And especially when they're met with critical indifference or even hostility! I really don't know what they were expecting out of this (did they want standard biopic trajectory? did the music scare them off?), but I guess it's their loss.
I also want to see it again, but mostly because my theatre experience was awful. I'll tell you about it later in full detail, but let's just say there were four teenagers in the mostly empty cinema hall who felt it necessary to nastily comment upon/laugh at everything happening on-screen. Particularly when Dunst appeared nude.
Similar to Jesse, I appreciate it more and more upon reflection -- but that's probably because I initially recall how precisely Coppola depicts Marie's emotional arc (confusion to ennui to decadent indulgence). Then I recall Schwartzman's petulant idea, not character, and the moments where historical politics slip in without much welcome or place.
Still, I do find the film highly enjoyable and am discouraged by some of the hostility that has been directed towards it.
Nick - "Then I recall... the moments where historical politics slip in without much welcome or place."
But... see, I kind of saw that as the point - the political tensions arise so far outside our insulated universe, and therefore they would come as jarring intrusions in the film (also for the childish Louis and especially to the party-hardy Marie.)
Can you clarify what you mean by Schwartzman's "idea"?
They don't seem to be "jarring intrusions" as much as they seem ineptly handled. I just felt the film ran out of steam and energy in the denouement.
Schwartzman's Louis XVI struck me as way too ostentatiously juvenile -- everything he did, whether it was overtly looking nervous or playing with a stick. The character of Marie is so well-realized that the shallow treatment of Louis irritated me whenever he occupied the screen.
I felt the same way about the final few scenes, but read them differently. I wouldn't argue that the plodding denouement is intentional on Coppola's part, but again, it seems entirely appropriate for what the film was attempting to depict. The self-contained, floating bubble is burst with the intrusion of the unhappy masses, and the games of leisure are quickly put to an end. I felt uneasy throughout the last fifteen minutes or so, but I kind of felt like that is what my reaction should have been.
But again, I would love a second viewing considering those idiotic teenagers in the theatre were a huge distraction.
I didn't react to Schwartzman's character in quite the same way, but I can certainly see why one would have issues with the presentation of his character.
Yeah, I didn't have a problem with Schwartzman's character either--in fact, I rather liked the performance. It was effectively insular, shapeless, and still somehow quite sweet in a sad, melancholy way. His comment "God help us, we're too young to reign" is one of the film's most poignant moments, and I'd say it's effectiveness largely has to do with his character--the gravity of the statement really hits home at that moment.
Ha -- and I almost cited that line as an annoyance! I thought that piece of dialogue was mostly unnecessary, since the film itself tacitly makes this point in a more creative, less explicit, way.
i'm so glad i'm not alone. I really do not understand the reaction to this movie. other than that female directors are often savagely attacked or ignored after hits (see also: campion, bigelow, etc...)
as for the ending, i loved it. that shot of the room. parfait
Yeah, that's a great point about female directors, Nathaniel. And the strange thing is I'm not even big on Coppola (liked Suicides, but quite wary on Translation.) She's definitely impressed me here though, and I'm quite saddened by the backlash too.
I'm hoping it has a big showing in the FB Awards, especially Best Picture!
12 comments:
Ohhh... I'm really glad that's the case. I love it more and more as time goes on... I may see it again before it disappears from theaters.
We have similar tastes when it comes to lavish costume dramas. Especially when they're by female auteurs. :)
And especially when they're met with critical indifference or even hostility! I really don't know what they were expecting out of this (did they want standard biopic trajectory? did the music scare them off?), but I guess it's their loss.
I also want to see it again, but mostly because my theatre experience was awful. I'll tell you about it later in full detail, but let's just say there were four teenagers in the mostly empty cinema hall who felt it necessary to nastily comment upon/laugh at everything happening on-screen. Particularly when Dunst appeared nude.
"Yes, yes, yes" indeed. Best movie of the year!!
Similar to Jesse, I appreciate it more and more upon reflection -- but that's probably because I initially recall how precisely Coppola depicts Marie's emotional arc (confusion to ennui to decadent indulgence). Then I recall Schwartzman's petulant idea, not character, and the moments where historical politics slip in without much welcome or place.
Still, I do find the film highly enjoyable and am discouraged by some of the hostility that has been directed towards it.
dl - Agree wholeheartedly.
Nick - "Then I recall... the moments where historical politics slip in without much welcome or place."
But... see, I kind of saw that as the point - the political tensions arise so far outside our insulated universe, and therefore they would come as jarring intrusions in the film (also for the childish Louis and especially to the party-hardy Marie.)
Can you clarify what you mean by Schwartzman's "idea"?
They don't seem to be "jarring intrusions" as much as they seem ineptly handled. I just felt the film ran out of steam and energy in the denouement.
Schwartzman's Louis XVI struck me as way too ostentatiously juvenile -- everything he did, whether it was overtly looking nervous or playing with a stick. The character of Marie is so well-realized that the shallow treatment of Louis irritated me whenever he occupied the screen.
I felt the same way about the final few scenes, but read them differently. I wouldn't argue that the plodding denouement is intentional on Coppola's part, but again, it seems entirely appropriate for what the film was attempting to depict. The self-contained, floating bubble is burst with the intrusion of the unhappy masses, and the games of leisure are quickly put to an end. I felt uneasy throughout the last fifteen minutes or so, but I kind of felt like that is what my reaction should have been.
But again, I would love a second viewing considering those idiotic teenagers in the theatre were a huge distraction.
I didn't react to Schwartzman's character in quite the same way, but I can certainly see why one would have issues with the presentation of his character.
Yeah, I didn't have a problem with Schwartzman's character either--in fact, I rather liked the performance. It was effectively insular, shapeless, and still somehow quite sweet in a sad, melancholy way. His comment "God help us, we're too young to reign" is one of the film's most poignant moments, and I'd say it's effectiveness largely has to do with his character--the gravity of the statement really hits home at that moment.
Ha -- and I almost cited that line as an annoyance! I thought that piece of dialogue was mostly unnecessary, since the film itself tacitly makes this point in a more creative, less explicit, way.
These are fantastic news. Cannot possibly wait any further.
i'm so glad i'm not alone. I really do not understand the reaction to this movie. other than that female directors are often savagely attacked or ignored after hits (see also: campion, bigelow, etc...)
as for the ending, i loved it. that shot of the room. parfait
Yeah, that's a great point about female directors, Nathaniel. And the strange thing is I'm not even big on Coppola (liked Suicides, but quite wary on Translation.) She's definitely impressed me here though, and I'm quite saddened by the backlash too.
I'm hoping it has a big showing in the FB Awards, especially Best Picture!
Post a Comment