|
|
Post by ingmarhepburn on Oct 5, 2022 1:36:19 GMT
Having just seen it myself, I agree 100% with what stephen wrote. I also didn't feel the Fire Walk with Me vibes (at all, to be honest), and apart from Ana de Armas and some technical aspects (namely the production values and the cinematography), I don't think there's much to be liked here. I agree that it shows little respect, and sometimes no respect at all, for its subject matter, and I'd like to hear/read the story behind that JFK scene one day. Was that part of the first draft of the screenplay, and didn't anyone see how problematic it was? I find it hard to believe that no one tried to deter the director from shooting that scene or using that infamous shot for the final cut. I can't imagine how unconfortable it must have been for the actors... Poor Ana de Armas. But most of all, poor Marilyn. She deserved a better treatment.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 5, 2022 13:06:38 GMT
Having just seen it myself, I agree 100% with what stephen wrote. I also didn't feel the Fire Walk with Me vibes (at all, to be honest), and apart from Ana de Armas and some technical aspects (namely the production values and the cinematography), I don't think there's much to be liked here. I agree that it shows little respect, and sometimes no respect at all, for its subject matter, and I'd like to hear/read the story behind that JFK scene one day. Was that part of the first draft of the screenplay, and didn't anyone see how problematic it was? I find it hard to believe that no one tried to deter the director from shooting that scene or using that infamous shot for the final cut. I can't imagine how unconfortable it must have been for the actors... Poor Ana de Armas. But most of all, poor Marilyn. She deserved a better treatment. Yeah, that scene just felt gratuitous to the max. Yes, I get that Dominik is trying to give us an unexpurgated experience about the hell Marilyn Monroe had to endure at the hands of the rich and powerful, but come the fuck on, it felt needless to watch Ana de Armas performing simulated fellatio for what felt like an eternity. Not just needless, but almost perverse. I don't think Dominik was getting his jollies off making it, but it felt like the sort of edgy graphic stuff you'd see in a Garth Ennis comic, where you can tell there's immense talent but also a huge amount of try-hardedness to make the audience uncomfortable. Sometimes, less is more, and in Blonde's case, more is a hell of a lot less. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 5, 2022 18:41:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Oct 5, 2022 19:23:48 GMT
I partially agree with him. Even though I liked the film, I can't help but feel a bit confused by the initial concept on Oates's part of exploring all that she wanted to explore (trauma, celebrity, etc.) vis-à-vis a barrage of fictional episodes about Marilyn Monroe... like, why not just invent an actress? I suppose the answer is that the book wouldn't sell. It's kind of a similar situation with Dominik too - I read an interview where he said that his initial desire was to make a movie about trauma and he planned to present that theme through the character of a serial killer. But then he read "Blonde" and decided that it'd fit his concept too. Both Oates and Dominik clearly wanted to do a certain kind of fictional project and somehow Monroe ended up chosen as the vessel. Now, I don't really mind that and I think that the cinematic result is worth it (haven't read the book) but the choice of Monroe as the central figure is nonetheless a tad puzzling. Except for the 'it'd get more attention that way' explanation, of course. |
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Oct 5, 2022 20:12:05 GMT
I partially agree with him. Even though I liked the film, I can't help but feel a bit confused by the initial concept on Oates's part of exploring all that she wanted to explore (trauma, celebrity, etc.) vis-à-vis a barrage of fictional episodes about Marilyn Monroe... like, why not just invent an actress? I suppose the answer is that the book wouldn't sell. It's kind of a similar situation with Dominik too - I read an interview where he said that his initial desire was to make a movie about trauma and he planned to present that theme through the character of a serial killer. But then he read "Blonde" and decided that it'd fit his concept too. Both Oates and Dominik clearly wanted to do a certain kind of fictional project and somehow Monroe ended up chosen as the vessel. Now, I don't really mind that and I think that the cinematic result is worth it (haven't read the book) but the choice of Monroe as the central figure is nonetheless a tad puzzling. Except for the 'it'd get more attention that way' explanation, of course. Well that is exactly the answer, isn't it?  Creative cowardice that gives in to leaning on IP to sell itself just like all the superhero movies do. |
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Oct 5, 2022 20:30:21 GMT
I partially agree with him. Even though I liked the film, I can't help but feel a bit confused by the initial concept on Oates's part of exploring all that she wanted to explore (trauma, celebrity, etc.) vis-à-vis a barrage of fictional episodes about Marilyn Monroe... like, why not just invent an actress? I suppose the answer is that the book wouldn't sell. It's kind of a similar situation with Dominik too - I read an interview where he said that his initial desire was to make a movie about trauma and he planned to present that theme through the character of a serial killer. But then he read "Blonde" and decided that it'd fit his concept too. Both Oates and Dominik clearly wanted to do a certain kind of fictional project and somehow Monroe ended up chosen as the vessel. Now, I don't really mind that and I think that the cinematic result is worth it (haven't read the book) but the choice of Monroe as the central figure is nonetheless a tad puzzling. Except for the 'it'd get more attention that way' explanation, of course. Well, Dominik also has a clear interest in all of his films with deconstructing myths and particularly in the case of Jesse James doing so through iconography. And few people are more entrenched in American iconography than Marilyn Monroe. |
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Oct 5, 2022 20:37:57 GMT
I partially agree with him. Even though I liked the film, I can't help but feel a bit confused by the initial concept on Oates's part of exploring all that she wanted to explore (trauma, celebrity, etc.) vis-à-vis a barrage of fictional episodes about Marilyn Monroe... like, why not just invent an actress? I suppose the answer is that the book wouldn't sell. It's kind of a similar situation with Dominik too - I read an interview where he said that his initial desire was to make a movie about trauma and he planned to present that theme through the character of a serial killer. But then he read "Blonde" and decided that it'd fit his concept too. Both Oates and Dominik clearly wanted to do a certain kind of fictional project and somehow Monroe ended up chosen as the vessel. Now, I don't really mind that and I think that the cinematic result is worth it (haven't read the book) but the choice of Monroe as the central figure is nonetheless a tad puzzling. Except for the 'it'd get more attention that way' explanation, of course. Well, Dominik also has a clear interest in all of his films with deconstructing myths and particularly in the case of Jesse James doing so through iconography. And few people are more entrenched in American iconography than Marilyn Monroe. True, true. I watched Chopper a few days ago and wasn't at all surprised when a title card popped up which read something like "The following is a fictional depiction of real characters". |
|
havok2
Junior Member
Posts: 396
Likes: 184
|
Post by havok2 on Oct 6, 2022 18:12:18 GMT
This will be our generation's Showgirls. Love how it filtered the usual suspects (Nolan fans, infantile capeshit fans and Oscar fanatics). I think Dominik did the right thing
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Oct 7, 2022 1:46:34 GMT
Saw Amsterdam tonight at a Regal and they always do that "name that movie" thing where they show blurred shots from a movie and have it slowly come into focus and you have to guess what it is. They should do the blowjob shot from this just to mess with people |
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Oct 7, 2022 19:46:32 GMT
This was a hard watch. I admire Dominik's ambition. He was doing a lot of things with the material, but it felt incoherent and all i was thinking was it's a "crazy dream". If that's supposed to be the desired result, then i guess he succeeded in that but i don't cherish or remember this movie after a few days. I wish he had stuck to one thing stylistically and focused on making me feel for her. I know she suffered a lot but all Dominik was doing was shoot her pain in the weirdest ways. Rather than making me feel her pain he made me indifferent to her pain.
Ana de Armas is pretty good. Her committed act kept me watching.
|
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Oct 8, 2022 2:47:44 GMT
This will be our generation's Showgirls. Love how it filtered the usual suspects (Nolan fans, infantile capeshit fans and Oscar fanatics). I think Dominik did the right thing Showgirls is a terrible movie. The opening scene/shot is inspired, with Berkeley strutting to the highway, but it's almost entirely late-night cinemax bullshit trying to ape a Goodfellas-like thing. I can't take anyone seriously who feels the need to shoehorn Showgirls into the "It's actually a masterpiece" conversation. It's not. It's not even a good movie. Basic Instinct is a very good movie; Showgirls is utter trash with some nuggets of amusement. |
|
havok2
Junior Member
Posts: 396
Likes: 184
|
Post by havok2 on Oct 9, 2022 19:56:13 GMT
This will be our generation's Showgirls. Love how it filtered the usual suspects (Nolan fans, infantile capeshit fans and Oscar fanatics). I think Dominik did the right thing Showgirls is a terrible movie. The opening scene/shot is inspired, with Berkeley strutting to the highway, but it's almost entirely late-night cinemax bullshit trying to ape a Goodfellas-like thing. I can't take anyone seriously who feels the need to shoehorn Showgirls into the "It's actually a masterpiece" conversation. It's not. It's not even a good movie. Basic Instinct is a very good movie; Showgirls is utter trash with some nuggets of amusement. Post physique |
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Oct 9, 2022 22:11:36 GMT
What Blonde thinks it is: What Blonde really is: "It works on so many levels" |
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Oct 9, 2022 22:14:15 GMT
What Blonde thinks it is: What Blonde really is: "It works on so many levels"That football has now been flagged for roughing Tom Brady. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Nov 3, 2022 7:49:53 GMT
I can understand why this ignites passion between those who hate it, and those who love it. I see the gravitation to either side. Which is why it pains me to say that this didn’t really inspire ANY extreme feelings from me.
Ok, it did make me say that Ana De Armas deserved a better movie around her, for as much as the movie itself may falter and stumble around her, her dedication to the spirit and essence of Norma Jean is commendable, and generally brilliant. I have to also give the film credit for its deviation from the usual biopic tropes, that instead of running through the highlights of Marilyn’s life like a PowerPoint presentation, opts instead for something more abstract and deliberately atypical. More dreamlike and ethereal in tone and nature.
Buuuuutttt… It is in service of a movie that ultimately boils down to tragedy porn. For ages. Yes, Monroe had a rocky life, that much is certain, but writer/director Andrew Dominik only seems *marginally* interested in the person she was OUTSIDE of her tragedy. This movie lives and breathes off of her torture, her mental instability, her humiliation, and ultimately, her extreme downward spiral. Typically biopics work best if, in addition to the subject’s achievements, you peel back the layers of the central figure to show their humanity.
Admittedly, during her career, contemporary pundits would find Monroe more style over substance, but there were plenty of opportunities for her to feel fully-dimensional here. What Dominik chooses to focus on, instead, is such an aggressively one note, non-stop barrage of misfortune after misfortune, practically DEFINING her by her tragedy. Marilyn doesn’t feel like a person after that. She feels like a cautionary tale. A tasteless cautionary tale at that, that feels like it’s exploiting her as much as it’s reflecting on her, and paying theatrical, surface level lip service to her mental state.
However, for me to get angry at this movie, that would require me to actually feel any passion towards it. At least that would give me feeling for it, if it weren’t such a drag, hammering in its point that it establishes within the first TEN minutes, and stretching it to a needlessly long two and a half hour plus running time. After a while, with everything tragic the movie throws at you, with how deep it’s trying to cut into Marilyn’s psyche - to the point it almost feels like it’s intentionally trying to push buttons, the worst possible thing it could have done was render the viewer numb to it. To desensitize them to the heartbreak, and take away from the emotional response they’re clearly aiming for.
Even as someone who’s never considered myself a dedicated fan, Marilyn deserved better than tedium.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Nov 3, 2022 8:02:00 GMT
Also, I may be the only one who’s not high on the cinematography. Like, I didn’t detect any clear patterns or significance to the choices. The aspect ratio switches, the transition between color and black and white; it all just seemed randomly cherry picked, without a lot of thought to how the camera, the ratios, or the color palette affects the scenes. In fact, it distractingly reminded me of Transformers: The Last Knight, where they were switching aspect ratios each cut.
|
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Jan 22, 2023 14:39:06 GMT
This is one of the worst things ever and not just in cinema. Razzies for everyone involved, ESPCIALLY de Armas who is DIABOLICAL in this movie. I will never in my life understand how on earth an infantised caricature straight out of disgusting Japanese hentai anime in the body of an adult woman with a questionable accent is garnering critical acclaim. If she gets nominated on Tuesday it would be one of the worst performances ever to be nominated for an Academy award.
Male gaze in its worst form, this film is literally made for straight men to masturbate to Ana de Armas' gratuitous nude scenes. I am positively DISGUSTED by this piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Jan 29, 2023 6:57:21 GMT
This is one of the worst things ever and not just in cinema. Razzies for everyone involved, ESPCIALLY de Armas who is DIABOLICAL in this movie. I will never in my life understand how on earth an infantised caricature straight out of disgusting Japanese hentai anime in the body of an adult woman with a questionable accent is garnering critical acclaim. If she gets nominated on Tuesday it would be one of the worst performances ever to be nominated for an Academy award. Male gaze in its worst form, this film is literally made for straight men to masturbate to Ana de Armas' gratuitous nude scenes. I am positively DISGUSTED by this piece of shit. Never seen anyone braindead enough to refer to a performance as "DIABOLICAL." What a triggered snowflake little drama queen. ACADEMY AWARD NOMINEE ANA DE ARMAS!! SUCK ON THAT FOREVER, TWATMUFFIN!! Won't be her last either. BuahahahaHAAA!! |
|
Pasquale
Full Member
Posts: 539 
Likes: 227
|
Post by Pasquale on Mar 19, 2023 16:31:52 GMT
This was a terrific biopic with an extraordinary(!) Ana de Armas. Andrew Dominic could (maybe) tone the nudity down, but I suspect I'll change my mind about it, once I rewatch it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on May 14, 2023 23:57:42 GMT
Just finished watching it. Ana de Armas is great. Without seeing To Leslie (I'll get to that), she's my pick for the female performance of the year. Such range. Great mannerism. However, the film itself is way way too over-the-top, way too long, and way too many conspiracy theories. I have no idea why this movie is so long and Dominic provides no joy in Monroe's life. The movie gets a passing grade for me, purely because of de Armas. That's really the only thing redeemable. You have to hand it to de Armas for putting her heart, soul, and body on the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 15, 2023 0:05:42 GMT
Just finished watching it. Ana de Armas is great. Without seeing To Leslie (I'll get to that), she's my pick for the female performance of the year. Such range. Great mannerism. However, the film itself is way way too over-the-top, way too long, and way too many conspiracy theories. I have no idea why this movie is so long and Dominic provides no joy in Monroe's life. The movie gets a passing grade for me, purely because of de Armas. That's really the only thing redeemable. You have to hand it to de Armas for putting her heart, soul, and body on the line. Ana de Armas really is incredible in it, and I frankly think she had probably the hardest job of any actor this past year in terms of having to struggle against preconceived notions of an iconic figure in Hollywood, her own accent (which I frankly think she overcame fairly well and it didn't take me out of the film even when it slipped through), an extremely misguided view of Marilyn from Dominik himself, and some exploitative and overly cruel scenes. For all the hoopla surrounding Best Actress being between Blanchett and Yeoh, I think de Armas was better than both (as was Riseborough). I only shudder to think of how Michelle Williams's woeful portrayal in My Week With Marilyn (which was far more Razzie-worthy a performance than anything in Dominik's film) would've been if it had paired with this. |
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on May 15, 2023 0:27:01 GMT
Just finished watching it. Ana de Armas is great. Without seeing To Leslie (I'll get to that), she's my pick for the female performance of the year. Such range. Great mannerism. However, the film itself is way way too over-the-top, way too long, and way too many conspiracy theories. I have no idea why this movie is so long and Dominic provides no joy in Monroe's life. The movie gets a passing grade for me, purely because of de Armas. That's really the only thing redeemable. You have to hand it to de Armas for putting her heart, soul, and body on the line. Ana de Armas really is incredible in it, and I frankly think she had probably the hardest job of any actor this past year in terms of having to struggle against preconceived notions of an iconic figure in Hollywood, her own accent (which I frankly think she overcame fairly well and it didn't take me out of the film even when it slipped through), an extremely misguided view of Marilyn from Dominik himself, and some exploitative and overly cruel scenes. For all the hoopla surrounding Best Actress being between Blanchett and Yeoh, I think de Armas was better than both (as was Riseborough). I only shudder to think of how Michelle Williams's woeful portrayal in My Week With Marilyn (which was far more Razzie-worthy a performance than anything in Dominik's film) would've been if it had paired with this. Exactly. I didn't mention about the accent, but you're right about that too. I saw some of it, but it didn't really bother me.
I am still trying to process the point of this movie. Trying to get my head about that. It's awfully repetitious and doesn't really go deep into her life. The camera chooses lack any consistency or point. It is simply "watch Monroe get raped, abused, have sex, yelled at, and almost get drowned by her own mother" and "btw, most of that stuff didn't happen". My ranking without Riseborough (From what I have seen, looks like the type of performance I would love): de Armas, Williams (it's a supporting role though), Yeoh, and Blanchett.
I think Yeoh was caught up in the EEAAO train. Academy members loved the film, and felt they needed to check all the boxes. de Armas's chances were hurt by a film's obsession with sex and misery.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 15, 2023 0:33:28 GMT
Ana de Armas really is incredible in it, and I frankly think she had probably the hardest job of any actor this past year in terms of having to struggle against preconceived notions of an iconic figure in Hollywood, her own accent (which I frankly think she overcame fairly well and it didn't take me out of the film even when it slipped through), an extremely misguided view of Marilyn from Dominik himself, and some exploitative and overly cruel scenes. For all the hoopla surrounding Best Actress being between Blanchett and Yeoh, I think de Armas was better than both (as was Riseborough). I only shudder to think of how Michelle Williams's woeful portrayal in My Week With Marilyn (which was far more Razzie-worthy a performance than anything in Dominik's film) would've been if it had paired with this. Exactly. I didn't mention about the accent, but you're right about that too. I saw some of it, but it didn't really bother me.
I am still trying to process the point of this movie. Trying to get my head about that. It's awfully repetitious and doesn't really go deep into her life. The camera chooses lack any consistency or point. It is simply "watch Monroe get raped, abused, have sex, yelled at, and almost get drowned by her own mother" and "btw, most of that stuff didn't happen". My ranking without Riseborough (From what I have seen, looks like the type of performance I would love): de Armas, Williams (it's a supporting role though), Yeoh, and Blanchett.
I think Yeoh was caught up in the EEAAO train. Academy members loved the film, and felt they needed to check all the boxes. de Armas's chances were hurt by a film's obsession with sex and misery.
I don't think Ana de Armas had a chance to win, with the scathing reviews that were out for the film in force. Actors loved what she was doing and that's why she hit all the precursors she did, but the industry at large (to say nothing of the critics) just weren't into it. Which is both understandable (as I cannot in good conscience call it a good film, because its flaws outweigh its merits) and also a shame (because what does work, like the cinematography and score, work very well and would've been worthy nominees). But I will say that it only consecrates the feeling I have that Ana de Armas will be back at the Oscars at some point. If she could get in for that film against that current, it was entirely on her own merit, and I feel if she finds herself in a friendlier project with a baity role, she has the goods to pull off a win in future. (I say that as someone who gives her a win already for Blade Runner 2049.) |
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on May 15, 2023 0:46:59 GMT
I don't think Ana de Armas had a chance to win, with the scathing reviews that were out for the film in force. Actors loved what she was doing and that's why she hit all the precursors she did, but the industry at large (to say nothing of the critics) just weren't into it. Which is both understandable (as I cannot in good conscience call it a good film, because its flaws outweigh its merits) and also a shame (because what does work, like the cinematography and score, work very well and would've been worthy nominees). But I will say that it only consecrates the feeling I have that Ana de Armas will be back at the Oscars at some point. If she could get in for that film against that current, it was entirely on her own merit, and I feel if she finds herself in a friendlier project with a baity role, she has the goods to pull off a win in future. (I say that as someone who gives her a win already for Blade Runner 2049.) Did you see/like the movie Judy (2019)? Pretty much hits on the same subject matter, but it was much short and better focused. It was a sad and depressing film about old Hollywood, but at least, we get some glimpse of hope and joy. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 15, 2023 0:54:45 GMT
I don't think Ana de Armas had a chance to win, with the scathing reviews that were out for the film in force. Actors loved what she was doing and that's why she hit all the precursors she did, but the industry at large (to say nothing of the critics) just weren't into it. Which is both understandable (as I cannot in good conscience call it a good film, because its flaws outweigh its merits) and also a shame (because what does work, like the cinematography and score, work very well and would've been worthy nominees). But I will say that it only consecrates the feeling I have that Ana de Armas will be back at the Oscars at some point. If she could get in for that film against that current, it was entirely on her own merit, and I feel if she finds herself in a friendlier project with a baity role, she has the goods to pull off a win in future. (I say that as someone who gives her a win already for Blade Runner 2049.) Did you see/like the movie Judy (2019)? Pretty much hits on the same subject matter, but it was much short and better focused. It was a sad and depressing film about old Hollywood, but at least, we get some glimpse of hope and joy. I have seen all available acting nominees and winners, so yeah, I have seen Judy. I think it's pretty milquetoast to be honest. Zellweger gives it her best and I am happy for her career comeback but I don't think that performance was worth an Oscar nomination, much less a sweep throughout the year. |
|
Creative cowardice that gives in to leaning on IP to sell itself just like all the superhero movies do.
