Cool News
BENJAMIN BUTTON is the Best Film of 2008, so says Capone!!!
Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
If all goes as planned, I'll have my Best & Worst of 2008 piece for you in about a week. But here's a little preview: David Fincher's THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON will be at the top of my Best list. I could, quite literally, spend 4,000 words talking about this single film and ignore almost everything else that opened in theaters this holiday weekend (everything except THE WRESTLER; that one will be on my list too). Instead, I'll try to break it down to its essentials.
First and foremost, BENJAMIN BUTTON will engage you emotionally, in the most pure and fulfilling way possible. If you cry at movies, you'll cry at this one. If you don't cry at movies, well, you'll probably cry at this one. At the very least, you'll be like me. I never cry at movies. But I do get this strange strain in the back of my throat that is probably my body hurting me just a little because I refuse to cry. I never feel like I'm holding back the tears, but that strange sensation is just a friendly reminder that if I responded to emotion like a human being, I'd be crying at that moment. I've seen BENJAMIN BUTTON three times to date, and I've gotten that feeling every time.
I also love the fact that BENJAMIN BUTTON celebrates the fine art of great storytelling but giving us not only an examination of a full life--birth to death--but also a life lived fully. In this age of biography films seeing a resurgence--MILK being the most recent example--even the finest of those films only gives us a fraction of a life, usually some turning point in a person's journey. But screenwriter Eric Roth (FORREST GUMP; THE INSIDER; ALI; THE GOOD SHEPHERD) takes the germ of F. Scott Fitzgerald's original short story and transforms it into something, well, transformative. It's a film that takes full advantage of its primarily New Orleans locales by adding healthy doses of surrealism, magic and, yes, even a touch of spirituality to tell one of the most complete and fulfilling films in recent memory.
So far, all I've really talked about is the film in broad strokes. But even when you examine BENJAMIN BUTTON's finer details, you see just how near perfect this thing is. Not only do we get the complete story of the titular character, who is born an elderly infant and spends the rest of the 80-some years growing younger in body while older in mind, but we also get surprisingly complete examinations of all of the people Benjamin (played at most ages by Brad Pitt using some incredibly sophisticated and seamless special effects). Characters such as his adopted mother Queenie (the sparkling Taraji P. Henson) or Benjamin's biological father (Jason Flemyng), who we assume we will despise for abandoning his son on a stranger's doorstep after a failed attempt at drowning him. Jared Harris' Captain Mike borders on caricature, but even he grows on us as he reveals himself to be a frustrated artist. My favorite of Benjamin's journeys takes place in Russia, where he means the wife of a British spy. The unconquerable Tilda Swinton plays Elizabeth Abbott, with whom Benjamin has his first true love affair, despite having a lifetime crush on Daisy (played as an adult by Cate Blanchett, whose beauty never ceases to amaze me.)
The long unrequited love between Benjamin and Daisy is at the heart of this splendid work. In fact, the entire film is one long flashback from Daisy's deathbed. Her now grown daughter (Julia Ormond) is reading Benjamin's diary to Daisy as the early winds and rains of Hurricane Katrina threaten outside her hospital room window. It's an odd framing device that has been a major sticking point for many critics, but it never bothered me even a little. In a way, it's Fincher's way of paying tribute to New Orleans and its people, but it also adds a sense of tension and immediacy to the proceedings.
I don't think I want to say too much more about BENJAMIN BUTTON at this point. It's an experience best lived through with as little knowledge of what comes next as possible. I've really only told you about what happens in the lead character's early years, with so much more to come when he becomes younger and embarrassingly handsome. The lingering thoughts concerning the film's many themes that stay with me to this day are associated with death. The world would have to look different to a person getting younger, wouldn't it? I haven't been able to shake that overwhelming sense of loneliness that Benjamin must have felt his entire life, even during those times in his life when he is loved completely, when he is literally surrounded by those who love him. Everyone else would appear to be rushing toward death while he lost his aches and pain and grew more energetic by the day.
I love that David Fincher (SEVEN; FIGHT CLUB; PANIC ROOM; ZODIAC) is the director who finally got this story to the big screen, after so many others tried and failed. His entire career could be looked at as aggressive resistance to sentimentality, and he never allows himself to get lost in it with BENJAMIN BUTTON. There is almost more heart and soul in this film than in any I've seen in a decade, but it never gets sappy or overwrought with swooning atmosphere. He's the perfect filmmaker to keep this story honest and on the right side of dark and uneasy. But in the end, he makes us love and respect all of these characters so much that we cry for them for unexpected reasons. The first time I got that strange feeling in my throat was when one character is reading postcards; you'll know the scene I mean when you see it.
One of my favorite moments in the entire 10 years-plus that I've been writing for Ain't It Cool News took place a couple weeks ago at the annual Butt Numb-a-Thon in Austin. Harry was kind enough to let me introduce this film, my favorite of 2008, to an audience largely made up of people that I've grown to know and love over the years, a few of whom had seen the film already. But something clicked that afternoon (it was the second film of BNAT), and by the end of THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON, nearly the entire theater of hardened geeks had been reduced to weepy piles of goo. It was the perfect film moment for me. A few days later, I got the chance to do the same thing in Chicago, with almost identical results (although fewer of the men admitted to tearing up). This is the kind of film you're proud to be overwhelmed by. I can't wait to watch it again.
-- Capone
capone@aintitcoolmail.com
-
+ Expand All
-
Dec 25, 2008 12:39:09 PM CST
Dark Knight is the Best of 2008 so says Stormwatcher!!!
by stormwatcher
And Capone, you still rub me wrong these days.
-
Seriously, he's a douche.
-
If he finds out that not just TDK is not your favourite movie of 2008, but you also think that Rourke was better than Ledger, he will say that you got no credibility and post quotes from people who call you a drunk cocksucker.
-
roger ebert calls the film "essentially a gimmick" and is based on "a profoundly mistaken premise".
this guy's(ebert) "sense of wonder" is in need of a wakeup call!
oh yea, his political rants in his review's are getting tired also!
-
I love the crying paragraph, that was hilarious, I get the same strain in my throat too!
-
as evidenced by the fact that she has an older husband, with whom she has children, AND a younger boyfriend, and they all live together. weird. not that i'm judging. been looking forward to this movie since i first saw the trailer. "zodiac" was criminally (no pun intended) underrated, and was definitely among my top five of 2007. i'm surprised notoriously perfection-obsessed fincher was able to put this film out so soon after "zodiac," though i guess it has been nearly two years since it was released.
-
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1063669/
-
Beautiful. Usually I say "great", "amazing", or some other buzz word most critics use. But, for this flick, beautiful is such an apt word. Haven't seen a movie like this in a while. The sense that film can be so subtly epic and cathartic without being so ostentatious. Fincher has really grown as a director. I would have never known the same dude who directed Seven would have gone on to make this. Kudos sir. However, I'd still put Slumdog on top of this. That movie gave me chills like no other.
-
How do you know what "nearly the entire theater of hardened geeks" was thinking? Were you up front looking back at each one of them, wearing some kind of emotional night vision goggles? Did you poll each and everyone of them on the way out of the theater? It's cool that you loved this film -- I didn't, I found it to be technically strong but emotionally weak -- but when you use that kind of anecdotal hyperbole, I think it really weakens your otherwise perfectly respectable (if debatable) case.
-
I wouldn't say it's the best one, but definitely one of the most underrated of the year. (Screw 'Der Baader Meinhof Komplex')
-
But not my favorite of the year. Nothing can top WALL-E IMO.
-
Maybe a little character development would've helped. It's not good when you have a love story in which you have no clue why they're together. Honestly, I enjoyed the scenes with Brad Pitt and Tilda Swinton way more than the ones with him and Cate Blanchett.
-
It was kind of an odd review, he said it was well made, and the performances were good, but the premise is what turned him off. He said something like it was spitting in the face of destiny, I'm thinking his current ill health probably affected his view of it.
-
I hope you guys are getting some sort of kick back for the dick sucking you've been working on this flick lately. It's not very good. It's not even in my top 5. And this has been a weak ass year, and I've yet to see the wrestler or Frost/Nixon. Shit, I guess Slumdog and Dark Knight sit at the top of my choices, and even those weren't flat out amazing like several of last years movies.
-
I love the completeness of the 'nothing ever lasts' motif. Not even the aged man gets to tell us all of the seven times he was struck by lightning. Fantastic film.
-
favorite movie of the year
-
Really and truly a beautiful cinema going experience. Nice review Cap
-
"Maybe a little character development would've helped." Did we see the same fucking movie?
-
This movie is crap. Don't listen to all the idiots who are projecting their own fears and desires onto a film that explores neither. Nothing ever lasts huh? You need to age backwards to know this? Bottom line, the film is not about anything more than a boring love story between two boring people. The old man shit in the beginning is dope, but the rest of the movie is empty, soulless, and not interested in telling a real story.
-
Seriously. Someone who goes to great lengths (going on EVERY talkback) to explain how unattractive Eva Mendes has got to be the Gayest "so called" hetero of 2008
-
i think its a good film...but...i dont think it was nearly well enough written to be as poignant as it was trying to be. it was far, far too stop start and stammered from point to point too often.
the payoff was obviously the very, very last scene, and it was very good, but for me it just took too long to get to it.
i think there is enough window dressing for people to think its much, much better than it actually is but my lord it was trying so hard to be like forest gump. perhaps the difference is forest gump is accessible. it feels real. whereas this film is obviously a different kettle of fish altogether.
a good film, but certainly not great. and certainly not the best of the year. frost/nixon and vicky, cristina, barcelona were both better than this for mine. -
This movie shredded me. I love it A LOT. I'd like a follow-up to this piece. I want to hear what you think about the films finer points.
-
than Forrest Gump!
-
I wouldn't rate this as the best of the year, but a good film.Although, there is a scene where a grown woman has sex with a child, so maybe it is the best movie of the year.
-
The movie I saw showed a guy doing a whole bunch of stuff, but offered no real insight into why he was doing it or how he felt about any of it. Which movie did you see?
-
This film offers nothing in the way of insight. It's lovely to look at, well-acted, and the dialogue is well-tuned, but that doesn't make a great film. Aging in reverse, as presented by this film, is no different than "our" way: you grow "old", you lose the ones you love, then you lose your marbles, then you die.Not to mention ***SPOILER*** Benjamin's decision to take off is incredibly selfish. He says "I don't want to be a burden" yet we see through a montage that he had about 20 perfectly good years he could have spent getting to know and love his daughter, at which point she would have been mature enough to learn the inevitable truth and join her mother in the love and care of her father. You know, like the rest of the fucking world does with their ailing parents?I recommend reading the original Fitzgerald short (10 pages) story (which, in a Q&A I attended, Eric Roth and Fincher both admitted to intentionally NOT READING) which is freely available on the internet. Though it's by no means a classic, you will get more out of it in 5 minutes than you did from this movie in 160 minutes.I'm sorry Capone couldn't see through this big bag of gas.
-
I saw it today and was thoroughly impressed. One of Brad Pitt's best performances, if not the best. It was a long movie, but the flow was excellent. "Did I tell you that I've been struck by lightning seven times?"
-
Speaking of which, could someone verify that this DOESN'T end with Mr. Button aging backwards into a puddle of semen? Or a dead fetus flopping around?
I think I saw that happen on TALES FROM THE CRYPT, and man, that would really bum me out. -
So says the Dizzle. So say we all.
-
Fincher has been hit-or-miss, but the combonation of Pitt and Blanchett really looks bad. The idea is also incrediby ridiculous. ZODIAC was snubbed for best picture. If this wins, it will be the biggest travesty since FORREST GUMP.
-
You talk of David Fincher's "aggressive resistance to sentimentality" and how he "never allows himself to get lost in it with BENJAMIN BUTTON". But let's get real here. This film is drenched in sentimentality. And honestly, I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Personally, I think sentimentality is often underrated. BENJAMIN BUTTON was deeply sentimental, but not recklessly so. There is a very sensitive and restrained directorial hand at work here.You've made an interesting pick for your Best Film of the Year. I'm surprised that in your entire review, you say absolutely nothing about Brad Pitt's amazing performance (unless I missed it). Sure, Tilda Swinton is good as usual. But Pitt is the heart and soul of this movie and has the biggest acting challenges. He never falters for an instant.
-
Don't get me wrong. The film is gorgeous as hell and the acting is top notch, but this film is not as good as Zodiac. I'd even say that Fight Club and Seven are better films in my opinion. I loved seeing Benjamin just experience life and share these moments as he slowly learns what makes up a human existence, and for most of the movie, I sat with a smile stuck on my face. The outdoor scenes, particularly anything at sea looks beautiful, and there's a scene with Daisy doing ballet by the pier in silhouette that is fantastic. That being said, making it a frame narrative I don't think as necessary, and while something like Zodiac made sense to be over 2.5 hours long, this definitely seemed like it could be tightened. I do realize it is telling the entire life of someone, but scenes definitely could have been shortened. In the end, I just found myself a little disappointed. This is by no means a bad movie, and it's pros more than outweigh its cons, but I suppose Zodiac just made me expect a lot more out of Fincher. I was thinking this would maybe be my favorite film of the year, and I'm sure it will not be now.
-
Whether it's referring to the cinematography or just the sheer delight in young (old) Benjamin's smile as he gets to live another day. After seeing this, I felt it's not something I'd need to see again. Perhaps I will though, I'd like to love this film, rather than merely liking it.
-
He mentioned that in the Q&A as well. This script is nearly 20 years old. And it really does show. There's nothing said by this movie that Roth didn't say better in Forrest Gump.
-
..good scenes, but this movie went on just a little too long. My favorite scene had to have been the scene where they get fired upon from the other boat.
But the movie as a whole just didn't work. And yes, I teared up a wee bit at the end. -
The whole thing was hopelessly contrived, and bland. Benjamin is only interesting because of his condition not because he's an interesting character. I'm surprised anyone could put this film as one of the top 20 films of the year let alone no. 1. Come on Capone!!
-
will be 100000000000000000000000000000000000's better
-
BB was just Oscar bait cheap concept.
-
I keep hearing that Benjamin Button is the new Forrest Gump. Oh DEAR. Another bad movie that will beat a WAY better movie at the oscars and be forgotten 2 years later.
I don't really care one way or the other, but I don't trust Fincher. Se7en and Panic Room are flat-out ridiculous, and Zodiac needed a 45 minute edit. The guy hit gold with Fight Club, but hasn't done anything else, and you combine "Also Ran" with "Forrest Gump" wanna be and I'm not interested. Just sayin'
-
Dec 26, 2008 3:54:45 AM CST
Good film in first hour but devolve into arty-farty handjob
by badwaldo s revenge
When the romantic sequence with the two lovebirds come up, it's like a parody of Abercrombie & Fitch magazine ad. Smarmy and self-consciously pompous. "Look at me, I'm superbly handsome even as I inch closer to 50!" chestbeats Brad. Typical pretentious bullshit. David seems self-satisfied with carefully deliberate directing to point of overdirecting. Zodiac was totally robbed with nary an Oscar nom, however. Dave shouldn't make any more pussified lovey-dopey PG-13 movie.
-
It's a fantastically well made piece of shit. Seriously. Fucking hell was it boring. Anyway, all the fault lies with Roth. Everyone else is fantastic, even the usually crappy Pitt. But goddamn, Roth fucked the adaptation bad. Conceptually its a fucking disaster. Instead of it being a story about a man being born a complete elderly person and regressing into a child, it's simply a guy born with the physical characteristics of an old man, who grows old, yet develops the physical characteristics of a child. Like fucking JACK. It's not a movie about ageing backwards, it's a shallow goofy movie about how we all die and shit happens and some guy who has a funny disease, like alzhiemers meets some ageing disorder. Then factor in that the actual story and writing plays like Danielle Steele doing a bad rewrite of Forrest Gump for the Hallmark channel after just watching Big Fish and you have what it is...A beautiful hollow turd.
-
I should mention that while I think Zodiac's three hour length is fine, I thought BB is overlong that needs tweaking. It needs to lose about 20 minutes of fat. Freewheeling artistic self-indulgence is a fad that should be tamed. I blame Paul Thomas Anderson for starting this fad with the dreck Mangolia. Not James Cameron, he knows how to edit and deleted stupid, extraneous sequences in Titanic that cost million bucks to film yet delete at the touch of a button. Damn, we need Hal Ashby resurrected to kick ass in editing bay.
-
...Had a story and momentum to sustain 3 hours. This is more like a sequance from Magnolia dragged out to 3 hours.
-
So, what the heck was the point of the recurring hummingbird? That one went over my head. -
It's like the feather from Gump. If I remember correctly Captain Dan/Mike had it tattooed on his chest because its flapping kinda looks like a figure 8 which is the symbol for infinity. And then, I don't know, I guess we all live forever it peoples memories or some shit. I don't even know what the fucking flood had to do with the whole film. Something to do with water. Benjamin likes water. I liked the dig at beatnick ballet dancers too. Should have given the dude a van dyke like the protestor Jenny was hooked up with in Gump. Jesus, what a fucking waste of talent this film was.
-
the dude has no fucking taste whatsoever
-
Men in monter suits going at it!! much better than any girly emotional movie!
-
If you're into emotional shit, a japanese film called Departures was the heaviest mutherfuck of a movie I've seen in a while.... even a manly man like me had to hold back a tear..ahem se what i did used manly language while admitting to holding back tears so that i seem all testoterony..eh i'll get my hat
-
How long it was. When we saw it at BNAT, time didn't matter. I just saw At The Movies with the review of it with the running time just under 3 hours. I can honestly say it flew by. It was a good movie and worth the cash to see it. But still not my fav of the year.
-
is the best film of 2008.
-
Perfect synopsis. Truth is, the best scene in the whole movie, the one that just crushed me emotionally, has nothing to do with Benjamin Button. It's the blind man unveiling his backward clock. Amazing scene. Maybe they should've followed that guy for two hours and forty minutes.
-
Somewhere between Valkyrie and Flammen and Citroen, there's a good movie. But whereas Valkyrie is basically Mission Impossible set in Nazi Germany, Flammen and Citroen is damn near inert. Nothing happens. Just a lot of talking. And sweating. Jesus, that movie had more sweating than The Wrestler. Plus, you can only build so much suspense for guys whose job is to ring someone's doorbell and then shoot them in the head when they answer. Where's the heroism in that? They're like the world's worst Jehovah's Witnesses. Ding-Dong-Boom!
-
As long as I'm shitting in the proverbial punchbowl today, that hummingbird made the rat in The Departed look subtle by comparison. And The Departed was not a subtle movie.
-
Seriously, would you rather I talk about fucking eyeballs and being first? Instead I focus on drawing attention to bad (and ugly) actors who get more work then they deserve. With a name like Choonie you should watch who you call gay.
-
I just watched SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE fully expecting it to be awesome because I had a really good feeling for it going in. And thankfully, it was an excellent movie.As for BUTTON, I was not jazzed by anything I saw in the previews, and the actors are not my favorites to start. All of this fervent praise sounds like overreacting to me. It may be a very good movie, but is it so emotionally touching as to blow our collective minds? I mean a lot of people thought the same shit about TITANIC in our brief flirtation with mass-insanity in the late 1990s. Eh, I'll see it but I don't expect to be drinking any Kool-Aid.
-
*SPOILER ALERT*
For anyone who's seen this. Did anyone else feel a bit of a disconnect when Benjamin became young enough where he was no longer played by Pitt. They just have quick two minute synopses of Benjamin as a teen, as a child, as a toddler and as a baby. These scenes show glimpses as Benjamin is slowy losing his memory and basically acting like a prick (or a normal little kid) and the kid actors just didn't resonate with me. Basically we've been following Pitt portraying Benjamin for a little over two hours, and now we're supposed feel connected with quick glimpses of child actors who are supposed to be portraying the same character? Sorry, I know a baby dying should be sad, but it just fell flat at the end. -
Although there was plenty of stuff that didn't really work for me. Not in my top 5 of the year. Dark Knight, Wall-E, Slumdog Millionaire, Man On Wire and The Wrestler are mine.
-
freakin idiot. this movie sucks
-
Brush off those haters with short attention spans, this was an amazing story
-
At nearly 3 hrs, TCCOBB is a wristwatch-checking challenge. The first act featuring the young "old" Benjamin was quite interesting but once he leaves home, things get dull fast and the story drags out painfully. Toss in a rather non-satisfying, hard-to-swallow final act and you've got an indulgent, though somewhat interesting, film that could have been MUCH better. Hell, editing down the whole mess to a tight 2 hrs would have been good for starters. A missed opportunity.
-
..Totally. It's clear Roth just stopped giving a fuck after the first half. The script just falls apart and becomes even more meandering and pointless once Benjamin's dad dies. It feels like Fincher just didn't give a shit either, which is why instead of some great and interesting effects being employed to make Pitt look like a little boy, they just hired some kids who didn't look anything like him. Especially when you first see the kid at the piano, it's like...who the fuck is that? I don't care. So, did he develop alzhiemers? Or are they saying as he got younger his memory reversed or something? Fuck, what a mess of a movie.
-
Nothing
-
My biggest, easiest to phrase gripe, is (spoiler alert) as other people mentioned - Benjamin's decision to leave Daisy when she became pregnant. The logic behind it really didn't make any sense. The movie showed that he had another 20 years in him before his de-aging condition made a lick of difference. The plot just needed a reason to get him separated from Daisy to keep the drama moving - but it wasn't a good reason. There was even a throwaway line by Daisy later about how she agrees that it was a good that he left - like she's trying to convince the audience at this point. In fact, it was so poorly reasoned that I would label it as a "plot hole".
My other gripe in general is that his de-aging condition really didn't make much of a difference in most of his relationships with people. His relationship with Daisy would have played out the same without it. Same with the British woman. But maybe that's just me bringing my own expectations into the movie. Maybe it wasn't supposed to be a part of it all the time.
What else? The heavy handedness. The hummingbird being shoved in my face as subtle as the butterfly in Patch Adams. The secret about his daughter that is so expected that it becomes unexpected because you don't think that the writers would dare do something so obvious. Didn't get the point of the whole hurricane. The whole lightning bit was funny but felt like a cheap laugh with more heavy-handed meaning.
It's not a bad movie, it's just not as poignant as it positions itself to be. Which makes it come across as arrogant. -
on all points. I didn't hate the movie or even dislike it, as much as I was disappointed by how much better it could have been and should have been. Visually it was beautiful, the effects were first-rate. Most of the acting was good though I couldn't stand Cate Blanchett (though I generally dislike her in everything I've seen her in).
But in the end, the gripes as mentioned by Dapper are the biggest ones that can't be overlooked, and the film was about 40 minutes too long. Had it been tightly edited and the plot holes fixed, it could have been a true classic.
-
I agree that it wasn't necessary. But apparently, the writer didn't think he'd hammered us enough with the idea that "nothing lasts". So he figured he'd better throw in an entire city getting destroyed.
-
and they are just comic book movies!
Seriously, Brad Pitt is VERY over rated. -
For all the wrong reasons. I think the old fucker has finally lost his mind...but we shall see...
-
I Hear theres some pretty big oscar buzz around that film ???
-
..having a short attention span. A good movie can be 3+ hours. However, if it FEELS like 3+ hours, that's not good. The movie had some stand out scenes, but it felt like it took forever to get to those points. In the end, it's a very well made movie, that's only mildly entertaining. Every great director has dissapointing films, and this is Finchers.
-
Most people by me were like'"dude, was that boring as shit or what?"
To be fair, some did clap. But ya didn't hear me clap and I was tempted to walk out several times from boredom. And the Viper camera is starting to get closer to a,"Film look." -
Is a film I would compare this to. Both were love stories based around a fantastical conceit. But in Eternal Sunshine, the love story came first. So you felt the ache when he tried to erase her from his memory. In Benjamin Button, when he left Daisy, I was like, "OK, what's the next adventure?" Because they never established why we should care about them as a couple.
-
...and you know it!!! Fuck Benjamin and his Buttons.
-
Benjamin Button wasn't. Not by a long shot. Sorry. A major misfire from an otherwise excellent marksman.
-
As soon as I read it, I wanted to scroll down and see how many TDK-ians would cry blasphemy. And look! The very first freakin' talkbacker! Sheesh. Now to read this sucker...
-
Really, how less challenging could this film be? Could it be any more bland?
-
This movie is for people who need a "deep meaningful film" to be spoon fed to them. This film was so heavy handed, predictable and, worst of all, bland. Forrest Gump was a good film because it was actually quite original and funny. It wasn't worth the Oscar but B Button is like watching Forrest Gump without feeling surprised at all. Every plot twist was as obvious as day. The whole film was essentially Benjamin standing in doorways as people went "oh my, Benjamin! Look at you". We were suppose to be as shocked too but it is so lacking in any drama. His "youthing" is never interesting. It's as thought the writer just sat back and didn't think to add anything else. This is the first Fincher film since Alien 3 that I didn't like.
-
Eternal Sunshine was 100 times the film this was. In Eternal Sunshine there were never any cliched characters like Forrest's, sorry Benjamin's mother. Seriously, how many films have a character like this? David Fincher should know better. It doesn't even feel like one of his films. Nothing original at all.
-
And the Aint it cool talkbackers have finally turned on David Fincher HAHAHA. You guys live to hate :)
-
you said "Every great director has disappointing films, and this is Finchers." It's funny, because this will prob be the one that gets him an oscar. LOVED THIS MOVIE. it's funny after seeing alien 3 as a kid, i never thought I'd be defending that films director ever. strange.
-
Because films that win usually don't deserve it. If it didn't win, it might lure people into thinking it is actually good.
-
I thought the film was fantastic, really. I haven't been able to shake it since I left the theater. I think the analysis is off because we expect Benjamin to make decisions a certain way and he doesn't, because he's not like us. (Spoiler next) I don't think he left daisy for selfish reasons. I think he was completely selfless, and it killed me. He knew, without a doubt, that daisy would never be able to handle him getting younger, hell it was already starting to kill her on the inside. She could barely stand to live life knowing she couldnt physically dance anymore. She kept making references to Benjamin and how unfair it was. Daisy was totally self absorbed and selfish. It was only when Benjamin was done exploring the world (the first time) and she was beaten physically, did she run to him and beg for his affections. She wanted to be the center of anyone's attention again, and he was ready and willing, as he always was. He sacrificed his 2 great loves in life, just so Daisy didn't go nuts with seeing Benjamin do all the things she longed to do. and about Fincher being heavy handed, damn people, he's ALWAYS been heavy handed... We knew Ripley was dying 45 minutes before the body scan, knew that Kevin Spacey was John Doe because the voices matched from the staircase to the phone, knew there was no way Michael Douglas would die or lose his money. Hell, he beat us over the head with Tyler Durden and Narrator being the same person. We knew Forrest Wittaker would come through in the end and be a good guy, and hell the whole world already knew about the Zodiac.. So tell me please, when has David Fincher EVER been a subtle filmmaker????
-
mine goes to Let the Right One In. i can't remember the last time a film floored me like that one just did. i went in with no prior knowledge/expectations, and i'll be damned if it didn't grab hold of me til' the very end. *ahem* sorry... continue discussing ol' ben and his magnificent buttons.
-
To be fair, no one is really hating on Fincher. If anything, they are seem amazed that he managed to make even a watchable film out of such a shitty script. This is by far his weakest film. It makes Alien 3 look pretty good in comparrison. The first half isn't even that bad, just pointless and a little slow. But the second half is just an endless dirge or romantic cliches and nothingness. Just utter pointlessness and boredom. I can't even imagine recommending it as something to catch up with on video.
-
His movies have been fairly predictable. Although I never really picked the Fight Club twist. That floored me. I never saw Dr Clemens getting killed so early in Alien 3. Nor could I predict the twist ending of Seven. But you are right in that subtley isn't his strong suit. Nevertheless, Benjamin Button is his first movie that has followed a fairly cookie cutter formula. Yes, the concept of a man growing young is unique but the movie surrounding it, the relationships, are all so cliched. The characters are caricatures except for Benjamin who is so bland he almost doesn't exist. The only emotion I felt was from the constant reminder of death which is bound to make anyone misty-eyed and sad. But it's a cheap way to get emotion from your audience.
-
That's what I feel like. I just saw BB and yeah, I don't get the love. Between this and the infamous Nolan comic book movie that I won't bother naming, I have a serious hate-on for the high praise coming out of AICN. Not that this site is the only culprit. There are plenty of others being taken in by these hype machine movies. Actually, I would gladly take TDK over BB any day of the week. I was never bored by TDK. I rarely check my watch in the middle of a darkened theater, but boy did I ever check it during this movie. Emotionally manipulative yet empty of genuine emotion, full of motivation from the filmmaker as opposed to motivation by natural progression of plot and/or character, insistent on introspection but lacking an empathetic protagonist... the complaints go on and on. What it DOES definitely share with TDK, though, is an ill-deserved reputation for depth. No. Benjamin Button, just as Dark Knight before it, is a shallow event movie masquerading as something more.
-
I thought this movie seemed moore like Big Fish than Forest Gump, personally. Enjoyed it a great deal & wiped tears away two or three times. Old biddies were sobbing.
-
I don't care WHAT trajectory you use to approach this... it reeks of straight-up Oscar bait (Opie must be pissed about being upstaged). You just know how it's gonna roll out for nominations:Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay. Pitt for Best Actor (after being criminally ignored for "The Assasination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford"). Blanchett for Best Actress. Swinton for Best Supporting Actress, and fuckall who knows what else.Remember six years ago, when Fincher decided to appease the money boys with "Panic Room", just to show he could make a "normal" movie? Then he doubled back with "Zodiac" (and if ANY director can lay claim to owning the serial killer genre, it's him). Now we get The Curious Case Of Fincher Using Benjamin To Push Academy Buttons. He wants that Oscar. He wants a bunch of Oscars. They will forever shush all those skittish money boys.That said, I doubt F.Scott is rolling over in his grave, but he probably has a big smirk on his face (the man had a finely tuned sense of irony). What the movie does to the short story is beyond blasphemy. But hey, if it results in an armload of little gold statues... who gives a damn?
-
I hear ya on the Alien 3 perspective. Fincher has come a long way. But Alien 3 wasn't his call for a majority of it, I think. If he would have had his way, it probably would have been different. Alien 3 wasn't great,but it seemed like Fincher only had so much say. I'd say it was 70/30 Studio/Fincher, and that might be giving Fincher too much. Benjamin Button wasn't bad. It seemed like this was his first attempt at getting a larger audience(families, "common folk", whoever the fuck that is) into one of his movies. His other films are pretty dark, intense movies that found a niche crowd, but never got the audience it deserved, or could. If he won best director for this, it definitly wouldn't be bad, but I think he did a better job on Zodiak...but that's just my opinion.
-
proves FUCK NOTHING
-
Dec 27, 2008 6:17:19 AM CST
A Brilliant Film--And Those Viper Cameras Were Great!!!
by media messiah
Benjamin Buttons wins my highest kudos!!! What a beautiful film, and what a beautiful looking film. The DP, and those amazing Viper Digital Cameras, delivered visuals on par with Citizen Kane, Lawrence Of Arabia, and Gone With The Wind. And the photo realistic effects, worthy of an Oscar for best special effects. In terms of Oscar worthiness, the film should be nominated, and win, for Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor/Actress, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Costume, Best Production Design, Best Special Effects, and Best Make-up. Benjamin Buttons deserves them all, and then some!!! The film should even motivate, and cause argument, for an Oscar Award for Best Ensemble Performance For A Film Cast. In respect to the film's director, this is David Fincher's master work, if Fight Club wasn't great enough, Benjamin Buttons has exceeded all expectations for this auteur? Yes, Fincher has now proven himself to be the greatest working director on Hollywood's A-list, hands down.This film is about accepting people for being different...the old, the young, the ill, those who are racially different, or even seeing prostitutes from another perspective, one that is not judgemental and hateful...etc. It's about forgetting about what makes us different, because that is an incredible waste of time in our lives, which are so damn short, and full of loss. The movie, Benjamin Buttons is telling us to live our lives well, as best we can, and along the way, try to touch others and make their lives a little better if we can, if only with a hug, or a kind word...as it can make all the difference in the world for a lost, or wounded soul, trying to find a place in this world amid so much unexplainable tragedy.Lastly, the film's theme of loss is brought forth to remind us...how much we love those who have left us in our lives...either through a move, errant communications, a broken relationship, or death--you only know how much you truly love someone, when they are gone.
-
I was beginning to think I was seeing a different movie than everyone else..... Benjamin Button was kind of painful to watch. It felt like an exercise in film making... "Today, class, your goal is to make an epic scale, manipulative tearjerker". While it had some good moments (loved the scenes with Tilda Swinton and thought Taraji P. Henson was great as Queenie) and some impressive special effects, my overall feeling of it came up rather empty. Sheesh, there was even a moment in there when they were on the boat that I was expecting Benjamin and Daisy to 'pretend fly' at the prow and say "I'm the king of the world".
I am still a Fincher fan; I think he is better than this. I have not given up, but this film did not do it for me. Heck, it wasn't even bad enough for me to full-on hate it, it just felt "off" and kind of boring.
-
To compare BB and this is not even worth my time.
-
Seriously? Brilliant?
-
Posted on Fri, Dec. 26, 2008
Phila. man shot because family talked during movie
By Barbara Boyer
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
A South Philadelphia man enraged because a father and son were talking during a Christmas showing of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button took care of the situation when he pulled a .380-caliber gun and shot the father, police said.
James Joseph Cialella Jr., 29, of the 1900 block of Hollywood Street is charged with attempted murder, aggravated assault, and weapons violations.
"It's truly frightening when you see something like this evolve into such violence," said police spokesman Lt. Frank Vanore.
Police were called to the Riverview Theatre in the 1400 block of Columbus Boulevard about 9:30 p.m. where the gunshot victim, a Philadelphia man who was not identified, told police a man sitting near him told his family to be quiet and threw popcorn at his son.
After exchanging words, Vanore said Cialella allegedly got out of his seat to confront the family when the father got up to protect them. That's when the victim was shot once in the left arm, sending others in the theatre running to safety.
Cialella then sat down to watch the movie. Police arrived a short time later and arrested Cialella and confiscated his weapon, Vanore said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
I knew all the hater reviews had to be wrong. The movie is quite good- very emotional without being overly sappy. Clint is excellent! There's some chilling stuff in it, but the best stuff is about Clint being a mentor to this teenage kid. Definitely check it out.
-
Pitt's character looks boringly passive. What does he say or do other than grow young???
-
you only saw this film, hancock, baby momma, and madagascar 2 then i assume?
-
everything else was sold out christmas night. it was good. definitely had a the whole Forest Gump feel going for it. but while this movie was a great form of entertainment. but it was something i can go my whole life without watching again. someone compared it to Big Fish, which is somewhat the opposite of this. in Big Fish there's a normal guy in a big fantastic world. this is about a fantastic man in a pretty normal world. i adore Big Fish. Benjamin Button... not so much.
-
But what would have made this movie's backwards-aging gimmick better is if he MENTALLY aged backwards as well--if he had the mentality of an old man early in his life, and a teenager and then child late in his life. Then it would have made a lot more sense why he left: the thought of marriage and fatherhood, which had been appealing to his "older" self, is all of a sudden too boring for the "younger" version that just wants to sow his wild oats. That would have put some real tragedy and feeling into his decision to leave; as it is, it just doesn't make sense. "I have to leave because it's not fair to you if I stay." Really? You get to tool around the world exploring exotic countries while she is forced to be a single mom with a baby? How noble. But even if you buy that him leaving is somehow good and noble, when he comes back and sees her, sees her with her new, kind, stable husband, and then makes her cheat on him, it ruins that message too.
If he had actually been aging backwards mentally, all of that would have made more sense--he's a teenage dick, and acts on a whim. It also would have made this movie about something other than a person with a physical deformity. And if that's all it's about, what a message: if a handicapped father has children, he should just leave them, because he might be a burden on his family later in life. Real heartwarming message. Merry Christmas. -
.....or anyone gutless money driven, soul-less clone of a good film ?
-
Lets see... works on a fishing boat? Check. Pals around with a rough around the edges captain? Check. Goes to war? Check. Has an off and on relationship with a broad he knew since he was a kid? Check. Comes back home to an aging mother after traveling the world and seeing the best and worst it has to offer? Check. Has a kid with said childhood sweetheart, but for one reason or another is only raised by one of her parents? C-C-C-Check.
You can call the coincidences "Rothian" if you like, I call them recycled bullshit.
At least he used a hummingbird instead of a feather this time, kudo's to that.
-
I'm kind of shocked, but it's AICN, so...not really.
I personally felt that it was one of the most artful mainstream films of the last 5 years. -
I didn't *hate* this movie. There is a lot positive about it: the cinematography, special effects, and general production value were among the best I've seen, and the acting, etc. was pretty good as well. But I was really disappointed that a movie that was so well-made in so many ways could seem so empty at its core. It really seemed to me like the people making it spent more time figuring out how they could realize and produce various elements than they did thinking through the plot and the characters. The central plot point--that the character ages backwards--seemed poorly thought out to me. The pacing was weird as well (why spend so much time on the details of him growing up as an old man, but dash through practically everything else as a montage), and I didn't feel like I knew either of the main characters well enough to care about what happened to them. I thought there was a great movie there to be had among this film's parts, but the filmmakers didn't arrive at it. My overall impression is that they went into it with the goal of "let's win ourselves some Oscars" rather than "let's tell a good story."
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWBeNUei0SI
-
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
-
Dec 27, 2008 7:09:09 PM CST
Probably the poorest researched prestige script of the year...
by chaplinatemyshoe
There are a lot of problems I had with the movie, but the biggest hurdle for me was the light weight dialogue that hearing spoken was the equivalent of watching grass grow. The initial kitchen exchange between Button and the Swinton character is a great example. They talk for 3 minutes in which they say very little that is interesting until finally we break away in narration with Button assuring us all that their dialogue was in fact riveting when in fact it's just foreplay to sleeping together which it's pretty clear they want to do right from the get go. But did we really have to endure a montage of disinteresting conversation and behavior to get to that point? To me, that's the movie in a nutshell. A lot of interesting premises with no meaningful or interesting dialogue to fill in the blanks.
-
Dec 27, 2008 7:10:39 PM CST
And honestly, what was with the magical black folks?
by chaplinatemyshoe
My dad, who saw it with me, said he half expected a blue bird to come out and start chirping. The movie, which purported to take place in real history, seemed to have no actual concept of how black people were treated in New Orleans...I don't know...EVER.
-
I'm a huge Fincher fan, but to call this piece of dreck the best film of 2008 is ridiculous and delusional. A sloooooooooow slog through almost three hours of mind-numbing dreck. No drama, except for the wartime sea battle between tug an sub they threw in there for the bored geeks. I loved the digital effects in the first 20 minutes, but after Brad Pitt turned into Brad Pitt... ugh. No wonder this stinker has been on the back burner for fifteen years.
-
What Fincher could have done with Batman or Superman...it just makes one wonder??? There is life here in Benjamin Buttons. The film is a metaphor for lives greatest lessons...encapsulated to tell us to just try to give all the love in our hearts, despite the many setbacks one may have, try to keep going...and try to help others to keep going while you can, because soon, you will be gone. Try to make the reason for your birth and your life mean something to someone, beyond just making money, greed, selfishness, sex, and attempting to look cool, or be in the in-crowd. You, me, all of us are Benjamin Buttons...and every character in this movie are Benjamin--we are one--and that is the point, there are no villains in this film...just good friendly and loving advice offered by example...asking you/us, to just be decent people, or the most honorable people that we can be--the best representatives of God or the Creative Force...that we can muster. Dark Knight, which many of you have praised, says nothing about the human condition, it says nothing about life, it says nothing about love, it says nothing about anything that really counts, it says nothing.Watch for the Oscar nominations and the Award show itself, Benjamin Buttons should take all the major awards. If there is an Oscar for Best DP, then the director of photography should win...and if there isn't such an award category, they should make one.
-
Are you the author of The Secret by any chance?
-
What Fincher could have done with Batman or Superman...it just makes one wonder??? There is life here in Benjamin Buttons. The film is a metaphor for life's greatest lessons...encapsulated to tell us to just try to give all the love in our hearts, despite the many setbacks one may have, try to keep going...and try to help others to keep going while you can, because soon, you will be gone. Try to make the reason for your birth and your life mean something to someone, beyond just making money, greed, selfishness, sex, and attempting to look cool, or be in the in-crowd. You, me, all of us are Benjamin Buttons...and every character in this movie is Benjamin--we are one--and that is the point, there are no villains in this film...just good friendly and loving advice offered by example...asking you/us, to just be decent people, or the most honorable people that we can be--the best representatives of God or the Creative Force...that we can muster. Dark Knight, which many of you have praised, says nothing about the human condition, it says nothing about life, it says nothing about love, it says nothing about anything that really counts, it says nothing.
Watch for the Oscar nominations and the Award show itself, Benjamin Buttons should take all the major awards. If there is an Oscar for Best DP, then the director of photography should win...and if there isn't such an award category, they should make one. -
Yes!!! Just kidding!!!!!
-
at my local bookstore, so I picked it up. Great book.
-
I don't know how yet exactly to feel about this movie. I loved the first hour, thought the second really dragged, and then the climax and ending produced some of the most emotional images I've ever seen on film, and the ending still haunts me. I guess you can count me in as one of those reduced to "goo" at one point.
BUT...the film is far from perfect, and here's one of my major issues with it that I haven't seen discussed.
At one point in Pitt's narration, he's recounting the day when Daisy was hit by the taxi, and, strangely, he now knows EVERY detail about what EVERYONE involved was doing or what they were going through leading to the strange coincidences that led to the accident (the worker had just broken up with her boyfriend, the guy who didn't set his alarm, etc., etc.). One minute, we're getting a diary narration of Button's life, as any diary would be, and the next he suddenly becomes the omniscient narrator who knows basically everything. That really was the beginning of the downfall of the second half for me. And then that darn ending (I'm particularly referring to Benjamin's final scenes) grabbed me extra hard and pulled me back. -
and cannot see the truth about TDK, like the underground witch in SILVER CHAIR refuses to believe there's a sun and sky and world above. She just won't have it. You said: "Dark Knight, which many of you have praised, says nothing about the human condition, it says nothing about life, it says nothing about love, it says nothing about anything that really counts, it says nothing". Um, no. It said A TON but you didn't get it, period. My friend who's trained in philosophy, religion, and has an education background in crime psychology, currently in the military, says the movie really spoke to him about the Joker's motive, Batman's struggle with capital punishment, (is the movie an argument FOR or AGAINST capital punishment, etc.), the nature of good and evil, the amount of "greyness" in the movie, situational ethics, etc. He said it was brilliant. He wrote me a very long email about all the subtext in the movie that is ACTUALLY there, that he didn't make up. I'm not going to paste the email here, but let it be on record that you're wrong, once again. The movie deals with criminal psychology in a similiar way that Lord of the Flies deals with the human condition. I bet the first time you read that book you said "I don't see the brilliance. It's just a bunch of stupid kids on an island and they go nuts, so what? It doesn't SAY anything about life, love, loss, etc!" No, I'm not saying TDK is a classic as good as Lord of the Flies. I am comparing the thoughtfulness behind the plots in both, that speak to greater things. Listen, if all you do is say "it didn't work FOR ME" or "the movie sucks FOR ME" or "the movie said nothing TO ME" then guys like me would back off. You make these statements as if they are fact and all us fans just won't accept the facts. Wrong. In my other posts I've given example after example of how this movie connected with the masses, including people who could give a rip to Ledger, don't read the newspapers or watch TV, and are immune to the hype. You're going to respond, I know, with some sort of counter that really won't address what I've said, but will just say I'm a sheep and blind, blah blah. Not even interested dude. Would you get off this already? Its really fucking boring and makes you look pathetic. Move on. So you didn't like it. So you feel all the love for it is unjustified. FINE. Can you live in a world like that? Seems like you can't. I'm going to take my own advice and just TOLERATE you, if not IGNORE you. Peace, brother. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
-
I bet you would be the same cunts to rag on shawshank when it came out. "It's too long, Tim Robbins isnt as good as Van Damme" etc. Fuck you if you don't like an epic made by David Fincher, your a douche.
-
Maybe that sequence was clumsily written, but I just chalked it up to Brad Pitt surmising several things that COULD have happened so that his character could explain how he felt about life and coincidence. I agree though - I was confused at first and the audience shouldn't have to make that abstract conclusion in their head. It should be in the writing. Especially when the movie wasn't trying to be abstract.
-
I actually thought that scene was one of the only interesting and original scenes in the entire film. But now it just seems ridiculous. I can't believe how much praise this movie has gotten. Reminds me of that other awful film Crash that was praised for being so poignant.
-
You're definitely wrong. The difference between TDK and BB is that TDK didn't need hummingbirds and overbearing "meaningful" monologue. If TDK was a baseball bat, BB would be a sledge hammer.
-
That's a much better movie than Benjamin Button. Then again, so are a lot of things.
-
Dec 27, 2008 10:24:06 PM CST
BilboFett: You Would Love A Fincher Batman Or Superman
by media messiah
Yes, I am biased against Nolan because he failed to show or make us feel, or understand why Bruce Wayne loves Rachael. Even in her death, he sort of just shrugs it off??? And that is the problem here. Dark Knight should have featured a love triangle between Bruce Wayne, Rachael and her man. Harvey Dent's conversion to becoming Two Face could have waited several sequels from now. We didn't need two villains in this film, one was enough--sorry, I digress. Back to my point. This film should have been about Rachael and Bruce, and her making the choice to be with another man because she assumed that it would be best for the city...seing herself as a distraction for Bruce and his greater work as a vigilante. We should have seen Bruce ache over it, and we should have seen him romance her, make love with her, to inform us that there was really a bond beyond just a lost childhood friendship. Instead they are shown more like not very close 3rd or 4th cousins.Nolan and his brother forgot to nclude heart in their film, and like so many in the past, they made the mistake of focusing on the villain, to the exclusion of the hero??? No...a villain should be more hidden and mysterious like Darth Vader...who probably only had less than 20 minutes onscreen in Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back, and that made him and his motives more frightening...because there was always that question mark--"Who is this guy really and what might he be capable of???" Nolan's DK worked best when they hinted at The Joker at the beginning of the film, without showing him in full glory...and letting us feel that this was a smart trickster, but after the bank robbery, Joker was everywhere...when we should have only seen his hench men talking about him, still unsure as to who he is, and even whether if he is real or not, or someone's elaborate manipulation?Also, I wanted to see Bruce Wayne with a life...and out of the suit; Batman or executive suit for that matter. Let's see him let his hair down and be normal for a bit and go see a Yankees' game, or attend a bachelor party at a strip club. And then there is China, they went to China and didn't use any of its great locations as an important character in the film??? Hell, wouldn't it have been cool to see the Batmobile, air dropped from an airplane onto the Great Wall of China...where Batman has to go after some baddies??? Or wouldn't it have been great to see some fight action in Hong Kong, or at the Shoalin Temple, or some of the other famed areas of China??? This was all just a waste??? Before we can fully empathized with a hero, we must first come to enjoy his life, and to see ourselves in his shoes. We should have laughed with Bruce and Rachael...and shared their romance, fun and joy...as well as felt their emotional difficulties, so when Rachael does choose another man, and when she is killed, we feel it...and Bruce Wayne feels it--and when he does, he should be dedicated to killing The Joker. A stunning twist could have been found in seeing Batman defeated, and then Alfred steppng in to kill The Joker, unknown to a blacked out Wayne. Later, Alfred simply tells him that The Joker killed himself. Alfred's move in killing Joker, would be in order to prevent Wayne from becoming a killer...and risk destroying everything that he stands for, an oath that Alfred does not live by, nor does he have to. He is Bruce's makeshift father, and like any father, he will kill to protect his child.These are the things the movies was missing. And for once, I would like to see someone play The Joker straight...with a deep menacing voice--a character, who occasionally pops a genuinely funny line, a real joke, or two, out of the blue--but The Joker has never had one funny line in any of the movies, just a bunch of silly quips??? Heath showed that deep voice a few times in DK, and if he had played the character that way throughout, that would have been something to see. In terms of humor, the Nolan Batman films are missing moments of humor--I'm talking about the same kind of humor you'd see in Terminator, the original Star Wars, Empire, or in Die Hard.
Nolan failed to cover his bases here and only received a pass largely because of Heath's sad death. In place of real substance, we got a lot of weak scenes of gangsters sitting around talking about Batman and The Joker, and Bruce Wayne sitting around talking about cryptic schemes with Alfred as a camera crles them endlessly...and while wearing 8,000 dollar executive suits, no less...all at the expense of the emotional scenes that I talked about, which needed to be in this film, but were nowhere to be found???As for you frend, I respect him...and you, but the ethics of this film should have been about whether it is humane to euthanize a sad soul like The Joker or not, to save the sanity and lives of thousands of people would would be victims of The Joker. The proper call would be to concluded that yes, euthanasia might be humane both for the insane criminal...and his victims. But what is important to the human condition is retaining a sane society...and if a proven killng has to go to make way for that, and to maintain that, such is the proper call. Batman is more the criminal than The Joker, who is nnocent by way of insanity, because he, Batman, could have saved Rachael and many others, and spared their families a life sentence of pain...by simply killing The Joker the first chance he got...and that should have been the main them of the film...that sometimes, you have to do the things that you don't want to do, even if you are moral, as the most moral thing may be to kill...and there is a big difference between murdering, and killing. I think of that coward who killed that family on Christmas Eve in L.A., while wearing the Santa outfit. If I could have killed that man before he hurt those people, I would gladly do it...Batman would not, so who would be the bigger villain, hhhhhmmm??? The Joker was just some crazy running an elaborate psyche test, no matter the results, he wins, save for Batman choosing to to kill him, and doing just that, killing him. The Joker was begging for a suicide by cop; "Kill me or I'll keep killing until you do"...and he should have been given just that, aquick trp to the grave...not simply because he was threat to society...but he was such a threat he was in pain and begging for help, begging to be stopped, begging to have his uncontrolled impulse to kill...silenced by death...but no one answered his pleas??? We can put dogs to sleep and claim that is humane, but not a mass murderer/serial killer who wants to be stopped??? Send this to you friend and ask him to analyze my points...and I'm sure he will find many of my points valid, the same reason why he is in the military to do what some are too afraid or unwilling to do, to kill to protect the innocent. That man is a great hero, and even though I am largely against war, I know there is a time to kill, even in war, and I would do it if called to save a worthy life, or lives. Merry Christmas and Happy New Years...Bilbo, I don't dislike you, I just disagree, but I wish you the best of everything, honestly. -
There was no story in DK, just explosons. As for The Curious Case Of Benjamin Buttons, I have actually had hummingbirds fly at me recently, within the last year, plus. It means something, a great mark of something wonderful...and when it happens to you, you will know that you are over mindless explosions dressed as entertainment--and that is when you will see DK in a different light.
-
It made absolutely no sense to have BB "shrink" to baby size at the end of the movie. If you're going to start out with an "old man" baby, you damn well better finish up with a "baby" old man. Since it appeared that his mental and emotional capacity (along with his overall size) progressed normally, at the end he should have resembled a 185-pound baby to bookend his start as a 7-pound 8-ounce old fart.
-
That is just one of the many reasons I think the screenplay to the movie is pretty crappy. It constantly shifts points of view, it tell instead of shows, and then sets up a logic it quickly dismisses cause it wouldn't be a "cute" ending if he didn't turn back into a baby.
-
Can you tell me why Jonah Nolan should've written a different story for TDK, and make it a love triangle story? Because that's what you wanted? Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I'm still reading your post and will respond if I think I have anything to add to it.
-
I don't think you have the right to say that TDK should've had a sex scene between Bruce and Rachel, or have the Joker have many funny lines, or have Batman murder him in the beginning of the movie. You also don't have the right to see many scenes of Bruce Wayne letting his hair down. They didn't shoot that movie because they wanted to shoot something else. Did you want TDK to turn into an emo-love story thing like the Notebook2 aka Superman Returns? I blame that brooding and romantic triangle for part of the reason Superman Returns bombed. Isn't it interesting that both had James Marsters as the other man, and he was a likeable, decent, quality guy in both movies? Anyways.. rabbit trail. You have a right to your opinions, but nothing justifies you saying you're upset because Nolan didn't shoot the movie you wanted. You can of course be unhappy with it, as you are. But comeon... a love triangle? Sex scenes with Rachel? Bruce Wayne letting his hair down and having fun all over town? The Joker being really funny? Who else besides you would want this man, comeon. :)
I will say that this last post of yours was the best and most-defended, but I still disagree.
I am clocking out now, saying I respect you and your opinions, I just disagree. Dude, I seriously hope I come to these talkbacks in a few weeks from now and you're not in some talkback for Watchmen or LOST or Heroes or something blasting TDK again. Can you please stop? It seems like a religious mission for you.
So I'm clocking out, thanking you for the time you took to write, and wishing you and yours a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. -
Yes, I would love a Fincher Batman. Probably not a Fincher Superman. That should go to Michael Mann I think.
-
It could have used some Note Book moments, yes. I think it would have been a more well rounded movie. I am writing something that is of my own creation, that I think will give me the sense of the kind of film, in this genre, that I might want to see--so who knows, maybe one day it'll be on the big screen? Here's wishing you a Merry Christmas, and a Very Happy New Year Bilbo, to you...and all of your loved ones!!!
-
Sitting on my desk shelf and just wanted to let all you know that the book is safe and sound.
-
Perhaps that version of TDK would have impressed you but not me. I'm glad Nolan made the kind of film I wanted to see. So there. :p
-
Okay...I just felt TDK could have used that something extra ala The Note Book or Benjamin Buttons without missing the very things in the movie that you and others gravitated toward.
-
...seems uninteresting
-
..really fucking BORING.
I'm going to look for Eva Mendes nudes.
Lick my taint Capone! -
That drivel? Sorry but I can understand why you like BB if they are the sort of films you enjoy. I couldn't enjoy any Batman film that used a cliched, melodramatic romance as a plot device. And the ideas you had to improve TDK are, sorry to say, laughable. Alfred killing the Joker? A detour in the middle of the film to visit a cliched site like the Great Wall of China? A fight at a Shaolin temple? A sex scene with Bruce and Rachel. Why? Perhaps your version would be one of the highest grossing films of all time and almost universally praised by critics and fans. Wait, it already is...
Sorry buddy but I'm just glad it is Nolan and co. coming up with the ideas and not Media Messiah. -
This is the best, and most honest list that he's made in years. And I thank you Harry, for giving suck a high ranking to "The Dark Knight." It is a pure masterpiece, and easily the best film of 2008. I hope it will get nominated for best picture by the academy. That is all I ask for, I don't even expect it to win best picture from those old elitists. But if it does happen, then I will cry tears of joy all night. :)
-
You would also disagree about James Cameron's Titanic, which is currently the top film of all time, not The Dark Knight. Hey, The Jonas Brothers are one of the top bands in the country, but it doesn't mean they are good...just like Dark Knight, who's initials are the same as Danity Kane, another bad band? And when you look around, romance is romance...it is real, is it clinched, perhaps, but it is a part of our reality, and the only way to really show the audience that Bruce Wayne and Rachael love each other, is to explore it, not just talk about something that we have never seen expressed. If you don't like the Great Wall, then you pick a site in China, but if you are going to go to China to shoot a film, then I suggest you really use China, or any other non U.S. location, to the best of your ability...or stay home. They could have filmed that scene in Chicago, and set it in Chicago, and we wouldn't have missed a beat. They could have also cut the scene from the film, and we wouldn't have missed a beat, either. It was completely unnecessary and was simply a 10 minute detour to nowhere; 10 minutes...by the way, which could have been used on showing us that Wayne and Rachael had a true and loving bond...so when she is kidnapped and dies, we could really feel it...and sympathize. The Dark Knight, emotionally speaking, is a 2 Dimensional film, when we needed it to be a well rounded 3 Dimensional film. BTW, Charlie's Angels received universally good film reviews also. History now records that Charlie's Angels is a perfectly horrible film, so much for bought off film critics and their opinions of Charlie's Angels or The Dark Knight???
-
You would also disagree about James Cameron's Titanic, which is currently the top film of all time, not The Dark Knight. Hey, The Jonas Brothers are one of the top bands in the country, but it doesn't mean they are good...just like Dark Knight, who's initials are the same as Danity Kane, another bad band? And when you look around, romance is romance...it is real, is it cliched, perhaps, but it is a part of our reality, and the only way to really show the audience that Bruce Wayne and Rachael love each other, is to explore it, not just talk about something that we have never seen expressed.
If you don't like the Great Wall, then you pick a site in China, but if you are going to go to China to shoot a film, then I suggest you really use China, or any other non U.S. location, to the best of your ability...or stay home. They could have filmed that scene in Chicago, and set it in Chicago, and we wouldn't have missed a beat. They could have also cut the scene from the film, and we wouldn't have missed a beat, either. It was completely unnecessary and was simply a 10 minute detour to nowhere; 10 minutes...by the way, which could have been used on showing us that Wayne and Rachael had a true and loving bond...so when she is kidnapped and dies, we could really feel it...and sympathize. The Dark Knight, emotionally speaking, is a 2 Dimensional film, when we needed it to be a well rounded 3 Dimensional film. BTW, Charlie's Angels received universally good film reviews also. History now records that Charlie's Angels is a perfectly horrible film, so much for bought off film critics and their opinions of Charlie's Angels or The Dark Knight???PS: As for Alfred, unless you are going to use him for something of great importance, why is he even in these films anymore? Michael Caine was completed wasted in The Dark Knight. One of our greatest actors, and they just had him standing around doing much of nothing. His involvement in the movie must have taken them less than a week to shoot??? When you have a powerhouse actor like Caine and you don't know how to use him to the best of his ability, that says something about you...and Chris Nolan has worked with him 3 times, and has wasted him 3 times, in 3 different movies!!! -
Let's get one piece of business out of the way- I hate FORREST GUMP. BUTTON is a better movie than GUMP, but my God does Eric Roth need to learn how to write new gimmicks. I'm really annoyed by the similarities between these two films. It's lazy storytelling (I don't care to recount the glaring similarities here)- and I'm of the mind to say this is an overhyped film. It's diverting, but when you compare it to something like SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, BUTTON is quite inferior. Sorry, that's my GUMP-hating take on BUTTON.
-
"Benjamin Button" is a great, magical, and romantic film. Yes, the concept is pretty asinine, and the films third act kinda drags a bit, but I could not take my eyes off the screen. And the directing, acting, editing, and visuals were absolutely flawless. My rating is an 8.5/10. :)
-
Your taste in cinema is god awful, and you're version of "TDK" is laughably bad, and just proves that you were not prepared for the greatness of "TDK."
Go back to you're mediocre "Notebook" film that only appeals to people of average minds. Or just go check out "Bad boys 2", or "Norbit." Those films will most likely suit you're taste. -
That's your example. Rotten Tomatoes has it listed at 64% compared to the 94% The Dark Knight has. That's not even close. I know Rotten Tomatoes isn't exactly accurate, but come on! The Dark Knight is a crime film, a detective film, not a romance. I can't stand the idea that every film needs a romantic subplot. That's just bullshit. Besides, Rachel, to Bruce, wasn't really about love, but his cling hope to have a normal life that really would never be possible.
-
The trip out to Hong Kong was hardly wasted. It was again to widen the scopt beyong Gotham city and gave us the tremendous shot of Batman base jumping from one of the world's tallest buildings. Your idea for having Batman visit the Great Wall of China, to insert a cliched landmark, is just gratuitous. As for Alfred, he acts as Bruce's moral compass and guide in these films. He was deeply involved in the story and, once again, your idea to get him more involved by killing the Joker would go down as one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Sorry bud. P.S. Romance aint cliched. It's the way it is handled. And in films like The Notebook, it is cliched. See a film like Lost in Translation for a non-cliched romance.
-
Exactly. I don't even think Bruce is "in love" with Rachel. She's his connection to his innocence from childhood before he was changed forever. He clings to her in the hope that he will one day be able to stop. Her death doesn't just represent a love lost but an exclamation that there is "no going back" (as put so well by the Joker). I find their relationship to be a lot deeper and affecting than most "romances" because it is deeper than a strong physical attraction.
-
Film Freak: A 30 point difference between Charlie's Angels and The Dark Knight isn't a lot in respect to Rotten Tomatoes, considering that some critics have called Dark Knight a masterpiece and the best film of the year--and yes, both it, and Charlie's Angels, are on the North side of 60% approval on Rotten Tomatoes??? Come on, Angels should have come in with the same numbers as Speed Racer, or lower...which again tells you that the critics are all bought off. If they were legit, the spread would be at least a 75 to 85 percent approval rating difference between Charlie's Angels and The Dark Night...but there isn't??? That should inform you that you can't believe either of the two approval percentages...since Charlie's Angels is being used as the benchmark, and or Dark Knight, to measure this by--again, with only a 30 point difference from a movie (The Dark Knight) that is being called one of the greatest films ever made, to Charlie's Angels??? Please??? Send In The Clowns, Wait...They're Already Here???Evangelion, stop ly'n, you know you love The Note Book, and you know that you cried a couple of times while watching the movie, and...well, so did I.The Scream: Lost in Translation was dry...but hell, I'd even go for that. Dark Knight was missing those emotional beats, and we both know it. And going to China now simply looks like a cheap trick by Nolan and crew to get a free vacation at the studio's expense. You can cut that scene in total from the movie, and no one would know the dfference. As far as Alfred, I don't care if he is killing The Joker, falling in love, or whatever, just as long as he is doing something constructve other than sitting around for another movie telling Bruce Wayne to get over his personal pain. Enough already, either give the character something to do, of substance, or kill him off.
-
Is romance, force fed to you?
and really, if you want romance in a comic book movie, stick with Spider-Man. keep it out of Batman, where it's a detective story, not a love story -
ZODIAC is one of the best films in recent memory. Sadly, it didn't earn much. I'll give Fincher a pass on this drek. But please return with a film that is worth a shit.
-
seriously, it's almost as good as All the President's Men when it comes to investigative journalism. Too bad it got completely ignored last year and this Benjamin Button won't. I mean, I really don't care if someone likes it. I like a lot of what could be called bad movies. But, don't tell me its one of the best of the year. The screenplay is terrible, and so is the editing (the editing is only cause it could have corrected some of the flaws of the screenplay had they tried)
-
Why was Rachael even in the movies at all??? If you are not going to write the relationship, and the character's properly, then it was a complete and utter waste of time, from start to finish. They should have just centered on Bruce Wayne, and that's it, no girlfriend, no lost love...but instead, they went there, I didn't, they did...and if they were going to go there, they had a responsibility to do it right, and not just get rid of the character out of convenience because Katie Holmes decided not to play ball anymore.
-
first off, Maggie Gyllenhaal is a step up!
second, like I said earlier, Rachel represents to Bruce, a chance to have a normal life. She recognizes that he's gone down a path that he can't turn his back on, even if he doesn't. This is why she agrees to marry Harvey. In her death, Bruce realizes there is no turning back. He's Batman, till the end. At the end of the movie, when Harvey asks why he was the only one that's lost something, Batman says he wasn't. Subtext, "I lost my chance at a normal life" pretty easy to understand. -
Maggie was a step up, but they killed her off??? I was against the Katie Holmes casting in the first place, but they hired her...not me, and then when she pulled out on them, they hired Maggie and gave her nothing to do but die??? Batman could have killed The Joker, but he didn't??? Harvey also could have killed The Joker, but we got that coin flipping garbage from the comic? Gordon could have killed The Joker, but he didn't??? If Batman had killed The Joker there would have still been that point where he could turn back, rather, he decided to risk Rachael's life by allowing The Joker and those like him to continue to exist, and by that choice, he ultimately murdered Rachael. But on to my last post. Again, by showing the bond between Rachael and Bruce and the power of it, would show the power of Batman/Bruce Wayne's sacrifice, that...to live a lonely life for the betterment of the masses rather than the few, including himself and Rachael...but by failing to show that, they, the filmmakers, have left people, like you, to make up your own themes and understanding of the film, no matter how inaccurate they are. Nolan simply blew the opportunity to construct a proper screenplay, that's all, and picked violence over substance.
-
"but by failing to show that, they, the filmmakers, have left people, like you, to make up your own themes and understanding of the film, no matter how inaccurate they are."
Riiiiiight, how naive of me. There's only one POSSIBLE way to look a film. I'm done with this. -
does not do it for me as an actor. His best turns have been in "Snatch" and "Burn after Reading"...good character work, but not amazing. I liked the film and at the beginning it seemed as though it might be great, but for me it fizzled. Self-aware and a little pretentious. Brad is sort of quiet through out...not enough development of the character. They didn't really explore how he became wiser as he got younger. Sort of the same character and then demntia sets in. Maybe I am being too harsh, but that was my reaction.
-
Guaranteed. All the pieces are there: Script, story, acting. Not to mention the most thought-provoking film seen in years. Ebert didn't like it because he couldn't buy into the premise. I say that's like not liking a Star Wars film b/c Wookies don't exist. Others didn't like it b/c they only have the attention span of a Spider-man film. Kudos to David for bringing back the 3-hour film, and for tapping a resource of great material that does not include graphic novels, remakes or 80's TV shows. Oscar will notice!
-
2008 does not have too much greatness with film so far with me. I guess Dark Knight takes the cake for me. Last year blows this year out of the water- ala ncfom, twbb. Even juno, assassination of jesse james, gone baby gone, zodiac, michael clayton- all better than what I have seen this year so far.
-
Dec 29, 2008 6:59:50 PM CST
Roger Ebert Loved The Star Wars Prequels So He's Full Of It
by media messiah
Roger Ebert is liar and a fake. He initially hated Forest Gump until the public disagreed with him...then, and only then, did he change his review. The man doesn't even have the guts to stand by his reviews. And you can bet, years from now, he will claim that he loved Benjamin Buttons from day one...and that he hated the Star Wars Prequels..and that Forest Gump was always one of his favorite films. Fake!!!
-
Actually, Man on wire was up to par this year. More a movie than documentary. Perfect, honest, fresh, epic- masterpiece
-
Dark Knight is an overhyped empty borefest...oh, with lots of explosions.
-
Ebert loved the Star Wars prequels means that he actually has guts. And, I do not think he will go back on this either, but rather, be able to understand why so many critics ripped into them. Read his review and defense for episode 1. Its great, and exactly how I feel about it.
You should love the Star Wars prequels too. At least episode 3. I Do not understand the grace for something like Iron Man, while having disdain for episode 3. That film is truly excellent. Admit it. I will always stand by this conviction. For mine is to defend Lucas, specifically Star Wars. I will do so my whole life. -
He gave it two stars and cliticized its cliched, heavy handed romance. So it doesn't surprise me that he didn't like BB. Then again, his review is odd. Nevertheless, what's wrong with changing your opinion? I think it shows courage to turn and around and admit when you are wrong and to actually listen to the views and opinions of other people. There are plenty of films I have changed my mind about over the years. I think being rigid and stubborn, sticking to your opinion even when you are clearly wrong is a lot worse if you ask me.
-
The actors and cinematography helped a gimmick flick not feel like 3 hours.
-
I sure recall Ebert saying how much he loved Clones? It makes me think that he changed another one of his reviews again, after popular opinion contradicted him. What's wrong with Ebert, is that he has been wrong, in a suspect way, too many times, on too many movies over the years. Like how can you get it wrong on Forest Gump of all films? I can remember before Ebert became a huge critic, his reviews were spot on accurate, but once he became a star, about 12 years into it, everything changed, and his reviews started to become, as I said before, suspect.
-
That much I agree. He seems to give a lot of films a free pass these days like the new Indy film. I take this as a guy who has become less of a cynic in his old age and has begun to appreciate films for what they are not what he wants them to be. I personally don't care if he changed his opinion on Gump or Unforgiven. Critics can get it wrong. The fact that he can revisit films and re-assess them is a positive quality if you ask me. And let's not blow this out of proportion here. He's not some politician who has gone back on a promise and disadvantaged people. He's a guy who have maybe reviewed thousands of movies. If he changes his mind on a handful (perhaps less than 1%)then what's the big deal? I don't think it seems suspect at all. No conspiracy. He just realised he got it wrong or missed the point. Happens all the time to everyone everyday in all sorts of situations.
-
Yes...but when a critic, or critics, go crooked, or seemingly so...they cost people money, people like you and me, our friends, families and peers, etc. Hell it cost 20 dollars for two people to buy tickets, and another 20 dollars for snacks...and then there is one's gas, etc. When I get misled by a film critic, to me, it is no different than getting ripped off by one of those Wallstreet investment bankers, home sub prime loans, gas price gouging, etc.--as it adds up to billions of dollars over time...in just a year or two, in collected box office money, DVD sales and rentals, cable sales, Pay-Per-View, net sales, and broadcast TV and syndication after-markets worldwide.Indy was horrible, save for its opening scene, which went bad when they nuked the fridge??? Kate Blanchet was great, the first time I ever really noticed her...but the rest of the movie was horrible. And I have seen several more movies this year, and last year, and they were all bad, films like The Incredible Hulk, Spiderman 3, Eagle Eye and Tropic Thunder, or those, just not to my liking. Except for Benjamin Buttons, Serenity and Cadillac Records, which have substance to them, I have been unimpressed with much of the material coming out in theaters these days. Ebert and others gave passes to movies they should have clubbed (don't know if any of those I mentioned were given good reviews by Ebert as I have given up on him), while failing to support other films that really deserved major...and positive support, and attention.
-
He is always supportive of films that deserve attention, highlighting lesser known films in his reviews so that people are aware of them. I don't think he has gone crooked. As I said, he's just softened up on films. Most of the films you listed there aren't great movies but they are pretty entertaining and Ebert reviews them as such. I've got no issues with Ebert. I don't think he's misleading anyone. Besides, people shouldn't go to the cinema on the advice on one film critic alone and if they do, and hate the film, they can always ignore his review next time. I'm just not a big one for conspiracy theories. He's a film reviewer not a crook.
-
Most of the criticisms of this film seem to point to an audience who is only watching TCCBB on a superficial level. They are watching all the surface action and drama, and making no effort to engage the film themselves. The
believe that film is a "passive" entertainment has persisted too long. It's like saying 2001 is just the same old SF movie we've seen a thousand times before i.e. men in ships exploring space. On the surface, TCCBB seems to be a Forest Gump retread, as many talkbackers have brilliantly pointed out the superficial similarties...like they're fucking Sherlock Holmes. Where as FG was all surface, not much beyond the story proper, BB demands that the audience re-thinks everything they've seen come before, and not just in the film itself, but in all epic "heartwarming" films. Under the surface there is a dark, harsh story going on that it seems most talkbackers are missing. David Fincher has made a career using popular entertainment to deceptively draw in an audience who would normally shy away from certain themes, themes like: our misconceptions of what happiness is, or what it needs to be. Misconceptions of what we all believe to be the BEST parts of life. After Forest Gump, all you think about is Forest Gump. After Ben Buttons, you think about yourself...and I believe that's great film making -
BB may have caused you to think about yourself in a powerful way. I dunno. It was a good movie. Just not great. Certainly not worthy of a best picture win. Its characters at times had this generic feel to me as well as the story. Granted, the story or execution of it is not paint by numbers but just feels like a fishhook to force people to, " oohh, that was so dramatic and big and powerful." Really, I did not find any revelation from this film. Nor did I feel it was a purely authentic expression of a movie. Instead, a movie that thought it was fresh, while being near the expiration date. Again, it was enjoyable but in the sense that it didn't bore but entertained. The movie didn't really offend my sensibilities. Just didn't rouse them either.
-
was how unbelievably BORING this movie was.
-
Sorry, this movie is long, very long, not well acted and poorly directed. Seriously, if this movie s one of the 5 best picture nominees, it was a bad year. Make up was good, that is about it.
-
...then people are giving it credit for. Watch it again, there are some very creepy things going on, most seem to miss. Whey does everyone need their narratives spoon fed to them.
BB is creepiest film, disguised as powerful entertainment of 08'
you folks saying it't badly directed are just not using ye'r heads, and making cheap pot shots. I've yet to hear exactly HOW it's poorly directed. I don't think Fincher can poorly direct anything.
-
There's nothing enjoyable about it.
-
"Reduced to goo" is apt. Nothing I've seen this year yet comes close to The Fall, and Milk edges this, but I'm certain it'll end up in my top 5.
What makes this a brilliant movie is that it is built around a fantastic conceit that continually rings true at the metaphoric level. Benjamin's age mismatches create romantic difficulties that echo those of real life, but much more powerfully, and the natural sense of loss that we feel over the passing of loved ones is likewise amplified.
Audiences by and large are loving this. Right now it's #61 on the IMDB Top 250 (4th among 2008 films after TDK, Wall-E, and Slumdog Millionaire).
Note to talkbackers: asserting that a movie that most everyone else loves is actually "boring" is an ADMISSION OF STUPIDITY. Not realizing this, and hence boasting about it in public, is PROOF. -
You're actually using imdb as a source? Who cares? THe critics are "liking" it, but it's far from amongst the best reviewed film of the year.it's currently 73% fresh. I can call it "Boring" if I want, because it was. BB is Forrest Gump lite. Button couldn't be a more dull character. ERic Roth copies so much from his FG script it's sad. I can't believe the same people who claim Gump is so overrated are eating up this crappy film.
-
Excellent film. A bit long but I have no clue what I'd cut. About the Hummingbird. It's the only bird that can fly backwards. Hurricane's go counter clockwise, much like the clock.
-
it's the best film of the year...after RAMBO
-
and unless I hear that Benjamin Button is like, a martial arts expert or something, I won't be going.
-
Jan 05, 2009 6:14:40 PM CST
hummingbirds, katrina floodwaters, old lady dying telling story
by skredly
this was the silliest most ridiculous movie since Titanic. The bird flying in the rain and at sea so cheesy. I wanted to die after seeing this...capone please check for your balls.
-
first hour or so was really really great but the rest didn't grabbed me at all. pitt's grown up benjamin was so emotionally cold in my eyes and a lot what happened to him just left me cold. Can't even say why, because normally I'm a guy who loves himself some love drama in movies, but I really didn't felt for any of the characters. still, its a goo movie and I might like it better when I rewatch it someday on blu ray, but still... I left the cinema unsatisfied, but my girlfriend loved it so, its all good.
oh and I think pitts nomination for best leading actor is unwarranted. I really think his acting was nice, but nothing above his ordinary performance.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts