Thoughts on a Couple Indie Films
Sep. 24th, 2014 10:34 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gothrockrulzFinally saw Only Lovers Left Alive about a month ago, and I still have mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand, Hiddleston and Swinton were extremely good in their roles as yin-yang vampires that are inseparable even when separated (though Swinton still terrifies me, no matter what she does). The cinematography was fantastic, and the atmosphere was very, very striking and memorable.
On the other hand, the story was very difficult to follow. When I finally starting getting the hang of what was going on, I felt like I'd performed a terrific labor for nothing. You gotta deliver a good punch if you make your audience fumble along after you. The punch really never came. A story doesn't have to be perfectly linear, but if it sprawls too much without enough cohesion, it's a chore. Life is full of chores, and we don't need any more. Really.
Last night, I kicked off a much-delayed Cate Blanchett one-movie-a-week marathon with Little Fish.
Blanchett lost herself in a role as a junkie struggling to piece her life back together, so much so that I kept wondering where her trademark commanding presence and grace had gone. She was nothing like Galadriel or Elizabeth, and I would have never pictured her in a role like that in a million years.
Even though Blanchett rocked and there were some crazy beautiful scenes, the movie was painful to watch, and again, very confusing to follow with its meandering plot. (I'm not even going to tell you how long it took me to figure out that Hugo Weaving's character was Blanchett's dad and not her boyfriend. *headdesk*) Anything involving lives ruined by drugs is rough to watch, but I guess I was affected because I really, really wanted Blanchett's character to get somewhere with her retail job. (It was kinda interesting seeing a big shot actress playing manager of a corner video store. XD)
All things considered, though I'm not crazy about either film, I did get a few plotbunnies watching each of them. And icons are somewhere in the works as well. :)
On the one hand, Hiddleston and Swinton were extremely good in their roles as yin-yang vampires that are inseparable even when separated (though Swinton still terrifies me, no matter what she does). The cinematography was fantastic, and the atmosphere was very, very striking and memorable.
On the other hand, the story was very difficult to follow. When I finally starting getting the hang of what was going on, I felt like I'd performed a terrific labor for nothing. You gotta deliver a good punch if you make your audience fumble along after you. The punch really never came. A story doesn't have to be perfectly linear, but if it sprawls too much without enough cohesion, it's a chore. Life is full of chores, and we don't need any more. Really.
Last night, I kicked off a much-delayed Cate Blanchett one-movie-a-week marathon with Little Fish.
Blanchett lost herself in a role as a junkie struggling to piece her life back together, so much so that I kept wondering where her trademark commanding presence and grace had gone. She was nothing like Galadriel or Elizabeth, and I would have never pictured her in a role like that in a million years.
Even though Blanchett rocked and there were some crazy beautiful scenes, the movie was painful to watch, and again, very confusing to follow with its meandering plot. (I'm not even going to tell you how long it took me to figure out that Hugo Weaving's character was Blanchett's dad and not her boyfriend. *headdesk*) Anything involving lives ruined by drugs is rough to watch, but I guess I was affected because I really, really wanted Blanchett's character to get somewhere with her retail job. (It was kinda interesting seeing a big shot actress playing manager of a corner video store. XD)
All things considered, though I'm not crazy about either film, I did get a few plotbunnies watching each of them. And icons are somewhere in the works as well. :)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2014-10-03 02:28 am (UTC)Sorry you weren't enthralled by it. Jim Jarmush is an . . . odd filmmaker. "Non-linear" is certainly the word for him. The only other film I know that he's done is Dead Man with Johnny Depp, and it's very arty and bizarre. Haven't actually seen it the whole way through, but arty and bizarre is how this one struck me too when I saw the trailer.
ETA: WTF--Okay, I'm tired of having to re-icon every time I post a comment. What the HELL, LJ? *kicks server*
(no subject)
Date: 2014-10-03 02:39 am (UTC)Haven't actually seen it the whole way through, but arty and bizarre is how this one struck me too when I saw the trailer.
Yeah, it's even more bizarre than you'd anticipate, and not always in a good way. But I couldn't rest content until I saw it. :)
ETA: Oh, I have been having to do that, too! I was wondering if I was going crazy!
(no subject)
Date: 2014-10-04 10:14 pm (UTC)SERIOUSLY! It's really annoying. Some kind of glitch, I dunno.
ETA: Which seems to be fixed now. Hm. Maybe enough people complained?