I honestly wanna tell my friends that my favorite part was when the T-1000, Velociraptors, and Na'Vi showed up. Just to hear their sheer disbelief for when they see it and realize I'm not joking.
I work at a theater and I laughed so hard when the movie opens with Margot Robbie saying "Thank you for seeing Babylon the way it was meant to be seen. On the big screen in front of a enthusiastic crowd" and the theater was completely empty. Not a single ticket sold for it today. lol
I saw with 2 people behind me at 7 30pm ended at 11pm, maybe it was long movie and late showing. It's not the movie people rush to see around Xmas weekend though. Also the bombastic trailer just put a lot of people off.
@@nerychristian we didnt. No one showed up so we wait about 15 minutes in case people show up late. If not then we shut it off to save time on the bulbs in the projector
@@nerychristian it's a big picture so it gets shown on many screens. But it's over 3 hours long, most people are staying home in the cold for Xmas. Not everyone wants to sit thru a movie over 3 hours unless it's avatar or batman. I didn't dislike the movie, but it was kinda all over the place and the ending was trippy and strange. I liked the slower parts of the movie when it was given time to breathe, feels like the director just had too much free reign with no one kept him in check.
On a personal level, I was pretty gripped the whole way, to the point where I was actually kinda surprised 3 hours went by like that. It's messy, but it's my kind of messy and it's highs are still gonna hit better than a good chunk of the competition in comparison. I do wonder in due time this movie may get some kind of re-evaluation.
The movie was a masterpiece. It’s an analog of what’s going on today (silent-talkie, theater-streaming). It also takes place in the era leading up to and in the depression (the globe is ab to enter into a financial crisis). There’s a lot of subtext in the movie most folks won’t get example: Babylon is the whore in the book of revelations and the name of the divine feminine given by Aleister Crowley, who also called her the “Scarlet Woman.” See Margot Robbie’s character in the movie, and Manny being a derivative of Emmanuel, the name given to Jesus at birth, the incarnation of YHVH. This may all seem like a stretch, but Chazelle is Jewish and this “lore” is a deep part of the Jewish faith.
I just finished watching this movie, and now I'm a defender of it. Yes, it's bombastic and crazy, but it's one of the most entertaining films I've seen in a VERY LONG time.
Ending spoilers below ... ish True I do agree there were some scenes, that felt extra, however, i was never bored during the movie. Is it just me, but i truly loved that ending, both how the narrative ended, and how it was edited. First and foremost, it was surprising to see something as psychedelic as that in a cinema, which I felt was an amazing experience. True, it was bizarre, but it captured all my attention, in a good way. But mostly, I loved how even tough the whole film gives you (and Manuel, the character) the idea that Hollywood, or better, the film industry, is such a miserable and toxic industry, Manuel ( I also felt that here manwel , who directed some films in the film, can be seen as the director of the movie himself, Damien chazelle) still love how it progresses with time and loves the whole culture. Its that bitter sweet ending which Damien Chazelle is known for. If you are into artsy films, I totally recommend, because at least it is a movie that makes you think after it ends.
I feel like Hollywood keeps giving directors free reign to make movies about excess with star-studded casts. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Don’t Look Up, Amsterdam. They’re sort of hit or miss
@@athenajaxon2397 Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is excessive in terms of the scope of its story and its runtime. The studios gave Tarantino free reign in terms of the length of the movie, when certain scenes could probably be cut for time
I believe this movie is not for everyone. It was totally for me tho. This is now one of my favorite movies. Watched in early release and I'm planning on watching it again. Super fun and entertaining movie. As a person that is aiming for a career in the film industry, this movie was outstanding, well shot, acting was great and I loved the storytelling. The movie takes place in the 1920's when silent movies where transitioning into talkies. It told that story while telling the story of multiple characters on the movie. It had great character development and it gave you a blimps at everyone life outside of the industry, what was their personal life like. This movie was what movies lack and should be, a story. While it did feature and showed multiple messages that it was trying to get across, like racism, privileged people, homosexuality, it never drifted away from the story it was trying to tell. Great movie, truly recommend. Just keep in mind, it isn't for everyone, so don't feel bad if you don't like it. The movie is very graphic.
It's more like an art film, for costume lovers. I'm in fashion design & history, Margot 's hair style was too long for the 1920s, her spiky Boots don't represent the era until it was 1930s
I agree with you! This movie was bananans, usually films about old Hollywood and movie making in general can come off as boring and pretentious (excluding Ed Wood, that movie is awesome), but this movie had a crazy energy to it and felt very mythical and dark in a lot of parts, and then the movie decided to turn into The Temple of Doom for a little bit. And the ending montage was the cherry on top, ya I really enjoyed this movie.
@Stan Kosick The rise and fall of the characters introduced, within a crazy period in the film industry where everything was evolving and changing. I believe it's the best way to describe it.
This movie gave the middle finger to the "real" Hollywood in all its dirt, grime and tragedy. I am traumatized by this movie. It's dramatic waves of dark OVERtones hit like a tsunami. Nothing in this movie was insidious nor gradual other than the looming fate of Nellie and Conrad. The second he starts walking down the long hotel corridor to his room, I knew he was going to end his life. The angle of the camera "peeking" through the slightly ajar door into his room was eerie. Nellie disappearing into the "darkness" was a haunting foreshadow of what would happen to her. The scenes with McKay were symbolic of the true underworld of Hollyweird that many of us know exists. Babylon is a profound punch in the gut. There is an element of this movie in every person's life.
The way Conrad talked to the bellboy while tipping him and goes up the stair I knew where it was heading, and each following frame was confirming it. When Pitt crosses the door with the revolver I heard the theater grasping in surprise. I wouldn't say that this anticipation spoiled the moment for me. Sometimes taking that time just add to the experience. The movie is an experience, and in my opinion it delivers.
Amazing comment I also knew conrad was going to off himself since he had just accepted his carreer was over plus he lost his best friend that way and the tip he gave the waiter was a great clue too. But overall yes the movie left me with a weird feeling of the ugliness that goes on in the film industry. It was meant to be a messy movie and I loved that manny at the end could have a family of his own and get him to go see the movies where now all the actors are new yet manny’s and conrad’s revolutionary ideas are now in effect. Crazy movie, enjoyed it a lot
I worked on Babylon for 4 days. "La La Land" is my favorite film and Babylon was my most anticipated media project of the decade so far (besides Top Gun: Maverick) before worked on it, this production was a full circle/360 experience. The best job of my life and 1 of the best, happiest and greatest days/times/experiences of my life. This was a dream come true. I watched it yesterday (only 1 in the theater/no distractions), what a surreal/magical experience. I'm also in 4 or so shots 👌. Thanks for watching everyone! Can't wait for all of you to see what we've created!
this movie was no where near long enough. i loved every second, everything felt so intentional. a stunning movie, and directed so well. i completely understood what they were trying to say, and there was so much room for interpretation in the middle and end too. I cannot wait to watch it again.
@@JuancoPRoFlow honestly, i wrote it completely seriously, but 3 months in, i think i did a 180 and cannot read my comment with a straight face. i have no idea what i was thinking, i was high off of the insanity of the movie. now that it's gone.... yea that was not good
Its a love letter to cinema, and a hate letter to Hollywood. This is Damien's passion project, which is about the degradation of a place that falls apart in itself and how the idea of these passionate individuals have been forgotten. However they can be immortalised in film.
It was sick, twisted, nostalgic, hallucinogenic, over-the-top. And I liked it very much. Being familiar with 1920's-1930' Hollywood and its demons will help as the characters are composites of real people. Reading the book Hollywood Babylon by Kenneth Anger will definitly help. The music is awesome. The film visually stunning.
I think watching this film through the lens of how characters must cope with massive change outside of their control will frame it more accurately. It is not so much concerned with presenting a history of early Hollywood as it is in showing how each character deals with a changing industry, the compromises, the difficult acceptance that they are no longer the toast of the town, or the ability to walk away in order to preserve one’s dignity. That’s what is at the heart of the film. It’s pretty much summed up in Jean Smart’s dialogue with Pitt’s character. The setting is the backdrop but it’s not the main focus.
Once you get past the Elephant Poop and the Golden Shower, it’s actually a pretty good film IMO. I really liked it. Definitely had me asking what I was about to see right at the beginning though haha
The intro could have been cut down to 10 minutes instead of 30. There is a lot that they could have cut out to make the film shorter. That being said, I loved the film! It just needs to be shorter and more concise. Loved all the characters, their backstories, and the arc they have.
I always skip the opening musical number in La La Land, just too in-your-face for my taste, and not appropriate when I think about what that movie is and especially how it ends. So maybe this is another case of an opening that is at odds with some of us in the audience.
I personally love this movie, it’s beautiful to watch (both cinematography and the costumes), and Margot & Brad are just amazing actors I won’t get tired of watching. I think the movie is intentionally messy, and essentially a love letter to movie itself, and tbh the three hours feels much more enjoyable than the three I spent on Avatar😂
It absolutely IS a dark remake of Singin in the Rain. The four lead characters are all there in various forms, with moments directly lifted. I realized later that the opening sequence was essentially his attempt to do Saving Private Ryan’s Omaha Beach but with Old Hollywood debauchery.
Babylon finally got released in UK so I watched it and now I’m here to watch the review and I have to say I also felt the burden of how disjoined the first act and a half is vs the rest. It had so much momentum and it pulled the breaks before it was due. I was also not a fan of the weird sex stuff in the third act, I found it too much for no real reason. However, that montage and that ending actually brought me back on board with the film right at the very end. I found that I tied together everything in a very satisfying way and showed that what happened in the late 20s/early 30s was just the beginning of what would snowball into what we’re experiencing today. But I could totally see how that didn’t work for everyone, I’m just a sucker for things like that.
I think the movie would seem a lot better if it was shorter & the viewer hadn't seen Singing in the Rain before. I was only impressed by the camera angles/shots & some of the cinematography. Ultimately it talked a LOT & didn't really have much to say.
The contradiction is not really one: it's a hate letter to hollywood, the industry, and a love letter to cinema. The ending sequence, which I absolutely loved (being from the same generation as Chazelle and evidently liking the same movies), is a product of the latter.
Honestly what a great film. Brad the total opposite of his character. Dude just continues to deliver dimes. Margot was great and Diego was amazing too. Really cool story with great acting and actually really really purposefully funny at times.
This movie was described to me as beauty from chaos, and having seen it, i agree. I think the idea was to see the flaws of these people, including vice, racism, a general lack of concern for whether people working on the film survive till the end of it, but also showing that these same people can make something wonderful that lasts, and as Brad Pitt points out, really means something to people. A fact that you also see when you watch multiple audiences in different time periods. I also think the unique editing choice near the end was meant to be an epiphany for our main character in that scene, as well as an aside to the audience so that his epiphany would be a little more relatable for those of us with the benefit of more hindsight than he has. As for everyone being miserable, i felt that the characters weren't always miserable. They felt like well realized people going on journeys. Brad Pitt passes through the years pretty much happy, until near the end. Margot Robbie struggles with dissatisfaction with some things in her life, but always has something that she's striving for until self destruction, which in part they show is the changing times. Diego Calva goes through an absolutely fascinating journey. Li Jun Li gives us a view of forgotten Hollywood that's definitely a side character, but still manages to breathe and live in her moments. Jovan Adepo was always fun to see right until he ran into a reason where he felt like he had to walk away. I think I'm trying to say that they all felt like any time someone was miserable, it was for a reason, or reasons, not just because Hollywood was a miserable place where no one could find any sort of fulfillment beyond numbing themselves into oblivion.
I think you are on point about this being the case of a director given to much creative freedom by the studio after making a name for himself. It felt like a lot of scenes were in this movie just for Chazelle to show off how he can handle shots and camera angles (crane, from below, revolving like he did in the pool scene of La La Land already, the opening room door where we see Conrad committing suicide. Scenes that felt showy and self indulgent honestly. Also, besides the lacking story (the main characters except for Konrad we didn’t spend much time with to know them and relate with them so they were cartoonish with limited back story). Also, the tone is allover the place, it’s late, then it’s crazy, then near the end is dark (underground club scene with horror music out of nowhere) and then it’s contemplative and sad. Then there is the random story of the black jazz musician facing racism in Hollywood because why not and also because Chazelle seems obsessed with jazz in general so somehow that story fit in there. The way it ends in the movie theater seems also a very sloppy way to end this movie. The acting was pretty good by Robbie and Pitt but l found Calva flat in his delivery.
The movie is about Manuel fighting tooth and nail with the universe to carve himself a place in history, a meaning to his existence, only to discover that it is human nature to be forgot about or mythologized in various twisted ways, and that it had cost him almost everything he learned to care about. And that somehow, it may have been all worth it.
I've been ranting about this for the last few years, but what is with the trend in the last 10-15 years of making every movie 2.5-3 hours long? It's like directors think that movies have to be that long in order to be taken seriously - that's the new average length, when it used to be only long epics like Braveheart or Lawrence of Arabia or LOTR or movies like The Godfather would reach that length. One of my favorite things about the little thriller Black Phone that came out earlier this year is that it was so refreshing to see a movie that was like only a stretch over 90 minutes; it felt so satisfying to see something without that extra hour of fat tacked on for no good reason. Either start making the average movie 90-120 minutes again or bring back intermissions in theaters, please!
I don’t mind watching long films (some of my favorite films of all time are long) but this year has made me go a few times after walking out of some films thinking, “Did that need to be as long as it was?” Some films as of late seem to either become repetitive or over-extend themselves that ruin their pacing and make the film seem long than it actually is. Some great films this year that I love are long like Avatar 2, The Batman, Bardo, White Noise, and Tar are long but I think they justify their lengths in the story they’re telling. Conversely, films like Triangle Of Sadness, RMN, Blonde, or Terrifier 2 are unnecessarily long that could easily be trimmed that feel more concise, focused, and direct than being messy and sluggish..
Unpopular opinion, but I absolutely loved the movie!! I loved Babylon so much more than La La Land. The lack of closure is what makes it feel more realistic. It's not your typical happy ending, feel good movie. I loved the exaggerative depiction of the entertainment industry. I think people forget that we're living in quite a censored time, so I love all that rawness and all the wide range of emotions the audience experience during the three hours. I found this movie very refreshing, but it's definitely NOT for the average, mainstream audience. I found it genius, but just my opinion.
The chaos was lip licking delicious! I loved that aspect. I thought the ending was BRILLIANT. What did you want? A happy, cheesy ending? 😒 Best movie I’ve seen in a long time. Wayyy better than La La Land which was boring, trite, and corny.
'not having a vision' or having 'contradiction' doesn't matter if the movie is entertaining throughout. I respect your views but I personally loved the movie
It is chaotic and I loved it, it was everywhere and that was the point, we are tired of the traditional story telling, it was a masterpiece with all elements independent from each other and you took what you wanted out of it.
This movie was awesome! Seen it twice now and really enjoyed the setting, the energy, and the journey the characters take. I’m surprised a lot of people aren’t liking it.
@My name is Aminé I hear you there. Unfortunately this business doesn't always reward good movies. The northman is one of my favorite movies of the year and has received great reviews but is also considered a "flop".
I disagree with you. This movie is fantastic, in its way. I think the point was to show what a shit business Hollywood can be, contrasted with the magic it sometimes produces. That it's about the end of the silent era is only incidental. It could just as well be about '70s new Hollywood, or the rise of the indies in the '90s, or when porno switched from film to video tape in the '80s. The director remixes scenes from films he loves like Pulp Fiction, Boogie Nights, and Singing in the Rain. THIS is what the insane montage at the end is about. The director's pure love of cinema.
Honestly, Damien Chazzelle's Babylon is a mixture of Boogie Nights meets The Great Gatsby meets Singing in the Rain, meets Eyes Wide Shut meets Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
I've hit a point in my life where I mind long movies and I have to be very interested in them beforehand in order to watch them. This is why I didnt watch The Batman in theaters (or at home), Jurassic Park, and Avatar. During the week I'm drained from a full work day and sometimes would rather just rewatch an old movie so my mind can relax or play casual games. Then during the weekend, with limited free time, I dont want to drive to a theater and sit down for 3hrs+ for a movie, feels like half my day is gone.
If you truly love cinema and have any knowledge of that time period when silent actors saw their careers vanish after the talkies, this film is a great cinematic experience.
“…mostly a messy jumble of I don’t even know what.” & “it’s inability to focus” perfectly describe my thoughts on the trailer. The trailer’s inability to tell me what the movie is about or why I should see it (other than the cast) appears to be an accurate reflection of the film.
Not every trailer needs to tell the audience what the movie is about, though. Its job is to get people interested. For example, see the Barbie teaser trailer.
@@mhawang8204 Sure, of course. As we all know all too well, too many trailers these days are just the entire movie in short form (or the only good parts). So I’m all for a trailer that piques my interest but doesn’t tell me too much. But the part where I say “or why I should see it (other than the cast)” MEANS it didn’t get me interested. Maybe if it had I would have spent the small amount of brain power to put together that it was framed by the transition to talkies. But it didn’t & I didn’t care to. I maintain a checklist of upcoming & current releases to help prioritize what, when, & where I want see 🤓. I very rarely add any notes to the film title. For Babylon after seeing the trailer I’d added “decidedly uninterested other than the cast” but left it on my list awaiting the reviews. As it turns out the trailer (unintentionally?) told me exactly what I needed to know about the film. So that’s really what I’m remarking on.
Quite the opposite. The chaotic nature of the narrative is there but very deliberately handled and to convey the stories of the ensemble cast during the time period. I am on the positive side saying it worked quite well in the director’s capability and was certainly one hell of an entertaining ride into dark side of Hollywoo.
tobey maguire’s character isn’t unnecessary, the position of power he holds is incredibly important to manny’s ultimate motivation. the presence of a rich hollywood-adjacent producer type with a little book of bad ideas also adds something that wasn’t there, the demonstration of his actual power acknowledges a threat that existed throughout the film in wallach. you waste time by thinking about what the film wants to be or the authorial intent. the film didn’t need to be reigned in just because it’s a little intellectually challenging, this isn’t amsterdam or bardo where it’s actually bogged down by the sheer number of ideas the director wants to communicate or the point is muddied by the abstractions. it’s a perfect film, and probably the best film hollywood has made about itself in the history of that shitty town. also there are three main characters in the film. all of them are throughly examined. definitely a character study lol, just because all 20 characters didn’t get that much time doesn’t mean it’s not a character study. movies’ already three hours dude, only so many hours in a day. the juxtaposition of the glamour and spectacle with the sheer misery displayed by every character is not a contradiction of the film. that is the point of it. by this point i can tell all you have is a minor misunderstanding, surely something to be remedied with time. however. to have this platform and openly say that Babylon is LESS ENGAGING than avatar 2 is a bridge too far. that is just not true. maybe if three hours of video game cutscenes is more engaging to normal people than an actual human rise and fall story, then yeah maybe it’s true. but there’s no way that’s true for most people. i simply do not believe it. and to say that as your recommendation, to encourage people to see avatar fucking 2 over this, you are doing a small part to kill cinema. this is a FILM CHANNEL, babylon is literally made for this “crowd”. how can you even make it 5 minutes into avatar 2 without audibly groaning at the sheer stupidity and litany of white man assumptions about indigenous people. i made it THREE HOURS into babylon without that.
So it's another "Wow, Hollywood and movies! am I right!?" pushing for an oscar, catering to the narcissism and hubris of the voters. I.e. Hail Caeser!, Mank, La La Land, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Empire of Light, The Artist, Being the Ricardos, etc.
@@Gino565 Absolutely! But there are TONNES of great movies, every year, that aren't about films, yet this topic/area constantly makes the bill, when other dont. It's just the fact you can see the blatant nature, and formula to get the academy to take notice of your film and abilites as a director. By highlighting their industry, they will give further attention. Because they can point at the screen and say 'I get that', they feel seen and more important due to it. You're seeing the same types of these stories crop up over and over, and it's just when someone decides 'I want an oscar nom now' do they lean to making films about films. You're seeing Speilberg do it with 'The Fablemans', it's all very calculated from my point of view.
I enjoyed it . But it’s the first movie of his I haven’t loved . Parts of it are absolutely brilliant , other parts are just like 😳 I’d call it a fascinating failure
@Dan Murrell, I finally watched this movie a year after your review. I found the first half of the ending montage moving and the middle bafflng and the final moments cathartic. It was clearly an homage to the last 30 min of 2001 Space Oddesy, which is also perplexing but also genius. What do you think about it in that context? And minor spoilers , but its a year later. Was it the inclusion of the modern cinema clips that bothered you ? I was confounded by his 1980s-2000s choices. But the pre-1950s clips worked well, in my opinion.
You’ve honestly sold me on this, I thought it was gonna be bonkers & that sounds like exactly what it is. Edit: saw it & it’s exactly what I was expecting. I understand why some people don’t like it but personally I was on board.
Well, that's disappointing. Babylon comes out in January next in my country, I'm still planning on seeing. Just really bummed out that that Brad Pitt bit from the trailer won't be there, I wonder if someone's going to try to sue the filmmaker for that. And to answer your question, no I don't mind longer movies, but I think it really depends other aspects like the pacing. I've seen films that felt longer than they actually were and vice versa.
The trailers for this made it feel like a horror film starring Toby McGuire as some sort of demon and I had no idea what it was about until now. Your review combined with that blatant marketing clash has sold me on this entirely.
I'm often reminded of Minnelli's masterpiece The Bad and The Beautiful where Kirk Douglas' character, after massive successes, directs his passion project - and it becomes a complete dud because he films every scene as a climax, not allowing the story to breath and develop characters. Modern film makers should watch this movie as a lesson in hubris.
I just saw it in a movie theatre. I am a huge fan of Chazelle, anc actually I liked it. It's messy, but it's worst parts are better than the 90% of the films' best parts today. It's a film about filmmaking to filmmakers. A film buff's love letter to filmmaking and speech about the system. So a lot of people won't care about it. The ending a bit high brow and a 20 minutes could be edited out of it, but I still like it. The beginning of the film reminded me of an old joke: A man who spent 25 years scooping up the elephant poop at the circus was complaining about his disgusting job. "I hate my job, I can't take it anymore," he said vehemently. "Why don't you find another job?" said the friend. Shocked, the man responded, "And what, quit show business?"
I felt the trailers made it look bad, so obviously an honest representation. (My personal favourite movie with the transition to talkies is The Artist.) Entertainment for Christmas? The traditional rewatch of Hogfather. The team that did that series of telemovies (including The Colour Of Magic, and Going Postal) truly captured the delight and depth of Pratchett’s work brilliantly.
When I was watching the trailer again yesterday, none of the characters seemed likable. I feared it would be Margot Robbie’s second flop after Amsterdam. I’m hoping it was just a big trailer. But now it sounds like a second movie with a big cast but no direction. With the pandemic, one hopes the writers and directors had more time in development. Too bad. Might end up skipping this depending on what else is playing… No problem with long movies; I want to get my money’s worth, but it has to be good, not a drag.
I don't think prestige directors always choose their projects. They depends on financiers. I'm curious what was the confluence of influences that gave us this film. While Singing in the Rain is an intensely entertaining meta movie, it was always due its flip side. The real Hollywood is a nexus of money, power, and various forms of prostitution.
The ending, at least for me works so well as a homage to the birth of modern cinema. It's chaotic and erratic, just like the narrative and the editing choice left me finding my mouth open in shock. I really enjoyed Babylon, but it doesn't exactly know what it's trying to be. I agree with you there, Dan.
@@raymondzrikeprobably not they said feels like, but based off of an elephant taking a dump on someone in the first 5 minutes. It’s not that hard to think like that
@@alexhein1738 except that movie was meant to recreate the effects of a very real addiction for your senses. You can't go down to the street corner and buy a ticket to Hollywood in the 1920s.
Aw, that's disappointing. Even though the movie isn't out in Ireland until January 20th, I had already booked my ticket. Well, I'm still looking forward to seeing it, so that I'll be able to form my own in depth thoughts. Love ya, Dan. Hope you're having a good holiday season.
I just got back from the theatre. I still think it’s worth the watch, although I agree with a lot of what was said. It has excellent performances, score and set pieces
Has this guy ever watched a tragicomedy? First time I’ve seen so many critics dropping their jaws at a classical rise and fall arc. Maybe our times just make audiences uncomfortable with films like Babylon. The best we can do is give people time to appreciate the masterpiece it is.
I have a feeling that anyone that loves (and I don’t mean like, but LOVES) Lost Highway, Inland Empire, and Mulholland Drive will probably like this movie. Sure, it’s sprawling and messy and indulgent but it’s also really fun, it breezes by and it doesn’t button everything up in a tidy package. I’m all for it. I loved it, despite its flaws.
I'm a big, big fan on Lynch and the only connection to those movies that I see is its depiction of old Hollywood. I just got back from seeing Babylon and it was interesting (some parts were excellent) but it's nowhere near as artistic as a lynch film, by which I mean that it doesn't have the depth/emotion or nightmare quality.
The sequence with Tobey Maguire tapped into the uncanny in a way that reminded me of Lynch, even down to the Elephant Man reference. The way Margot Robbie disappears into a dark void, and the way he left parts of the movie ambiguous are the things I feel that fans of Lynch movies are comfortable with and it won’t diminish their enjoyment of the film. Lynch makes puzzling dark films that tend to confuse and infuriate casual movie fans. Chazelle was not making a Lynchian film or even trying to. But he made a film that I’m sure will alienate certain movie goers who will say it’s too long and pointless and complain about not resolving certain threads and their frustration influencing their enjoy,ent of the film (for example, I can see people complain about why the trumpet player story line was even part of the film and they’d think it could have been removed). Lynch fans aren’t as uncomfortable with these complaints. And I think they’d react to the film more positively because they’re not sticklers to rules or predictability. The film is more influenced by Martin Scorsese and the Coen Brothers, but I loved the little touches of the uncanny that reminded me of Lynch and it’s those aspects I think average movie goers will gripe about.
I rewound the review and it just happened to land on the part where he mentions Tobey Maguire as being bizarre and unnecessary. And I believe many people will share a similar opinion, the “I didn’t get it” complaints. I have a feeling Lynch fans don’t feel the same way.
I'm still absolutely thrilled to see this movie, australia releases it a whole 2-3 weeks late. But hearing the tragedy that Pitts dance isnt even in the movie?? Tragic loss
I didn't know how long it was going in and that hurts the movie. To me it's one of those movies that you feel the length and some. Two and half hours in I started to feel it was going to wrap up but it had 40 min left. Acting was really good, technical aspects great, story was nothing special. It starts off messy and then gets its feet but then again shifts to mess by the end. By the last third I knew manni was going to break out and live, laroy die from drugs, Conrad turn miserable. It was drug out watching the ending. Also it was unnecessarily over the top when it didn't need to be. I like crazy and shocking stuff, but it hurt the movie IMO.
This movies has so many interesting ideas and themes. I loved it and was never board. The characters were so entertaining to watch and their fates hit hard.
I would like to point out that perhaps feeling “lost in the weeds” is precisely how the movie wants you to feel. Especially the first half of the movie.
Saw this at an industry screening early last week - probably the only film from this filmmaker I liked all the way through. I think I know what he was going for and it worked for me. However, I can also see your point and I almost walked out when the elephant relieved itself just giving a hint of more stuff to come. After the movie ended I listened to reactions from the industry crowd - this film is probably going to flop.
Rarely do I disagree with you Dan, but I really loved this movie. It struck such a strong chord with me and I was totally moved by the end of the movie. Yes it’s weird, yes it’s long, yes there are bold choices made, but it is a cautionary tale about what is Hollywood and what is Cinema. And that’s the message of the movie!
People say Hollywood movies take no risks but yet it seems damien chazelle got carte Blanche to make a crazy 3 hour long film on a possible $100M budget and R rating
You know, when I saw _Whiplash,_ and didn't like it, and everyone else liked it, I thought, well, maybe it's just me. When I saw _La La Land,_ and didn't like it, and everyone else liked it, I thought, hmmm, well, I guess maybe it's just me. Now that I've seen this movie, and didn't like it, I can honestly say, *it's not just me.* I will never knowingly watch another Damien Chazelle movie.
@@branagain there's been cases of great scripts bad movies in the past like Frankenstein 1994, or gladiator having no script and winning best picture. But the thing is, and coming from a screenwriter, is that sometimes film writers hope for two things. One that the script is great and maybe if its not the best make it the best directed film. I mean some films with amazing direction can elavate a simple script. You look at Mad Max or gravity the scripts are good but very simple and then the direction just elevates everything.
I absolutely loved it! I laughed quite a lot (something Hollywood fails at repeatedly), and every actor really pulled their weight throughout the whole film. Also, it’s just so pleasing to see a fellow Mexican get a lead role in Hollywood. I honestly almost shed a tear. Representation we rarely see on the big screen.
Diego Calva did a good job as the main role in this movie. I know this movie isn't solely based on the Comedy Element rather the 1920s Hollywood Retro Lifestyle but this Movie Alone had legit funny scenes than any COMEDY film ive seen these past years!! I literally laughed out loud! From the very beginning when the Elephant pooped on that poor man's face, when a scene had to do many cuts & takes and the directors were flipping out "If you Sneeze one more time I Swear!!" 😂😂😂 And Margot Robbie letting loose in party of upper class Elitist then to vomit on the rich guy's face 😂😂😂 👏👏👏. This Film has to be right up there with 'Wolf of Wall Street'. To top it off Tobey Maguire played an unusual role in the Film that actually suits him. They always potrayed him as a nice guy i like Where Tobey went with this role. Brad Pitt is spectacular as usual! I can see why the director picked this star studded cast because of their amazing acting abilities bravo to all! I rate this film 9.5 out of 10
I loved it. I think it captured a time period that was forgotten. And yes! Hollywood era was crazy. There’s many books written and well documented. They were no angels. I liked the chemistry Robbie and the Mexican had. It’s pretty salacious, but funny. I recommend you see it. It’s a great comedy.
Hard to describe how I felt about this one. On Letterboxd, I gave it 5 stars. I'll own it, and I'll never apologize for it. Certain aspects grossed me the hell out and I was questioning Chazelle for even thinking about adding those certain scenes into the film. Overall, the good or great aspects far outweighed the bad, uncomfortable, or flat out gross aspects... For me at least.
Man, if I had a nickel for every time there was a piece of media this year that was a flop with the name "Babylon" in the title, I would have two nickels, which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
This movie was incredible. This feels a little bit picky. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion though. To me it was a movie about the importance of cinema, but an unbiased view showing both sides. It was gritty but gave the viewer so much to anticipate and enjoy. One of my favorite cinema experiences.
I can't stand this trend of long movies. A movie has to be really amazing for me to devote three hours (+travel and trailers, so more like 4) to it. I rarely see a movie that couldn't have at LEAST a half hour cut and be vastly improved. It's definitely a situation where if a movie had middling reviews like Babylon, if it was 2 hours I'd probably go see it and judge for myself. Three hours? No way, I'm not going to devote a third of my day to a movie that hasn't appealed to me thus far. I think back to a movie like Parasite that is just over 2 hours (132 minutes) and that movie is an absolute roller coaster of emotions and genres and SO MUCH happens. Why do these movies feel the need to be 3 hours now, ugh.
