I have to join the hosanna chorus on this film. Couldn't take my eyes off the screen.
I love Gilroy's dialogue and his seemingly effortless ability to make long scenes riveting when it's really nothing but talk talk talk. It's not the kind of dialogue that strains after cleverness or quotability, but it has a nice give-and-take dramatic rhythm.
Also loved it. The last act especially - very tense.
Great writing, great acting. And a very nice looking picture.
My wife found the music to be overly cheesy in places. I thought that was by design and satirical. The scene where he tells Russo he thinks his dream is to be in news reporting - the music was quite corny, I noticed it too (and in a couple other places) but I thought it was intentional. As in, Lou doesn't have real emotions, so we'll give him this overly sappy track while he tells us his dreams. I thought the music was great elsewhere, so that's my explanation. Any thoughts?
Just saw it. I thought the acting was great (Jake G shows once again why he's one of our most treasured young thespians), but overall the movie left me feeling a bit cold.
Spoilerish:
It might have something to do with the fact that the main character is a sociopath. It's hard to empathize with someone who doesn't care at all about anyone else, and does such horrible things to get what he wants. I understand that Gilroy wanted to break all the rules with this script (unlikeable protag, no character arc, unhappy ending), and I commend him for that, but I think the inevitable outcome of that choice is that the movie is not as emotionally fulfilling as it could be (while still being smart). As humans we're just naturally inclined to get more fulfillment out of certain types of characters and endings (well, unless the human watching is a sociopath himself).
"I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries
I watched this again the other night, and can we just put Riz Ahmed in everything now please? Seriously, it's almost a shame that Jake G was so f--king good, because it overshadowed a really great performance from Ahmed as well.
"I ask every producer I meet if they need TV specs they say yeah. They all want a 40 inch display that's 1080p and 120Hz. So, I quit my job at the West Hollywood Best Buy."
- Screenwriting Friend
Just saw it. I thought the acting was great (Jake G shows once again why he's one of our most treasured young thespians), but overall the movie left me feeling a bit cold.
Spoilerish:
It might have something to do with the fact that the main character is a sociopath. It's hard to empathize with someone who doesn't care at all about anyone else, and does such horrible things to get what he wants. I understand that Gilroy wanted to break all the rules with this script (unlikeable protag, no character arc, unhappy ending), and I commend him for that, but I think the inevitable outcome of that choice is that the movie is not as emotionally fulfilling as it could be (while still being smart). As humans we're just naturally inclined to get more fulfillment out of certain types of characters and endings (well, unless the human watching is a sociopath himself).
I couldn't disagree more. Why do you have to empathize with the character? As a human, I get fulfillment out of interesting characters...I don't care if they're a hero or a sociopath...in fact, I prefer the latter.
I couldn't disagree more. Why do you have to empathize with the character? As a human, I get fulfillment out of interesting characters...I don't care if they're a hero or a sociopath...in fact, I prefer the latter.
I didn't say you have to empathize with the protag to enjoy a movie. I said it's easier to enjoy a movie if you do. The word "empathize" means to relate to someone/something. I'm pretty sure most people are more likely to find a character's journey fulfilling if they can relate to him/her in some way. I'm pretty sure there are also studies to back that theory up.
"I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries
I couldn't disagree more. Why do you have to empathize with the character? As a human, I get fulfillment out of interesting characters...I don't care if they're a hero or a sociopath...in fact, I prefer the latter.
I think that if you get fulfillment out of interesting characters you do empathize with them whether you realize it or not. Lou is a man with a mission. As was Tony Montana, Daniel Plainview, Michael Corelone, Charles Foster Kane, etc, etc. Once I find them interesting I kind of live vicariously through them. They get hurt or fail, I empathize.
"I ask every producer I meet if they need TV specs they say yeah. They all want a 40 inch display that's 1080p and 120Hz. So, I quit my job at the West Hollywood Best Buy."
- Screenwriting Friend
I didn't say you have to empathize with the protag to enjoy a movie. I said it's easier to enjoy a movie if you do. The word "empathize" means to relate to someone/something. I'm pretty sure most people are more likely to find a character's journey fulfilling if they can relate to him/her in some way. I'm pretty sure there are also studies to back that theory up.
I know what the word empathize means, and again, I disagree. It's easier to enjoy perhaps for you...but not for me (nor clearly, the majority of the critics...)
I think that if you get fulfillment out of interesting characters you do empathize with them whether you realize it or not. Lou is a man with a mission. As was Tony Montana, Daniel Plainview, Michael Corelone, Charles Foster Kane, etc, etc. Once I find them interesting I kind of live vicariously through them. They get hurt or fail, I empathize.
Absolutely, I agree. My point was just that you don't necessarily need to empathize with a character to enjoy the movie (again, just personally speaking).
Comment