The film just drags and drags. The film is a narrative mess. You don't know what is going on even up to the end of the f
-
murphy-89 — 19 years ago(January 15, 2007 09:44 PM)
I think that once people stop having certain expectations about a film, it gets easier to view. People who first see 2001: A Space Odyssey may be expecting an intense, wildly futuristic story with fast moving images, and so many people hate it because they can't let go of the idea that 2001 is supposed to be like that. Once you just sit and view it as it isno preconceived notions, no waiting for actionit becomes a masterpiece.
Lily is definitely the same way for me. The first time I saw it, I could only see a slowvery slowdecline into depression. By the end, I thought I'd never be able to view it again, it was so thoroughly postmodern. But I've watched it about 7 or 8 times after that, and it just gets better each time. There is so much love and detail put into this film that it's astonishing, and I can pick up on a subtle nuance here and there that I hadn't previously noticed. Lily has things to offer for those who care to piece it apart. Think of it as a type of film version of Eliot's "The Wasteland". Although some cannot get past the obscure allusions, intricate scenes, and seemingly random passages, a great appreciation can be gained when one stops and pieces it apart. Films that view like quiet puzzles are not for everyoneI completely understand. Maybe give it another shot on a rainy day when you're bored. -
casio_balboa — 18 years ago(August 17, 2007 12:39 PM)
I don't think that the film is boring but, in my opinion, it isn't very good.
It reminds me of the kind of film a 17 year old who thought he/she was super-sensitive would make; by this I mean it's not very mature nor is it particularly genuine, but it does feel needlessly self-absorbed and pretentiously bleak. And that stuff about 'the Ether' and discussing pop musicians as if they make profound 'art' also felt like a teenager trying to be poetic and 'deep'.
I couldn't relate to the characters as I've never known people (adults or children) who are so violent and so nonchalent about it. I had no idea why the kids were so violent and where this rage came from. In a film like 'City of God' the same issue was far clearer - those character were poor, surrounded by violence and essentially had to fight to survive.
However, I do find it strange that this film was so popular in Japan not because I think it's a bad film but because it's not very mainstream. Similarly, Takashi Miike's 'Visitor Q' was apparently a big hit there. Kudos to the Japanese for having sophisticated tastes, although I don't think this was film particularly sophisticated. -
Flabrezu — 18 years ago(September 04, 2007 05:03 AM)
In what way is self-absorbed and pretentiosly bleak? You clearly didn't understand it if you think that the discussion was intended to be deep and profound. It was just showing how obsessed they and kids in general are with certain artists in Japan.
How is this the movie's fault? Again, it's a different culture. There are actually those problems in Japan. -
casio_balboa — 14 years ago(October 01, 2011 10:56 AM)
My point was that the film itself, not just the character, is self-absorbed and pretentiously bleak. For example, just as a film about a racist doesn't need to be racist, a film about a teen doesn't need to be immature.
So, to clarify once again, I find fault with the execution, not the topic itself.
I hope this answers your question, "How is this the movie's fault?" -
trentcyrusparker — 17 years ago(April 24, 2008 12:18 PM)
herpes_menendez wrote:
"It reminds me of the kind of film a 17 year old who thought he/she was super-sensitive would make; by this I mean it's not very mature nor is it particularly genuine, but it does feel needlessly self-absorbed and pretentiously bleak. And that stuff about 'the Ether' and discussing pop musicians as if they make profound 'art' also felt like a teenager trying to be poetic and 'deep'. "
Hi,
I think that was part of the point, that sensitive teenagers take their obsessions so seriously, and like to believe their obsessions are profound and poetic. They need to feel their adoration is justified by some unique meaning, and their idol is something special beyond this world. This is probably why idol worship usually does not permeate to adulthood, because we loose that blind and devoted enthusiasm in adoration of things and people. In this sense I think it perfectly captures the essence of sensitive teenagers, who do have a longing to feel poetic in their discovery of the world, and like to believe there is a deeper meaning to everything they do. Yes it is self-absorbed, but that is one of the fundamentals of being a teenager! -
ratherbnjapan — 18 years ago(March 18, 2008 05:41 PM)
you should say "i" instead of "you," because you may not wanna watch it again, but i do.
if you don't care, i mean, there's not much i can say. but about it being a narrative mess, there are actually many subtle hints in the movie that you can pay attention to to give better understanding to the timeline.