mother!

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: mother!

    How can people who want to make films not understand this? If you make something that's good enough it will resonate with people in different ways. Once you release it into the world it is no longer yours and your own view of your work isn't definitive.

    Eliciting some kind of response is hard enough in itself. To make people feel so many different things takes a different class.

    How can you set about creating your own art and not understand it how it works? It doesn't matter. Let's just say that the man with oscar nominations to his name doesn't know what he's doing.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: mother!

      Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
      How can people who want to make films not understand this? If you make something that's good enough it will resonate with people in different ways. Once you release it into the world it is no longer yours and your own view of your work isn't definitive.
      And the movie even touches on this point explicitly! Aronofsky knew exactly what he was creating and the effect that it would have.

      We all should be aiming to create work that is so multi-layered that it can affect people in different ways. It's the beauty of filmmaking.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: mother!

        Originally posted by DLev24 View Post
        And the movie even touches on this point explicitly! Aronofsky knew exactly what he was creating and the effect that it would have.

        We all should be aiming to create work that is so multi-layered that it can affect people in different ways. It's the beauty of filmmaking.
        This.

        Aronofsky has stated that he was happy that the film is getting people talking, good and bad. He wanted this reaction. He said it was supposed to be a "punch in the face", which it certainly is. It definitely shakes people out of their complacency.

        I personally think it is refreshing to see a film that isn't straight forward and allows the audience to come up with their own thoughts and feelings about it instead of being spoon-fed what to think and feel.

        The film is certainly doing it's job, case in point-how long this thread is and the intense thoughts/feelings written on it.

        Also, someone mentioned the fact that when people take communion it is bread/water not flesh/blood. That is true, but certain religions believe that once it is swallowed it transmorphs into flesh and blood.

        In ancient Rome the romans hated christians because they "ate the flesh and drank the blood of christ" so they thought they were cannibals. Also they "loved their brothers and sisters" so they thought they were incestuous. They crucified christians because the allegory was so strong in the bible they believed it to be literal truth. This film is also being crucified because some folks are taking it too literal.

        This film is allegory and parable, just like some of the stories in the bible itself. Jesus himself spoke in allegory and parable in the stories he told to his followers. Nothing in this film is supposed to be taken literally. A 100% allegorical film has not been done for decades (The Holy Mountain is one from way back then as well as the play Waiting for Gadot)

        According to Aronofsky interviews, this film encompasses the entire bible from genesis to revelations. Aronofsky is an atheist but he understands the bible is a book full of allegory/parable stories. What better way to tell the story of the bible than by mimicking the style the bible uses in it's writings.

        Personally I feel filmmakers/writers should be celebrating this film because it is off the mainstream. I have read many threads here on DDP where people wish production companies would make more high concept, different, interesting, unusual, and independent films instead of pumping out the same old drivel. But now when one is made it seems people are upset by it.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: mother!

          If you think you have a cup full of iced tea and take a big gulp and only then realize you have a cup of milk, the shock and horror and disgust cause you to gag and possibly spit in the sudden revolt of unexpected taste.

          That's my allegory.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: mother!

            Originally posted by Darthclaw13 View Post
            This.

            Aronofsky has stated that he was happy that the film is getting people talking, good and bad. He wanted this reaction.
            Any moron can get a "reaction". It takes skill to write a compelling story.
            "I just couldn't live in a world without me."

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: mother!

              Originally posted by StoryWriter View Post
              Any moron can get a "reaction". It takes skill to write a compelling story.
              Well that's just not true. If it were that easy to get an emotional reaction wouldn't everybody be getting lots of comments back on their work instead of having to chase people up asking if they've read it?

              And again, y'know, Oscar nominated. Countless awards from film festivals. Well respected among his peers. If we were to compare his resume to any of ours it may point to him knowing what he's doing better than any of us do.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: mother!

                This thread is interesting to read. So many generic franchise films and safe films in Hollywood these days. Yes, I do want to see movies that take chances. But there are good ways to do that and bad ways. I don't think pretentious soap-boxing is the right approach.

                Taking a chance with a bold movie does not relieve the director and the cast and studio of their obligation to produce a movie that speaks to people and resonates with them.

                There just seems to be such a dearth of writers and fillmakers with real life experiences who have a feel for the zeitgeist of the world we live in. Lots of insulation and circle jerking these days. Could be the product of a wealthy and fat, lazy society. Foreign films continue to deliver better than anything you can see coming out of L.A.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: mother!

                  Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
                  Well that's just not true. If it were that easy to get an emotional reaction wouldn't everybody be getting lots of comments back on their work instead of having to chase people up asking if they've read it?

                  And again, y'know, Oscar nominated. Countless awards from film festivals. Well respected among his peers. If we were to compare his resume to any of ours it may point to him knowing what he's doing better than any of us do.
                  Honestly, people don't get any kind of reaction because they have failed to make you care about the characters. Many think they're puppet masters. "Jim lifts his right foot to the next step, then Jim lifts his left foot to the next step."

                  If I wanted a "reaction" just any old "reaction", I could easily get a "reaction". It's simple to put a pile of crap in to get a "reaction". I could think of ten things in a minute that could accomplish this very minor accomplishment. For example, off the top of my head, a movie that showed people chopping puppies in half with machetes. It would rightfully be reviled as a complete pile of crap, but if someone was dumb enough to film it, it certainly would cause a "reaction".

                  What I like doing is writing something legitimate and getting an earned "reaction" to what I write. You can tell when you do it right because everyone has the same "reaction" to it -- the "reaction" you intended them to have -- a genuine "reaction". Not a: "Hey, I just farted in your face -- what's your "reaction" to that?"
                  "I just couldn't live in a world without me."

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: mother!

                    Originally posted by Ven View Post
                    There just seems to be such a dearth of writers and fillmakers with real life experiences who have a feel for the zeitgeist of the world we live in. Lots of insulation and circle jerking these days. Could be the product of a wealthy and fat, lazy society. Foreign films continue to deliver better than anything you can see coming out of L.A.
                    Unfortunately, I think a lot of writers I read, don't write from real life at all. I think they watch films and television and write their stories based on already fictional lives.

                    It's kind of like making a copy of a copy of a copy -- eventually it becomes meaningless.
                    "I just couldn't live in a world without me."

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: mother!

                      I downloaded the script for this one from the paramount scripts website and read it more or less at one sitting. The writing was clean, professional. You could really see the movie as you went along -- an effect that was underlined by stills from the flick.

                      My reaction? Well, as others have said, I think this one is at best a pay-per-view flick, if that. My problem with it wasn't so much with the edgy nature of the material -- which must have delivered a lot more punch seeing than reading -- but with the overall concept and characterization.

                      mother! the way I read it, is a comedy. A nightmare, allegorical, gory, seething, unforgiving black comedy but comedy nonetheless.

                      But it's a comedy without a punchline, without a single funny moment. In an odd way, despite the deftness of the dialogue, it's closer in spirit to slapstick than anything else. And by slapstick, I don't mean Robin Williams or Will Ferrell, I mean Buster Keaton or even a more heartless Charlie Chaplin.

                      So it goes for the broad effect with a satirical intent -- but blows off the intellectual trappings of satire in favor of a mythological biblical subtext.

                      You can see how, like fruitcake, this might not be to everybody's liking.

                      In a few words: what aronofsky does is take the favorite bete noir of atheists, the Bible, put on his ten gallon boots, and jump on the accursed book with both feet.

                      Subtle mother! is not. Not only is it guaranteed to offend, but it begs to do so.

                      Despite all that, it might have made the kind of movie that its admirers want it to be if the characterization were stronger.

                      The MOTHER character is not the problem. We feel for her, for her beleaguered situation and the accelerating torment she suffers. She could stand to be more proactive, but it's understandable given the set-up, that she's not.

                      The problem is with HIM. Because HIM is the crux of the unfolding tragicomedy, but from start to finish his motivations are baffling, and his take on what's happening beyond detached.

                      The way I see it, HIM is the antagonist, not the slew of stereotype-named intruders who make MOTHER's life a living hell. But he is so weirdly tolerant of everything, including her protests, that the antagonist's role slides off him like grease off teflon.

                      At one point, MOTHER is described as being passive aggressive. If this is true for her, it's true ten times over for HIM.

                      And to my mind you can't have a successful story, much less script, much less movie, with two passive aggressive leads. Even if you can get Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem to play them.
                      Last edited by Max Otto Schrenck; 11-16-2017, 08:07 AM. Reason: clarity

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: mother!

                        I went into this film a blank slate knowing nothing about it. About 20 other people in the theater with me.

                        Lights dimmed. 60 minutes later I still have no idea what was going on. Kept watching it because I already paid for the ticket.

                        Lights come back up. Only four people remain in the theater, including me.

                        Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
                        How can people who want to make films not understand this? If you make something that's good enough it will resonate with people in different ways. Once you release it into the world it is no longer yours and your own view of your work isn't definitive.

                        Eliciting some kind of response is hard enough in itself. To make people feel so many different things takes a different class.

                        How can you set about creating your own art and not understand it how it works? It doesn't matter. Let's just say that the man with oscar nominations to his name doesn't know what he's doing.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: mother!

                          Originally posted by nguyensquared View Post
                          I went into this film a blank slate knowing nothing about it. About 20 other people in the theater with me.

                          Lights dimmed. 60 minutes later I still have no idea what was going on. Kept watching it because I already paid for the ticket.

                          Lights come back up. Only four people remain in the theater, including me.
                          Maybe that's why it didn't get any Oscar nominations. The voters all bailed when the lights were out. Hell, Jennifer Lawrence bailed on the movie AND Aronofsky, after she finally saw it.
                          "I just couldn't live in a world without me."

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: mother!

                            I heard she got quite a bit of backlash from even her own fans as well for it. Hopefully Red Sparrow will fare better for her.

                            Originally posted by StoryWriter View Post
                            Maybe that's why it didn't get any Oscar nominations. The voters all bailed when the lights were out. Hell, Jennifer Lawrence bailed on the movie AND Aronofsky, after she finally saw it.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X