|
|
Post by notacrook on Sept 4, 2020 15:19:40 GMT
Reid's novel is an incredibly tense, highly addictive read. However, its conclusion let me down to an extent in its simplicity, taking the easy route in explaining all of its teased mysteries. Kaufman's film adaptation doesn't change the source material's twists and turns as such, but he adds so many extra layers, visually and through all those dialogue-heavy interactions, that he produces a much more interesting version of the same narrative template. I'm Thinking of Ending Things is an all-consuming whirlwind of a film - not easy to like, impossible to ignore, and I imagine just as difficult to forget. There are so many ideas packed in: originality versus imitation, both in art and in how we live, think and communicate; the desire to be a good person, in the eyes of yourself and others; chasing dreams and ambitions while being haunted by the idea that you don't have the talent or commitment to do so. All of these complex, uncomfortably relatable ideas are told in a way that only Kaufman could pull off, shrouded in shadow, warped by wacky absurdity, laced with the darkest of wit. All of his actors are perfectly on his wavelength, with leads Buckley and Plemons really running the gamut of emotions and playing with the different facets of their characters in ways both confounding and deeply sincere. The viewer also needs to be on Kaufman's wavelength to get anything out of this - some, I'm sure, will sit there shouting at their screen, ready to dismiss the whole thing as utter nonsense by the end. Some of it is nonsense. Some of it is indulgent. But I was with Kaufman the whole way here, and I got a hell of a lot out of it. 9
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 4, 2020 23:54:27 GMT
Inferior version of the book which may have been simplistic at the end but you thought back on it fondly, you were involved in it ..........this is a movie that's overly thought out and cluttered and is concerned with merely dictating, moving you around and laying out clues for you.
Movies have to actually move not be endlessly pondered over - it worked better and simply on the page. The book and movie both have elements of a trick in them....but the movie is merely a trick.
Jessie Buckley is phenomenal anyway ......
~6/10
|
|
jakob
Full Member
Posts: 827 
Likes: 698
|
Post by jakob on Sept 5, 2020 0:32:17 GMT
I loved the novel until the twist, which felt more like a cheap cop-out than an earned reveal. What I noticed that I loved about this adaptation was that the film is very upfront about where the story is headed from the get-go (if you’re paying attention) and the cheapness of a “GOTCHA” reveal instead translates to a proper conclusion of self-examination and sadness. Where the novel felt like it teased too much with too many red herrings, the film never felt like it was taking us down any true path. We just sat in the weird and strange ambiguity which really let Kaufman’s translation of the text through his own voice shine. You could tell what attracted him to the story was not the suspense, but instead the melancholia and he delivers a very effective and contemplative film, almost existing in its own strange genre. It’s his weakest script, but that’s only because his other works have grown so iconic and the plot stays a bit too faithful to its novel, whereas really branching out into more creative territory would have done it good. But the direction is intimate, the photography is chilling, and the performances are stellar. Plemons, Buckley, and Thewis are all stellar but I’m really hoping the Academy makes up for her egregious snub for Hereditary and nominates Toni Collette. She puts the entire spectrum of her range on display and it is magnificent.
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Sept 5, 2020 2:17:51 GMT
I think Kaufman needs Brian Cox to come yell at him again.
Kaufman is one of those guys where there's no middle ground for me. Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine are top 100 of all time material and I've outright disliked everything else. This falls into the outright dislike category. I was kind of liking the first act with just them in the car and some of the stuff with the parents was funny, but it just turns into a mess around the midway point. Haven't read the book, I could imagine the ending and time warping stuff working better in a novel since it's a less literal medium, but in the movie it just comes off like a cheap gimmick. Then when all that stuff is going on they can still take a break for some way too on the nose, pop culture reference dialogue, like having the "Baby It's Cold Outside" discussion. It just meanders and in the end I felt nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Sept 5, 2020 4:48:35 GMT
I liked most of the book until it shat the bed in the climax, and while I hoped the film would spice it up... I did not care for how it played out there either.  Delightfully awkward and felt like a very hammed up and entertaining play throughout, but I don't think it was all that successful. I was so pumped for Kaufman to try his hand at horror, but instead we got... this. |
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Sept 5, 2020 5:03:17 GMT
Buckley is a star.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Sept 5, 2020 8:29:33 GMT
It's a shame that it almost entirely loses the horror and suspense of the novel ... and its real cardinal sin, I think, is totally abandoning a sense of normalcy to make it believable or identifiable right off the bat. The film announces its weirdness immediately and totally stays committed to it through to the end (to its credit and detriment both, I think); it removes the story from reality more or less entirely which already creates too much distance for this story to be totally pulled off. And while it clarifies or expands upon some elements of the novel in an enlightening way, it's also doing so much more than the book that Kaufman is purposely adding more mystery to it, more mysteries than necessary, as if to keep throwing us off with questions that probably don't have answers (or at least not good ones). Performances are great across the board though, the editing and sound design choices are outstandingly anxiety-inducing, atmospheric. Its best sequences especially are exhilarating to watch, basically everything in the house and the last twenty minutes, which I can't claim to really "get" but I loved watching. It's definitely a movie that wants you to rewatch it, and while I enjoyed it, I'm not sure I enjoyed it enough that I'll want to watch it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Sept 5, 2020 8:46:25 GMT
Oh honeys, being one of those vapid, pretty girls they mentioned, I found the whole movie depressing in its nihilism. I haven't read the book but what was with Pauline Kael's review of Woman under the Influence and the dance sequence and song from Oklahoma? 6/10
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Sept 5, 2020 8:55:14 GMT
I think Kaufman needs Brian Cox to come yell at him again. Kaufman is one of those guys where there's no middle ground for me. Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine are top 100 of all time material and I've outright disliked everything else. This falls into the outright dislike category. I was kind of liking the first act with just them in the car and some of the stuff with the parents was funny, but it just turns into a mess around the midway point. Haven't read the book, I could imagine the ending and time warping stuff working better in a novel since it's a less literal medium, but in the movie it just comes off like a cheap gimmick. Then when all that stuff is going on they can still take a break for some way too on the nose, pop culture reference dialogue, like having the "Baby It's Cold Outside" discussion. It just meanders and in the end I felt nothing. Oh honey, this ^. I kinda yawned inside on "Baby It's Cold Outside" discussion which is several years old now. Same for me, big fan of the early work, Being JM, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine and then nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Sept 5, 2020 13:36:24 GMT
It's a hard watch but a very rewarding one, especially you're a Kaufman fan or you've seen and appreciated his films. Very high on dialogue in the initial part of the film where Buckley and Plemmons talk a lot about various topics and some of it went over my head. When they arrive at the house the movies gets weirder and trickier and this is where Kaufman brings in his surreal game but instead of hitting with it all, he does it gradually till the last minute of the movie, dealing several complex topics like time, age and art in his unique fashion.
It's one of his bleakest films aided by unforgiving atmosphere, nihilistic talk and unpredictable characters. A bit meandering but never boring and that's one of the strongest takeaway that a talky, confusing film is still somehow engaging is the mark of a genus (you'd know if you see the film) filmmaker.
Jesse Plemons is perfectly cast (in fact all of them are). He is capable of being both wacky and humane and this character needed that. Jessie Buckley is wonderful too. I particularly loved her performance after they leave the house.
I'm still mulling over some things but i liked what i saw. It's not the strongest Kaufman film but every bit worth watching as his other work.
|
|
|
|
Post by pessimusreincarnated on Sept 5, 2020 16:20:17 GMT
Very dense and abstract film that will probably require rewatches. I can't say I'm exactly champing at the bit to watch it again though? For all of Kaufman's dizzying thematic and tonal stunts here, this movie came off as a bit tired. I think he's tackling a lot of the same issues here that he did in movies like Synecdoche, NY and Anomalisa (aging, regret, the passage of time, the absurdity of human existence), and whereas those movies contain a lot of enjoyable stylistic flair and surrealism to accompany the weight of those themes, this one ultimately felt rather drab. I will say Jessi Buckley is as terrific as everyone is saying, and I think Kaufman continues to hone his abilities as a director; he feels very in-command of the material from a technical standpoint. This just wasn't his finest hour as a writer, imo.
A 7, maybe? I could see it going up or down in my mind as I continue to mull it over. Also as I continue to read Antkind, which is excellent thus far.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 5, 2020 17:07:26 GMT
I think the first half as fantastic, but honestly, the whole thing just goes off the rails when they leave the house. Jessie Buckley and Jesse Plemons have a very fine rapport that is still very watchable even as the film starts to lose me, but I can't help but wish the whole thing had been restricted to the house.
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Sept 5, 2020 17:48:48 GMT
I think Kaufman needs Brian Cox to come yell at him again. Kaufman is one of those guys where there's no middle ground for me. Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine are top 100 of all time material and I've outright disliked everything else. This falls into the outright dislike category. I was kind of liking the first act with just them in the car and some of the stuff with the parents was funny, but it just turns into a mess around the midway point. Haven't read the book, I could imagine the ending and time warping stuff working better in a novel since it's a less literal medium, but in the movie it just comes off like a cheap gimmick. Then when all that stuff is going on they can still take a break for some way too on the nose, pop culture reference dialogue, like having the "Baby It's Cold Outside" discussion. It just meanders and in the end I felt nothing. Oh honey, this ^. I kinda yawned inside on "Baby It's Cold Outside" discussion which is several years old now. Same for me, big fan of the early work, Being JM, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine and then nothing. I think a collaboration with you is just what Kaufman needs MsMovieStar . Writing a great part for you would get the creativity flowing again. |
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Sept 5, 2020 18:08:59 GMT
I haven't read the book but what was with Pauline Kael's review of Woman under the Influence and the dance sequence and song from Oklahoma? 6/10Reading the book wouldn't help with that, all of those things are Kaufman's additions. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 5, 2020 19:12:45 GMT
I haven't read the book but what was with Pauline Kael's review of Woman under the Influence Buckley imitates Kael's inflection and speaking pattern too you just know she watched Kael interviews .......all the puzzle solvers will be intrigued I guess, I dunno...........I kind of hated the "Zemeckis film" within the movie (not the book) too personally that's another one  . |
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Sept 5, 2020 19:39:51 GMT
I think the only time I wasn't really feeling the film was actually in the first 30 mins or so - basically, before they arrived at the house. It felt a bit too stuffy and portentous, and the house sequence felt like a much needed breather (if you can say that, given how weird it got). I found everything after that to be absolutely riveting and entirely overwhelming, much in the same way that I experienced Synecdoche after first viewing. A film hasn't hit me that hard in ages.
I do definitely see the comments that it's a film that both requires a second viewing and one that doesn't particularly invite one easily, at least not for a while. It is quite difficult and at times tiresome, perhaps by nature, and I do want to let it sit a while before potentially revisiting. Perhaps once is enough though - that stunned, confounded feeling really was exhilarating.
I also kinda hated that Zemeckis jab - I get it, but it felt way too indulgent and self-satisfied.
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Sept 5, 2020 21:08:55 GMT
Also agree the Zemeckis thing just came off as douchey, especially considering Zemickis is a better director (note the emphasis, not talking about writing) than Kaufman is.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Sept 5, 2020 22:49:20 GMT
I agree a lot with what Gleiberman had to say about it. I think Kaufman may be better served with taking a leave of sorts, allowing some separation between himself and and the industry that he seems at this point to loathe if all the jabs at Hollywood are anything to go off (the Zemeckis joke was the biggest eye-roll I've had in a while). We get it, Charlie, you think anything other than abject hopelessness is a lie humans tell themselves to feel better. Perhaps I was never an out-and-out Kaufman film and only liked him when filtered through Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, two filmmakers similarly interested in playing with the form but seem much more interested in the spectrum of human emotion rather than damning half of it as nothing more than a comforting lie before we die. Everything on a technical aspect and the contributions of the actors were all aces and I unabashedly loved the dance sequence, though. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 5, 2020 22:50:43 GMT
I agree a lot with what Gleiberman had to say about it. I think Kaufman may be better served with taking a leave of sorts, allowing some separation between himself and and the industry that he seems at this point to loathe if all the jabs at Hollywood are anything to go off (the Zemeckis joke was the biggest eye-roll I've had in a while). We get it, Charlie, you think anything other than abject hopelessness is a lie humans tell themselves to feel better. Perhaps I was never an out-and-out Kaufman film and only liked him when filtered through Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, two filmmakers similarly interested in playing with the form but seem much more interested in the spectrum of human emotion rather than damning half of it as nothing more than a comforting lie before we die.Everything on a technical aspect and the contributions of the actors were all aces and I unabashedly loved the dance sequence, though. Yeah, I think pure unfiltered Kaufman just ain't for me. |
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Sept 5, 2020 23:35:57 GMT
I agree a lot with what Gleiberman had to say about it. I think Kaufman may be better served with taking a leave of sorts, allowing some separation between himself and and the industry that he seems at this point to loathe if all the jabs at Hollywood are anything to go off (the Zemeckis joke was the biggest eye-roll I've had in a while). We get it, Charlie, you think anything other than abject hopelessness is a lie humans tell themselves to feel better. Perhaps I was never an out-and-out Kaufman film and only liked him when filtered through Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, two filmmakers similarly interested in playing with the form but seem much more interested in the spectrum of human emotion rather than damning half of it as nothing more than a comforting lie before we die. Everything on a technical aspect and the contributions of the actors were all aces and I unabashedly loved the dance sequence, though. Kaufman is already taking like five year breaks between films, though. He was more prolific in the early days when he was good. I also thought of commenting that Kaufman should quit directing and get other people to direct his scripts. "Filter" is a good word for the effect of Jonze and Gondry. Kaufman has a lot of ideas but seems to struggle to fit them within any kind of constraints. He needs a director with a strong voice outside of his own to focus his work. After a few Kaufman directorial efforts I can sort of picture what Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine might have been like if he'd directed them and the result is not pretty. Even with his recent films being small and getting middling responses I still think he has enough clout where he could pull down an A-list director to direct one of his scripts and he's obviously an immensely talented writer so I'm not giving up hope on him doing something good again one day. I'm feeling a little guilty because I'm picturing Cage-Kaufman from Adaptation reading people saying mean stuff about him and getting sad. |
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Sept 6, 2020 12:43:34 GMT
I agree a lot with what Gleiberman had to say about it. I think Kaufman may be better served with taking a leave of sorts, allowing some separation between himself and and the industry that he seems at this point to loathe if all the jabs at Hollywood are anything to go off (the Zemeckis joke was the biggest eye-roll I've had in a while). We get it, Charlie, you think anything other than abject hopelessness is a lie humans tell themselves to feel better. Perhaps I was never an out-and-out Kaufman film and only liked him when filtered through Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, two filmmakers similarly interested in playing with the form but seem much more interested in the spectrum of human emotion rather than damning half of it as nothing more than a comforting lie before we die. Everything on a technical aspect and the contributions of the actors were all aces and I unabashedly loved the dance sequence, though. Kaufman is already taking like five year breaks between films, though. He was more prolific in the early days when he was good. He has time between his finished work on screen, but he's also had several projects fall through ( Frank or Francis, an HBO series, an FX series with a pilot that wasn't picked up, at least 4 scripts for other directors that weren't produced) as well as his book that just came out. He keeps actively working, he just hasn't been as good at getting them released since Synecdoche floundered. |
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Sept 7, 2020 21:02:35 GMT
Give me I'm Thinking of Drinking Things starring MsMovieStar every time over this crap plz! Not my kinda movie, and not very good either. It's an itchy, chucked, hollow-feeling movie despite Kaufman's heaving quirk-ups, memory-lanes, and utterly failed side-satire. It's also obvious what's going on, imo, making it feel tired and kinda moronic as it goes on. I don't see what a rewatch would exactly clear up. Having said that, I love cinema-snow, David Thewlis cracked me up with every single line reading ("Billy Crystal is a nancy"), and Jessie Buckley is great indeed and deserved a better movie around her. 5/10. |
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Sept 7, 2020 21:53:24 GMT
Give me I'm Thinking of Drinking Things starring MsMovieStar every time over this crap plz! Not my kinda movie, and not very good either. It's an itchy, chucked, hollow-feeling movie despite Kaufman's heaving quirk-ups, memory-lanes, and utterly failed side-satire. It's also obvious what's going on, imo, making it feel tired and kinda moronic as it goes on. I don't see what a rewatch would exactly clear up. Having said that, I love cinema-snow, David Thewlis cracked me up with every single line reading ("Billy Crystal is a nancy"), and Jessie Buckley is great indeed and deserved a better movie around her. 5/10. Oh honey, that's such a great title! |
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Sept 8, 2020 14:51:06 GMT
I agree a lot with what Gleiberman had to say about it. I think Kaufman may be better served with taking a leave of sorts, allowing some separation between himself and and the industry that he seems at this point to loathe if all the jabs at Hollywood are anything to go off (the Zemeckis joke was the biggest eye-roll I've had in a while). We get it, Charlie, you think anything other than abject hopelessness is a lie humans tell themselves to feel better. Perhaps I was never an out-and-out Kaufman film and only liked him when filtered through Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, two filmmakers similarly interested in playing with the form but seem much more interested in the spectrum of human emotion rather than damning half of it as nothing more than a comforting lie before we die. Everything on a technical aspect and the contributions of the actors were all aces and I unabashedly loved the dance sequence, though. Kaufman is already taking like five year breaks between films, though. He was more prolific in the early days when he was good. I also thought of commenting that Kaufman should quit directing and get other people to direct his scripts. "Filter" is a good word for the effect of Jonze and Gondry. Kaufman has a lot of ideas but seems to struggle to fit them within any kind of constraints. He needs a director with a strong voice outside of his own to focus his work. After a few Kaufman directorial efforts I can sort of picture what Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine might have been like if he'd directed them and the result is not pretty. Even with his recent films being small and getting middling responses I still think he has enough clout where he could pull down an A-list director to direct one of his scripts and he's obviously an immensely talented writer so I'm not giving up hope on him doing something good again one day. I'm feeling a little guilty because I'm picturing Cage-Kaufman from Adaptation reading people saying mean stuff about him and getting sad. SYNECDOCHE was a MASTERPIECE. Better than anything he's done except ESOTSM, and I've loved most of his stuff. ANOMALISA was great too. |
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Sept 9, 2020 15:55:17 GMT
On a shortlist for most nonsensical movie I've ever seen.
I haven't read the novel... but the concept (while a bit cringeworthy) probably had some potential to be halfway decent. Too bad Kaufman bogs it down with an unfathomable amount of bullshit. I've seen people call this a "philosophical puzzle" which is funny since the philosophy is dime-store level and scattered, and the puzzle is obvious with 90 minutes of runtime left in this turkey.
Charlie Kaufman retire bitch. His best movie (Eternal Sunshine) is a bigtime ripoff of a George Saunders story anyway.
Also, my favorite review quote... from a 5 star rave on letterboxd:
LOL
|
|
Delightfully awkward and felt like a very hammed up and entertaining play throughout, but I don't think it was all that successful. I was so pumped for Kaufman to try his hand at horror, but instead we got... this. 
.
