That same year saw the release of Cronenberg's "The Dead Zone"- One of the best Stephen King film adaptations. It was also surprisingly laid back for a director who can go wildly over the top.
Arthur is a great guy and to be fair he deserves better This Nora clearly doesn’t love him near as much as she loves HS From the way she has always looked and acted around him. But what she loves more than anything is living in the USA and her career This movie glamorises emigration; leaving one’s home & family to find a more materialistically successful life elsewhere She would have equally led a fulfilling life in Soul; maybe even became a lecturer as opposed to some unknown writer living in a mini apartment in a city filled with drug addicts, homelessness and poverty. I really liked both HS and Arthur but found this Nora incredibly selfish and obnoxious
some cinephiles over dramatize cinema as it really an art form lol im tired of those hyper depressing rambling about those crappy film makers bergman tarkovsky or bresson cinema existed before and after those hacks
This movie wasn't ahead of it's time things just never changed back then americans did assassination using normal people by brainwashing them using psychodelics,hypnosis nd subliminal messages nd they blamed it on video games nd other media where they had less influence look at the recent example of orange man's assassination attempt if he hadn't survived they would've blamed it on social media nd mental health completely ignore the security issues nd the fact it could be an inside job or that it all of that might be a publicity stunt
It felt like a lot of the plot was underdeveloped and left us expectant (I guess that was the point ) but he film was pretty enjoyable, even someone unfamiliar with all its exsitenciat depth can pretty much have an great aesthetic experience by watching it.
The movie was about the mans battle between his subconscious mind and his actual reality. Carl Jung concepts along with others. Thats why its a "psychological thriller" its entertaining to those whole enjoy deep concepts. A24 directors are masters at this.
It doesn’t live up to the hype. It’s still a great movie, but it missed many opportunities, had a poor script, and doesn’t carry an emotional punch. Still great though
I believe Tarkovsky's comment about only caring about the opinions of Bresson and Bergman was made when the Soviet authorities were trying to advance their opinions about the need to speed up the pace of Stalker. That comment is important, and I'm glad you brought it up. It identifies filmmakers who most influenced him and were colleagues and supporters (Bergman described his first experience of a Tarkovsky film as "like a miracle" and helped him with the production of Sacrifice). But he actually cared quite a lot about the opinions of others. In his book Sculpting in Time, he admits that he was thinking about giving up film until he received letters from people who described how much Mirror meant to them. He pasted the letters in his journal and quoted them in the book. He also said that children understood his films much better than adults. The extraordinary cinematic and poetic elevation of the roles for children in his last three films as bearers of faith and hope for the future - Monkey, Angela, Little Man - suggests that he cared a lot about the opinions of children as well. That very much included his own first son Arseniy, who is portrayed as Ignat in the film. Tarkovsky's sister, who only appears for a few minutes as a young girl at the dacha when the father comes home from the front, said that Mirror was an attempt to explain to his family what had happened during a difficult time in his life. Tarkovsky thought he was making a film about himself, but after it was finished he realized it was about his mother. Ignat has the most screen time of any male actor - which strongly suggests the film is about his son as well, and an attempt to explain to that son why things had been so difficult. I agree that Mirror is a film that is best to feel your way into, but I feel like I've come to an understanding of this and other aspects that enrich each new viewing rather than giving way to any sense of finality. The fact that Tarkovsky made what some estimate were as many as 33 edits before the final cut slotted into place (to the surprise of Tarkovsky himself, who had despaired of the film ever taking shape at all) speaks to the film having a very specific structure and underlying narrative logic. Which is elusive, no question about it, but it's there to be explored - as I did in these blog posts. kitbakerii.blogspot.com/2015/03/beyond-looking-glass-andrei-tarkovskys.html
I’ve seen Blade Runner 2049 and Dune 1 and 2 but have been underwhelmed. I think my problem has been that I haven’t cared about any of the characters. I was surprised by this because I was a fan of the first Blade Runner movie and the first Dune book. I don’t know whether it is worth it to try another of his films or if his style is just not for me.
I don’t think that came across correctly about Blade Runner 2049. The movie just didn’t stick with me. I had heard it was bad before I watched it. When I did watch it, I remember thinking it wasn’t bad at all. It just wasn’t as good as the original. It has been a few years now since I watched it and I can’t remember what happened in it.
It's crazy how i was roooting for them in the beginning but i was terrified that they're gonna kiss in the last scene where they just standing while staring into each other. That scene was so intense because we saw how they have come to an acceptance that they can't never be with each other and I'm scared that they're just gonna ruin it all.
imo, the character closest to being the villain of the film was Hae Sung. Knowing damn well that his childhood crush was already married for 7 years, why would he put youself between the two and incite that tension. man, love is really painful yet powerful...
Used this for my assignment about Andersons style! This is a great help! Trying to prove to my English class that with Anderson there is always more then meets the eye with him! Thank you!
5:54 it's this moment that does a lot for me; hae sung is clearly nervous, unsure of what to do or how exactly to react, while Arthur stands there for a bit, evidently taking it all in and no more than a couple of seconds later, a heartfelt smile emerges from his face. i'm not sure if im capable of effectively expressing how much this scene and his reaction means to me.
It’s a great film, I agree. I didn’t hate Arthur but he was a little passive in the situation. And seems to be resigned to the situation and could not control it strongly.
Arthur lacked self-confidence. I liked him, but he looked miserable and allowed his wife to flirt with another guy in front of him. She even wept for the other guy in Arthur's eyes. He accepted that his wife loves another more than him, but because of how he views himself, he didn't hold her accountable for that.
Not talking about films but as for the cinema’s future, I think maybe a city in the future might have 2-3 instead of the current 6 or whatever depending on the city.
for me this movie was a whole different experience, my interpertation is, its about depression and dreams (the litteral dream but also the dreams you have in life, your future dream scenario) how you can get trapped in a downward spiral being stopped by your mental illness and the reaction of the world around you, that in my persenol experience mostly dont help but only let your self-hate/doubt grow, and how all these things can add up to just loosing the grip on life, and you see it play out before your own eyes but cant really get agrasp on when, how and where everything spiraled out of control. and at the end of that whole ordeal you can only wish your past life before it all went down was still within arms reach. something like that but if im going in dept it would be a whole book in the this comment section and nobody wants that
