Don't think
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Man Who Fell to Earth
Errington_92 — 12 years ago(June 01, 2013 03:45 PM)
Don't think
The Man Who Fell to Earth
deserves such a bad reputation. Bowie did well in portraying Newton's vulnerability and the critique of societies' influential aspects and vices bringing down Newton. Though at times the narrative could be vague.
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not". -
JellyFish19 — 12 years ago(August 04, 2013 04:00 PM)
The plot synopsis alone is interesting, but the adaptation of it is just a boring and irritating mess. I guess "Walkabout" is the only Roeg film I truly enjoy, and I don't even know why. Perhaps it felt like a spiritual experience, this felt like some joke from the editing room.
-
sheywhat — 12 years ago(August 11, 2013 08:55 AM)
This* is one of the best science fiction movies ever made. I'd put it in a Top 25 Best Sci-Fi list.
*I'm talking about the "director's cut". However, I would like to say that, to reflect the truth of both films, the one released in theaters should be called The Man Who Fell To Earth
the studio cut
and the other film should simply be called The Man Who Fell To Earth. This is due to the fact that Roeg gave the film to the studio finished and complete (his version showed in European theaters) and the studio made it incomplete by slashing twenties minutes from it to make it more friendly for the prudish American audience. -
ewaf58 — 12 years ago(January 25, 2014 01:43 AM)
I agree this is a great film - I went to see it as a teenager back in 1976 (In the UK so it was the full version).
What the original poster of this thread doesn't understand is that it is a multi-layered film rich in imagery. The music is great too.
I really love the time travel sequence when David's car becomes visible to a group of early farmers.
I found the ending unbearably sad. -
peter_t_2k3 — 12 years ago(February 10, 2014 07:56 AM)
I wanted to like this film but it just didn't work for me. It had some great visuals but the plot got confusing and a lot of stuff seemed to be there just to look good rather than to serve a purpose. I suppose I'm not a massive fan of surreal films and didn't really know what to expect with this film but I found it seemed to drag and left me with a headache.
-
Morbius_Fitzgerald — 11 years ago(May 02, 2014 12:23 AM)
The effects were laughable,
For 1976 they looked pretty good.
Anyway thats your opinion, I actually liked this movie. Sure it has its problems but it certainly has its merits too.
Although one of worst movies you've ever seen? I respect you think its bad but you ain't seen beep yet.
"I have always valued my lifelessness." -
Korios — 11 years ago(July 02, 2014 06:06 AM)
I think the film is
deliberately
nonsensical, not out of incompetence. If it was out of incompetence at least a few parts would make sense; here everything is totally vague and blur. I agree that high school plays usually have better actors than this film. Particularly the quarrel scenes between Thomas and his girlfriend(?) were repulsive.
Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching. -
milstar — 11 years ago(September 15, 2014 01:50 PM)
With some movies I feel greatly ambivalent toward them. Such as "The Long Kiss Goodnigh". And this. Like it constantly draws me in and then rejects. When I watched this I felt that all the time. Sure, it's nicely photographed, edited (I like intercutting) and intriguing storyline. On the other hand, level of bizzarity, gratitous sex (almost pornographic), and acting is unconvincing. It's long and almost with no plot.
Remake would be nice, but done is distinct manner from this film. -
Just_Jimmy — 10 years ago(January 11, 2016 01:47 PM)
I also agree with the OP (not because I'm also half Norwegian, the other have being Swedish should make me want to troll him hahahhaha)
I've tried on a number of occasions to enjoy this film, it just goes no where and it makes me laugh the people that defend it just because they want to be so alternative and artsy. Instead of bashing someone's opinion and saying they just don't get it, why don't you tell us all why it was so amazing and not why it wasn't horrible. I understand you enjoyed it and are offended that people think it either doesn't go anywhere and it's horrible, but tell my what makes this so amazing. -
ewaf58 — 10 years ago(January 12, 2016 12:26 PM)
I don't think you're able to understand the film. It is constantly moving forward (by years) in time as the characters (except Bowie) grow older. I guess you didn't even notice the timeslip sequence either.
It's about corporate manipulation and use of an individual (wherever that individual may come from). You probably failed to spot the corporate men watching even when he first landed.
You simply do not have the ability to understand subtexts within a film and are just viewing it at one level. Please don't write anymore opinions and leave this site or stick to the Transformer franchise.
Thank you. And if this post angers you - then that was my intention. -
Just_Jimmy — 10 years ago(January 12, 2016 12:42 PM)
hahahahahhaa.another holier than though film student who thinks they are the only one that understands film, and can't come up with an original reponse when someone constructively criticizes a movie he/she enjoys.
Please refrain from using plagiarized phrases, like the stale "transformers" retort that you kids are using these days it makes you look ever the fool. You are not special. You're not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else. -
michael-abatemarco — 10 years ago(January 17, 2016 12:32 AM)
The bashing goes both ways. People explain what it is they like or love about it and get labeled art fags for their trouble. BFF and others do a fine job explaining it here in response to the OP:
http://www.imdb.com/board/10074851/board/thread/42752421
Here's another:
http://www.imdb.com/board/10074851/board/thread/129119221
Look around and you may find that people do explain their love for this film. -
d.rust — 10 years ago(January 12, 2016 01:23 PM)
I have seen this movie ONCE when it was first shown on television. I haven't had the desire to re-watch it, although it is still vivid in my mind.
I do have to say I am a sci-fi fan. The story is well known in fandom.
I think its biggest failure was the use of the Thin White Duke as a drawing card at the time. Bowie hadn't had the experience to carry a movie of this nature.
Of course, later in life, he had become a little too comfortable in his skin to portray Thomas Jerome Newton.
What makes the original poster believe that David Lynch had anything to do with this film? -
d.rust — 10 years ago(January 17, 2016 10:58 AM)
I'm usually in to strange movies like this. I love David Lynch, and I don't have any problems with artistic freedom, but this was just bad, bad, bad.
That's what the original poster said. Now that I re-read his post, it's probably his wording that led me to believe he had the idea that Lynch was involved. As for Fincher, BZZT. You misunderstood the context of "poster". And to bring up trash like "The Social Network" well, you're just too much into Fcbook. -
drxcreatures — 10 years ago(January 17, 2016 03:16 PM)
I can't say it is the worst but, I just could never get into this film. I have a copy and have tried viewing many times.
http://www.cgonzales.net
&
http://www.drxcreatures.com