually seen it, but I never miss an opportunity to mock Ansel Elgort. Don't remind me. The fact that I'm still planning on seeing this and hope WB doesn't cancel the international release because it flopped in the US, even after they cast fucking Ansel Elgort as the lead, and after the reviews, and after the news that they straight-washed the story, and after getting halfway through the novel and realizing that the chances of this turning out solid are slim to put it mildly... is very much testament to my love for Kidman. Same here. I'll support Kidman!
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 346
|
Post by wattsnew on Sept 21, 2019 17:35:31 GMT
Ansel Elgort is having a meltdown on Instagram about the negative reviews.
|
|
|
Post by bob-coppola on Nov 21, 2019 0:01:46 GMT
so, it fucking sucks:
jesus fucking christ. overstuffed is an euphemism to describe the goldfinch. it's a movie that, in 2h30 of running time, wants to tackle or just splash into the plot: grief, guilt, coming of age, life with a foster family, abusive and negligent parenting, motherhood, terrorism, alcoholism, drug addiction, antique furniture, the underground world of criminal art dealing, the blossoming of one's sexuality, suicide and the philosophies of art. I almost lost my breath just listing. it's a melodrama, a modern charles dickens fable, but also a sophisticated drama (and a crime thriller for the last 15 minutes). it has a classical score, then turns to electronic sounds, and then settles on scoring the movie to modern songs.
the first half is a hot mess, but an engaging hot mess. you see young oakes fegley trying to adjust into a rich family's household, and it's an interesting dynamic. nicole kidman plays the part of the surrogate mother beautifully, and it's a shame that such strong performance is watered down by weird narrative choices and underwriting. then, he goes to las vegas to live with his poorly acted father (sorry luke wilson, but you truly blew it) and his trashy stepmom (sarah paulson ROCKING). there, he also befriends an ukranian boy (wolfhard, that shows depth despite his awful accent), with whom he shares so much chemistry. see, the writing is not good and the editing is a series of choices (like trying to stuff 3 different sequences set in the same room, but from different days and people wearing different clothes, and then thinking it wasn't going to look weird), but there's a beating, human heart that makes it engaging.
then, when there's a time jump and the action goes to present-day... christ, it was painful. the movie decides to prioritize plotting over characters, and it starts operating on autopilot. first, a lot happened with the characters and they changed a lot, and those new dynamics feel utterly unearned. it makes no sense at all and you just have to accept it. the plot is then told in such a boring way, just going through the motions. it only hurts that this half chooses to focus in the most boring relationships, involving the weakest links of the cast (a sleepwalking jeffrey wright, and two insipid love interests).
so, that leaves us wondering how did no one try to save this lost case of a screenplay? the writing is so lousy that some symbolisms are absent from the movie in its almost entirety, just to become very important out of the blue, and then disappear again. everytime there's a time-jump or a change of setting, it's like everything's rebooted and a whole new, uninteresting story starts. it feels like there's a second act missing, as it jumps from the set-ups of the first act that goes on too long for a third act withouth even bothering to try and explain what happened. some parts don't feel like they belong in the same story at all. it's so, so poorly tied together that it honestly makes no sense.
it's too much, and the goldfinch tries to do it all in the dullest way possible. the only remain of dona tartt's beautiful prose lies on roger deakins' exquisite, gorgeous dp.
4/10 just because it's REALLY well-shot, the production design is genuinely great and I loved the performances from kidman, paulson and fegley.
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Nov 24, 2019 22:56:45 GMT
Now I really liked this movie. I dont know why it was abandoned by audiences and some critics. No, I did not read the source novel so I cannot compare it but if I look at the film itself it really worked for me and captured my throughout. The story was very captivating and so were the characters. I really did care for Theo and what he went though and was extremely interested in his development. Some critics discussed the structure of the film that was a bit... over the place... well I did not feel it that way. Maybe just when at the end it turns into a thriller and that flow did not really go well with the rest of the movie but other than that I though John Crowley did a great job, especially mixing past and present. Acting wise I was really more than satisfied as well. Ansel Elgort did a great job in the leading role and was the perfect equivalent to the wonderful Oakes Fegley who is the true heart of soul of the film and proves himself once again as one of the greatest kid actors out there. Also Finn Wolfhard did a wonderful job. Besides the kids and Elgort there were powerhouse performances by Jeffrey Wright and Nicole Kidman. Sarah Paulson totally left her usual territory with her role, and while it was good, it was sometimes a bit too cartoonish. I really liked the music of it and the camera work by Roger Deakins was great. Another aspect that could have been executed better would have been to tie some lose ends when it came to the character relationships. I felt there was something left out and I can imagine the novel did better in that aspect. But still it is a very rich story, good acting cinema with many moving moments. I recommend it for sure.
Nominations for;
Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Oakes Fegley Best Adapted Screenplay Best Ensemble
Rating: 8/10
|
|