what´s all the fuss about this movie?!
-
Howlin Wolf — 21 years ago(March 23, 2005 06:02 AM)
So all we are left with is a film about relationships. Now that would be OK if you connect with it, if you see something of yourself in one of the characters then maybe you will like it.
and some people certainly did; maybe you just didn't
That which is not yet, but ought to be, is more real than that which merely is. -
radicalmedia — 21 years ago(April 02, 2005 12:30 PM)
EXCUSE ME!
I am a fan of Pressburger, powell, Bergmann, Fellini, Cassavettes, Vardaand more. This film is not an intellectual exercise. IT is an expositional obvious tv drama! There is nothing original about these performances or the framing. No personal vision of the auteur (which was clearly demonstrated in his previous film BLISS) OBVIOUSLY ten years in advertising has blanded his personality. I would rather have seen TRASHY STUFF direct this terrible script.
If you want a list of good films..Ill give them to you. But dont berate somebody for having a very clear instinct that this is not Cinema.
Cannes Venice Berlin and ROtterdam film festival all agreed with TRASHYSTUFF. So maybe you can learn a thing or too. -
GoodFella1980 — 23 years ago(April 02, 2003 05:28 AM)
So what do you prefer?
XXX - the Vin Diesel crap or Armagaddeon - the whole lot crap?
If you want bang-bang movies treat yourself to some Swedish porno movies. I think you don't have the class to watch movies like Lantana. If your work at McDonalds suck, then JUST QUIT THE BLOODY JOB! WOW! is that too hard to muster? -
radicalmedia — 21 years ago(April 02, 2005 12:38 PM)
so now somebody has to watch a TELEVISION drama like Lantana to have CLASS? What sort of class are we talking about? Middle class? I would rather watch A SWEDISH PORN anyday. At least its epic, funny, sexy, bizarre and hopefully ORIGINAL!
Where is the poetry? Where is the nightmare? We are seduced by a TV TAWDRY COP SHOW DRAMA then our lives must be pretty safe and ordinary MR PRANAVAN.
Or maybe you have 007 ON your numberplate and you go round houses at night waking up the neighbours.This is crap.
GOOD CINEMA: check out: POWELL, IMMAMURA, FASSBINDER, COCTEAU, BUNUEL, GODARD, CASSAVETTES, RUIZ, ALMODOVAR, ALLEN, HARTLEY, HAYNES, BOGDANOVICH, PRESSBURGER, OZU, KIORASTAMI, KAURISMAKI, FELLINI, PASOLINI, FOSSE, RUSSELL, SCHLESINGER, VARDA, DEMY..AND MORE. -
scvls — 20 years ago(December 31, 2005 05:53 AM)
"epic, funny, sexy, bizarre and hopefully ORIGINAL! "
I wouldn't call those to be important for a good movie or if you want, cinema.
if the film succedes to convey it's message with what it's given, I think I'll be happy with it as a movie is a medium, not something to measure the director's originality -
jerieg — 23 years ago(April 03, 2003 10:27 AM)
Maybe when some time passes, and you have had relationships with people that involve more discussion than "do you want fries with that", you may come to appreciate Lantana, or at the very least, understand it a little better.
I am not saying this was a great film, I felt that it bordered a bit on Magnolia-gimmicky, but Lantana was involving and interesting to me, because of, and not in spite of, the fact that the characters lead lives that seem to be boring, uninteresting, and depressing.
Those are facts of life that everyone can relate to on some level of experience, and those who choose not to at least see some semblance of themselves within any of these characters are simply unwilling to see any reality at all. -
radicalmedia — 21 years ago(April 02, 2005 12:41 PM)
Magnolia was not great either. but stop taking the piss out of his job at MC DONALDS you middleclass twat? His instincts for good cinema are in fact correct.
This film was not accepted into any reputable festivals like CANNES or Venice..the europeans hated itand I personally think that the drama in this movie is overly earnest and cinematically unadventurous.
If i wanted "personal" tawdry cinema like thisI would read a self help book called Speed Healing or Emotional Molecules. Id rather get the facts from a scientist. Cinema is meant to be crazy, epic, nightmarish, inexplicablelike good art. -
-
glumpy_99 — 22 years ago(May 28, 2003 04:21 PM)
Interesting. I'm a twenty year old Aussie who has 'never been involved in a long-term relationship' and I still loved it. The characters were fascinating, and the story reveals its many hidden depths and layers, (as do the characters) on repeated viewing. A comment further up said who would remember this film in ten years. I think for its weaving of plots, the tightly packed narrative, (it fits more into 108 (or thereabouts) minutes than PT Anderson (who I respect as a film-maker) could manage in his occasionally interesting, but ultimately overblown and bloated 180m.+ opus MAGNOLIA) and its outstanding performances by a gallery of talented Aussie actors, LANTANA will certainly be remembered as a landmark Australian film, and, (prediction:) one of the first great films of the new millenium, (right behind TOMCATS(!).)
That's my opinion. What interests me is that my 40+ year-old father saw the film, having been married for 20+ years (naturally!) and his opinion reflected some of those expressed here; his first comment after seeing it was, "But it was just so SLOW! Nothing happened! Who wants to see some p*ss-ant bores farting on about relationships!" What I think the missing link is, and why some may miss the brilliance of the film, is a disinterest in personal relationships. My father isn't interested in 'relationship' movies; I think he prefers movies about externalised concepts, not necessarily Michael Bay blockbusters.
I think if you are disinterested in the way human beings relate to each other, you're not going to find much to satisfy you in this film, and it has nothing to do with your place of work, or age, (although I wouldn't recommend it to very young people,) and to say that is to arrogantly disrespect another's point of view, and be virtually worthless as a participant in film discussion.
Glumpy. -
Arithon — 22 years ago(June 07, 2003 07:15 PM)
Glumpy 99. As to whom are you refering to as being arrogantly disrespectful? It does amaze me that a movie with so little exposure can cause so many emotions and thoughts to pour forth. Perhaps if you posted a question to the person(s)that piqued you so much, it is probable you will receive an answer. Truly, there must be a valid reason for such answer(s). And yes you are correct, this film is not for everyone, particulairly those of a young age.
Failte!
Arihton -
heyheymel_82 — 22 years ago(July 12, 2003 04:12 AM)
I'm with Glumpy. I thought the movie was great, with a wonderful cast. But I have to admit, I found it sooo hard to see Glenn Robbins in a movie like this. I was expecting him to start with all the jokes, but not even one joke, bit disappointed there! (haha) But I'm glad he was in this film; we got to see what he has to offer as a straighter actor (what he calls it), and not an outback person or a Panel boy or anything like that. So full marks to Glenn Robbins for taking a chance and appearing in a movie like this. I'm glad he did.
-
radicalmedia — 21 years ago(April 02, 2005 12:54 PM)
NOI think it has to do with cinema literacy.
This film is easy to watch. There is so much exposition. You are spoonfed everything. Your dad is probably used to watching films from the seventies by directors such as Ken Russell, Robert ALtmann Midnight Cowboy, DoG Day Afternoon, Billy Liar, Marathon Man, Day of the Locust, A woman under the influence, Women in LOve, City of Women where the plot was not so convenient. Where the audience had to work a little harder
The characters lives and plot is spoon fed to us in the dialogue and incessant over coverage of scenesso that the themes of self help and integration are fed to us like grazing cattle. Digested with some Paul Kelly syrupthis work is no more refined than Titanic without the boats, Forest Gump without the chocolatesA safe politically correct character drama that could be used for the HOWARD propaganda team in my opinion to promote THE ASSIMILATION of American and Australian culture. -
johan-gunnarsson-1 — 19 years ago(October 05, 2006 06:41 AM)
Sorry for this late addition to the thread, I do NOT consider myself a film freak / cineastic but I really LOVE this film, the story it tells and how it's being told. The slow pace, the music, the way you can follow the inner life of each character by just seeing their faces. Minimalistic acting. It really grabs hold of me. And to top it all off, they managed to do all that without even a murder in the plot.
Cheers Australia!
Johan
Sweden -
radicalmedia — 21 years ago(April 02, 2005 12:45 PM)
Im glad that in your worldRelationshipahemis a level you attain.
THen you get your beach house, your country house. Your sports car. You sound so beep middleclass.
Maybe you need to experience pain, my friend. This film is NOT about outsidersit's not about beauty, suffering, the inexplicable desire to survive. It's about sewing up the plot. It's about American self help psycho babble therapy thats lost and then found in our landscapegiving us a real sense of pseudo cultural identity. What a weak politics this film fills us with?
Are you satisfied that this American woman fulfils the gaps in our lives? Wouldnt it be more interesting if we punished her for leaving us empty? -
x111b3825 — 22 years ago(August 15, 2003 11:10 AM)
Every movie is crap and wonderful at the same time, depending on one's tastes. It's interesting to see how with almost every movie on here, there are people on both ends of the spectrum bickering a point of view.
Some are definitely overblown and more elaborate, while others at other extremes claim "it sucks," or conversely"great flick!"
Ultimately who cares, but it's all in fun. I liked Lantana, but as overblown and at points unrealistic as Armageddon or XXX were, liked them also. The Fast and the Furious had a dumb plot point I thought since they only appeared to steal to build faster carsetc. etc. and I thought it'd be more realistic selling drugs or whatever. Still, who cares? I'm not sure why I'm wasting time writing this, but I thought I might just because I think its important not to take yourself too seriously at times. We all should remember how ridiculous we all seem sometimes here, paying homage or disgust to the glowing God of the silver screen. I know I sure do. I really dig countering these snobs who have like four thousand reviews written like they come from a Harvard education and personlly knew John Cassavetes (whom I personally admire simply because he seemed a lover of the experience of life and tried to bring this to the film world).
Regardlessthink about it and enjoy what you will, recommending it, and thrash about on what you don't. Here it's all in fun and maybe someone will listen in their perusal of your review, but ultimately, it is hardly significant in the scheme of things.