Let my preface this by saying that I tend to hate "artsy" films, and I get very annoyed by people overanalzing the *beep
-
jesseredwards — 9 years ago(July 18, 2016 08:08 PM)
This movie totally bombed when it premiered because people didn't understand it. I think it will be a while before it finds its audience. Remembered, nobody like Citizen Kane when it first came out and now they consider it the greatest movie ever made.
-
Tommen_Saperstein — 9 years ago(December 20, 2016 03:57 PM)
Probably because so many people have seen it. Ordinarily people would have to seek out this kind of film in order to watch it, but because this movie created so much buzz with the reviews and the marketing, it attracted a larger audience than is typical for this kind of movie. And in attracting so many viewers, it naturally attracted the wrong kinds of viewers. The score would be higher if it only had 25,000 ratings.
Honestly most of the classics that only cinephiles watch like the films of Bergman, Godard, and Tarkovsky would probably have lower ratings if more people had seen them.
Persona
would at best have a 7.0 if it had 100,000 ratings.Live Deliciously!
http://bit.ly/2gD7xFP -
jeyragusa — 9 years ago(July 21, 2016 02:59 PM)
Watched this film last night. Eerily well made and directed with just one big problem. It is rather vague and if it wasn't for my trolling effort here, I must admit, I did not even get the gist of the story.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for the subtle parts, especially in artsy films, but this film seemed to offer no explanation at all, subtle or otherwise.
Harvesting humans??? Is that what that special effects gimmick was all about??
And how are we supposed to know what the motorbike gang is all about?? -
jesseredwards — 9 years ago(July 21, 2016 03:30 PM)
Chris Stuckman's analysis video helped me understand it a lot. You can find it pretty easily on YouTube. I think the point of the motor bikes was just for her superiors to track her down quickly but without blowing their cover. If they went looking for her in spaceships the jig would be up pretty quickly.
If I were you I would watch Stuckman's video, then sit on it for a few months then go back again. I noticed more the second time I watched it. -
jeyragusa — 9 years ago(July 24, 2016 01:03 PM)
Thanks jesseredwards. I did view Stuckman's explanation video. Yes, it did shed some more light on the film.
Much as I adore off beat independent films, this film was a tad too vague for me. Excessive vagueness piques ones interest to follow closely while watching; however, failure to understand gist of film, leaves one bored by the end of said film.
Or perhaps my capacity to pick up on subtlety has deteriorated in my advanced years. My attention to detail was never too keen to begin with. -
YuunofYork — 9 years ago(November 10, 2016 09:02 PM)
If you like intelligent, well-made films without pretension, I have some recommendations for you. Check out
Being John Malkovich (1999)
,
Drive (2011)
,
The Ice Storm (1997)
,
Up in the Air (2009)
.
One more, which I wouldn't call pretentious - but as it is a Lynch film it is replete with symbolism and told nonlinearly, is
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
. There is a purpose and a point, and it is a masterpiece of filmmaking, so, if you're up for it. -
shurbanm — 9 years ago(November 28, 2016 06:26 PM)
was an ok movie but
her acting was very convincing
???
I wouldn't say that this required much acting. She just had episodic lines. rendered in her signature monotone and expressionless.
I'd say anybody could play her part.
And her being "drop down gorgeous" is a bit of a stretch. She's definitely better looking that anybody else in that movie but I wouldn't say she's drop down gorgeous. A tad on the heavy side - but I give her props for that. She hasn't fallen for forcing herself to confirm to the hollywood look - or maybe she just likes that extra snack -
Tommen_Saperstein — 9 years ago(December 20, 2016 03:52 PM)
It's one of the best films I've seen in my life.
Live Deliciously!
http://bit.ly/2gD7xFP -
Falconeer — 9 years ago(January 09, 2017 04:37 PM)
I absolutely agree with your opinion of this one. When I see ANY current film these days, I automatically have very low expectations. I watched "Under the Skin" expecting a run of the mill sci-fi Hollywood flick, especially considering the presence of S. Johansson, who I would never expect to see in something so non-mainstream. This is an extremely powerful and unsettling film. It also contains some of the weirdest, most disturbing imagery i have ever seen in a film. The way she eviscerates her victims is just incredibly strange and nightmarish. I even like the fact that so much remains unexplained at the end. It's one of those movies that you don't forget. On a side note, when I read those usual "this is crap" posts about films like this, I cannot help but feel pity for these people, the way I feel for a blind person who is unable to witness a sunset. These people are just missing out on so much..
Fabio Testi is GOD