mother! | 09.15.17 | Paramount | Darren Aronofsky, Jennifer Lawrence | Razzie Awards frontrunner

[Barnack]

5 hours ago, Harley said:

I like how DA has put a guide to understanding the movie. As if the audience is to stupid to understand his blatant, lazy assed symbolism. 

There is a list of symbolism I didn't get to be honest, I would have questions to ask.

 

For example the screen junkies guys didn't got most of them (almost none of it), and their are big movie watcher / paid to reviews:

 

 

Imagine the general audience, if them didn't got it at all.

Edited September 23, 2017 by Barnack

[Hatebox]

Perhaps by now we can put to bed the notion that Aronofsky is 'the next Kubrick' simply after how much he has described his intention of this film down to the smallest detail. Seriously, has another art-house director ever lifted the veil so much?

[That One Girl]

No one is the next Kubrick because no one can ever match him.  It's time to put to rest the notion that anyone will ever be considered as such.

[CoolioD1]

30 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Perhaps by now we can put to bed the notion that Aronofsky is 'the next Kubrick' simply after how much he has described his intention of this film down to the smallest detail. Seriously, has another art-house director ever lifted the veil so much?

i believe richard kelly did the same thing with donnie darko which was coincidentally around the time where everyone realized how dumb donnie darko is.

[Joel M]

It's not like Aronofsky movies are subtle and he ruins them by over-explaining in interviews.

[Barnack]

2 hours ago, Hatebox said:

Perhaps by now we can put to bed the notion that Aronofsky is 'the next Kubrick' simply after how much he has described his intention of this film down to the smallest detail. Seriously, has another art-house director ever lifted the veil so much?

Nicolas Winding Refn in is commentary track (Only God Forgives for example) explain every details.

 

Never heard Aronofsky compared by Kubrick ever before (not sure I get the comparison, use of symmetry ?) or any relevance to how much explanation a director put on the dvd or elsewhere to anything really (people that like to know listen to those and those who do not want just do not, seem 100% irrelevant), source ?

Edited September 24, 2017 by Barnack

[straggler]

2 hours ago, Hatebox said:

Perhaps by now we can put to bed the notion that Aronofsky is 'the next Kubrick' simply after how much he has described his intention of this film down to the smallest detail. Seriously, has another art-house director ever lifted the veil so much?

An author can talk all they want about their intentions. How I interprete something is my own view. Death to the author. That said, I don't like things being overexplained. 

[trifle]

 

 

 

[kowhite]

This movie.  I really liked this movie.  A lot.  Yeah, this thing is legit.  F  the F CinemaScope, fucking plebes.

 

Ok, I get the reaction kinda.  But this movie is good.

[Alpha]

On 9/22/2017 at 4:02 PM, Harley said:

I like how DA has put a guide to understanding the movie. As if the audience is to stupid to understand his blatant, lazy assed symbolism. 

God, I hate it when directors do that. Leave the movie up to the interpretation of the audience. If you're just going around in interviews and telling everybody about all the symbolism and motifs in your movie and what it means, you're being more of a (and this adjective is overused nowadays) pretentious douchebag rather than an interesting filmmaker.

 

Aronofsky has made some great movies, but he's not a subtle filmmaker, and traveling the Hollywood press scene to talk about what this movie is all about takes away from the magic.

[kowhite]

34 minutes ago, Alpha said:

God, I hate it when directors do that. Leave the movie up to the interpretation of the audience. If you're just going around in interviews and telling everybody about all the symbolism and motifs in your movie and what it means, you're being more of a (and this adjective is overused nowadays) pretentious douchebag rather than an interesting filmmaker.

 

Aronofsky has made some great movies, but he's not a subtle filmmaker, and traveling the Hollywood press scene to talk about what this movie is all about takes away from the magic.

 

The movie can be told about what it's doing, but the movie on its own...honestly you can read it different ways.  And DA has said he wants that, and in that he succeeded (imo).  Seriously, you don't have to listen to him.  Or do, cause he wants you to take it how you want, even if he had his own designs.  I've never been much of one to think less of a film cause of the marketing.  Movies stand on their own, for better or worse.

[Cochofles]

7 hours ago, trifle said:

 

 

 

DAMN! So much beauty.

You gotta give it to mother! : it has inspired amazing art. Just breathtaking. 

[The Futurist]

3 hours ago, kowhite said:

This movie.  I really liked this movie.  A lot.  Yeah, this thing is legit.  F  the F CinemaScope, fucking plebes.

 

Ok, I get the reaction kinda.  But this movie is good.

 

 

[straggler]

5 hours ago, kowhite said:

This movie.  I really liked this movie.  A lot.  Yeah, this thing is legit.  F  the F CinemaScope, fucking plebes.

 

Ok, I get the reaction kinda.  But this movie is good.

There is something called numerical bias. The basic idea is that when we see a number or grade our minds immediately assume it is valid. But Cinemascore is really meaningless. It is a survey of about 400 people at only 4 or 5 theaters on opening night. That is too small and limited a sample to validly convey anything. All it indicates is that 400 casual moviegoers went to see that new horror/home invasion film starring Jennifer Lawrence and got mother! instead. Yet the media treats Cinemascore as if it trumps all reviews or the reactions of audiences that actually had a clue what they were going to watch. I get that it is a divisive and insane film, but I think it is brilliant and I could not care less what 400 unsuspsecting moviegoers had to say on opening night about what they thought they were going to watch. Cinemascore is a tool, but it should not be overstated and I don't think it is helpful regarding less conventional movies. It measures expectations. But I guess moving forward studios need to be smart about how they manage all these different shorthand measures.  

Edited September 25, 2017 by straggler

[a2k]

Release a book to explain the movie. Whatever happened to show, don't tell 

Edited September 25, 2017 by a2knet

[kowhite]

4 hours ago, straggler said:

There is something called numerical bias. The basic idea is that when we see a number or grade our minds immediately assume it is valid. But Cinemascore is really meaningless. It is a survey of about 400 people at only 4 or 5 theaters on opening night. That is too small and limited a sample to validly convey anything. All it indicates is that 400 casual moviegoers went to see that new horror/home invasion film starring Jennifer Lawrence and got mother! instead. Yet the media treats Cinemascore as if it trumps all reviews or the reactions of audiences that actually had a clue what they were going to watch. I get that it is a divisive and insane film, but I think it is brilliant and I could not care less what 400 unsuspsecting moviegoers had to say on opening night about what they thought they were going to watch. Cinemascore is a tool, but it should not be overstated and I don't think it is helpful regarding less conventional movies. It measures expectations. But I guess moving forward studios need to be smart about how they manage all these different shorthand measures.  

 I agree with the part where you think it's a great movie.  

 

You also said other things,  I'm not pleased with my response to your post, it deserves better, but it's late and I had a few.

[kowhite]

4 hours ago, The Futurist said:

 

 

Film is a visual medium.  

[Joel M]

Cinemascore answers essentially one question "Did the audience got exactly the movie they expected?" nothing more. Even if it was a survey in 100 theatres instead of 4, bullshit cbm or YA movies with a fanbase like Apocalypse and Divergent would still get an A and stuff like Inception, Gone Girl and Fury Road would still get B/B+ at most. 

[The Futurist]

 

 

"they killed their mother!"

 

 

[dashrendar44]

9 hours ago, a2knet said:

Release a book to explain the movie. Whatever happened to show, don't tell 

In DA's case, it should be"Show, don't YELL!!!!!"