Nov. 6, 2009, 4:54 a.m. CST
Up for seeing this
Nov. 6, 2009, 5 a.m. CST
and the Dark Rooms version, and the Nighthawks version and the New Twilight Zone version, and the Outer Limits version, all of which were pretty much the same with the same "twist" ending... is it worth watching this stretched and drawn out 3 hour version of a 4 page story?
Nov. 6, 2009, 5:03 a.m. CST
The rough assemblage was three hours. The theatrical cut is 115 minutes. And, yes, it's worth seeing (in my opinion) because it takes the story in a completely different direction.
Nov. 6, 2009, 5:24 a.m. CST
Masturbation with no limits.
Nov. 6, 2009, 5:34 a.m. CST
and there's no cure for that.<P> Actually, it's really fucking unbelievably awful - worst part being that Reckless Kelly here has given producer interference a good name with Darko... and we all know that's like the one guy who got net points that paid on a movie. <P> It happens, it's rare, and oh my God you don't want it to be an example for others.
Nov. 6, 2009, 6:41 a.m. CST
If I had paid to sit through just another retelling of the same story, I'd have been peeved.
Nov. 6, 2009, 7:16 a.m. CST
That's what's in The Box. This movie is going to blow chunks.
Nov. 6, 2009, 7:18 a.m. CST
Mannn i can't wait to see that movie. Gonna be trippy. Was that what the Noe conversation was about?
Nov. 6, 2009, 7:39 a.m. CST
..and I was shocked at how much I enjoyed it. It certainly helps to take the bad taste of "Southland Tales" out of your mouth. There's some great atmosphere here and Langella gives a killer performance. I'd agree with Beaks and say it's worth checking out.
Nov. 6, 2009, 8:34 a.m. CST
More adult than Darko, but I miss Darko's great soundtrack, warmth and humor.<p> I'm not sure I agree with the ending of The Box though. Kinda felt like they made the wrong decision.
Nov. 6, 2009, 9:25 a.m. CST
Have to do about Blue Velvet?
Nov. 6, 2009, 9:26 a.m. CST
None of the critics like anything this weekend.
Nov. 6, 2009, 10:12 a.m. CST
Another asskissing bore of an interview by Beaksy. Kelly is a "prodigiously gifted filmmaker"? Only a retard like you could say something like that about the asshole who wrote Domino and is responsible for Southland Tales. <p>Either this idiot sells the cheapest cocaine or he gives the best head in Hollywood, there's not many more possible reasons for him to have a career. One can only hope that this shitfest bombs so bad that he isn't allowed near a studio in any capacity any more.<p> And you seriously want us to believe that you discussed Gaspar Noe and Lars von Trier with him before him expressing his desire to direct the next Twilight movie, that whore? And that part of the interview just spontanely self-incinerated so you sadly couldn't post it? Really, Beaksy, i only want your best, so please listen to my advice: Fuck off.
Nov. 6, 2009, 10:37 a.m. CST
by Azlam Orlandu
I'm kidding. That film almost made me disregard the love I have for Richard over Donnie Darko. I'm glad you got your film made, bro. But you used up your one turn pretty quick. Start kicking out some quality or you're donefore.
Nov. 6, 2009, 11:18 a.m. CST
When the ending of the short story happened 40 minutes into this film I knew I was in for a bad one. I would have liked it to have stayed as a morality tale but instead Kelly tried to make it fit into his world and failed. I honestly see what he was trying to do but it just didn't work for me. Maybe in years to come I'll be like those critics who hated 2001: A Space Odyssey and frankly I can live with that. But the score is amazing! Cheers to Arcade Fire!
Nov. 6, 2009, 11:53 a.m. CST
It's like a high budget student angst art school bullshit end of term project every time. <p> who wants to see this stuff? Drew Barrymore?
Nov. 6, 2009, 11:53 a.m. CST
by Midnight Thud
I believe we've just passed the three week marker since it came out, and I was always curious to hear what you thought about the last shot of the film.
Nov. 6, 2009, 12:02 p.m. CST
Saw this shitfest last night. Langella is the only good thing in it. But I sort of expected that. The rest is more of the same Kelly drivel you would expect. Darko was a one-hit-wonder for Kelly, cult-wise. The film is a mess and very shoddily edited. Marsden's talent was a wasted in this. Diaz is still great to look at, but really not up for heavier material no matter what she's doing. Perhaps if they made it into a short film and keep the original story intact it might be better, but I doubt even heavy editing could save this one.
Nov. 6, 2009, 12:15 p.m. CST
The first two thirds were great and quite suspenseful; but the third act is another case of the storytellers revealing just a little bit too much of what's going on. I would like to have known slightly less about Langella's motives, and some of the mystical water 3 paths stuff was unnecessary. If they finished the rest of the movie as tight as the first 80 minutes or so, then this would be quite good.
Nov. 6, 2009, 12:16 p.m. CST
We must be, if seeing kristen stewart screaming like she's never been on her rag before is supposed to be her adjusting to life without her diamond shining boyfriend.
Nov. 6, 2009, 12:20 p.m. CST
Was actually a very interesting choice for the music, but it arguably makes me want to watch the film more, especially if it stands out from the Twilight Zone version, which is definitely creepy.
Nov. 6, 2009, 12:20 p.m. CST
A matrix reference and the gummi di milo reference from the simpsons along with the above quote? (Puts on tin foil hat) this motherf&%%'s looking into my brain!"
Nov. 6, 2009, 2:13 p.m. CST
I've seen the movie and would like to see what Kelly has to say about the ending...
Nov. 6, 2009, 2:31 p.m. CST
Or at least thats what I heard. <P> I saw the Twilight Zone for this not to long ago, its got Grey's step mom in it as Diaz. And man I wanted to smack the shit out of her like she was a character from Grey's Anatomy.
Nov. 6, 2009, 2:39 p.m. CST
I found the majority of the movie to be entertaining, but in my opinion the ending just completes a cycle that was set up earlier. To me, the ending was really the most logical outcome of the scenario. One in which the characters were forced into a situation in which they had little choice over their own destinies. In addition to the fact that this final choice was inevitable, making the prior 45 minutes of the movie essentially pointless since they were going to end up at this place regardless of their actions.
Nov. 6, 2009, 2:39 p.m. CST
film designed to capture a larger audience. I doubt that happening.
Nov. 6, 2009, 3:02 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2009, 3:49 p.m. CST
Total crap. I didn't give a shit about any of the characters. It was also very boring. Lame movie.
Nov. 6, 2009, 4:26 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2009, 5:37 p.m. CST
she's still incredibly sexy
Nov. 6, 2009, 6:44 p.m. CST
by Rocco Curioso
all the zombie-like people getting bloody noses? That got really tedious after awhile. The movie started OK, but(as has been mentioned)when you put the Big Reveal halfway through, there's no reason to keep your ass planted unless the movie presents some other way to hold your interest. This one didn't. Added to which, you get:<P>1.) Cameron Diaz bringing nothing to the party except a weak attempt at a Southern accent.<P>2.) James Marden, who still believes(going back to X-Men 2)that the best way to express anguish is to screw up your face like you're taking a giant dump.<P>3.) To paraphrase Wayne Campbell, I know this is a small movie... but couldn't they at least get a better child actor? That runt who played their son was annoying as fuck.<P>4.) Frank Langella's catatonic attempt at portraying the Spooky Mysterious Stranger.<P>Give me my money back, Richard Kelly. Or at least stop making movies.
Nov. 6, 2009, 6:46 p.m. CST
Kelly is a hack.
Nov. 6, 2009, 8 p.m. CST
comments about the ending a little while after the film comes out? I saw it today and would love to hear yours and Kelly's thoughts about the end.
Nov. 6, 2009, 10:17 p.m. CST
There were goofy teenagers talking sometimes so I might have missed a little but I thought it was really good. I don't actually get what happened at the end end. Who was that? And about the decision. I mean he had no choice. Some choices aren't choices and that wasn't one. Even the first decision wasn't really a decision. I mean think about their situation. It's like one of those damn Dancer in the Dark decisions. I like the look of it. The fake 70s thing. I dunno. I'd like to get into but this probably isn't the time. We'll wait.
Nov. 6, 2009, 11:22 p.m. CST
Still can't figure out how a movie that didn't hammer me over the head with needless exposition made it through the system still intact. It felt good to see something enigmatic for a change. I might just see it again before it leaves the theaters... and the score was excellent.
Nov. 7, 2009, 12:50 a.m. CST
In better hands it could have turned out better but w/ a hack it's a piece of shit.
Nov. 7, 2009, 7:21 a.m. CST
In every picture I see of Kelly he has a smug shit eating grin on his face... but he's never smiling. Weird.
Nov. 7, 2009, 12:55 p.m. CST
by Sick Fixx
He made Donnie Darko. How you can jump on the 'calling him a hack bandwagon' suddenly is beyond me.
Nov. 7, 2009, 2:29 p.m. CST
(spoilers fuckers!!)Hey, the film was good. Obviosuly, thanks to Kelly, it's definitely over-crammed with information and not exactly the easiest to follow(but extrmely more mainstream in it's own film logic than his prvious efforts).And,There's so many little details, i wish we (the audience) could see more of ( such as the very Donnie-Darkoish book that they revel in the 3rd act). But, I write jsut to clear something up. So, basically-the bad guy is an alien.And basically, he's just here to test the merit of mankind and determine whether or not we're worth saving.correct? And one more thing. The cop-relative...he had pushed the button too, no? Becuase when asked bout the party, he gloats that he "didn't pay for the party". Or was he possessed by the aline dude, too?
Nov. 7, 2009, 3:21 p.m. CST
by the new transported man
Just watched it too, I pretty much concur. The "vessel" was conducting his experiments to test mankind, yes, but the pickle is that his actions were equally just as immoral as those of the test subjects. Also, this could be just a plot contrivance, but the button-pushing of the next couple coincided perfectly with Norma & Arthur's conclusion, which kinda implies determinism. Or it could have been just symbolic. Not sure about Norma's dad, but considering how all of the dialogue serves some purpose, now I have to wonder about it. Hopefully they'll do a Donnie Darko-type expansion or Director's Cut.
Nov. 7, 2009, 3:24 p.m. CST
by the new transported man
The score was great, & the overall art direction ruled. That wind tunnel set was tops.
Nov. 7, 2009, 4:22 p.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2009, 4:29 p.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2009, 5:32 p.m. CST
by the new transported man
Neo & Trinity die & the matrix is rebooted.
Nov. 7, 2009, 6:26 p.m. CST
I took a date to it last night. Hated donnie darko hated southland tales but id figure id give richard kelly another shot and we were both sooo bored. The premise is cool and the first half hour is captivating then it all goes to hell with the god or alines explanation of what the box is booooring.
Nov. 7, 2009, 7:27 p.m. CST
(major spoilers) That's what I meant about the choices not being choices. Being an alien who could make people blind he also had to know their situation. Besides he could probably just find that out through normal routes. So she needs money for her operation, he's not going to be an astronaut, she also is no longer getting her tuition reimbursement stuff so they kinda had to push the button. I'll assume the couple that pushed the button on them were probably in a bad situation too. And then the end decision James Marsden's character had to make at the end was also no decision at all. It's like making people feel bad for trying to do right by their family when they probably never would have done it if you hadn't given them that option in their darkest hour. That's how God is. Just like that mean Martian.
Nov. 7, 2009, 8:03 p.m. CST
Still a very good movie.
Nov. 7, 2009, 9:58 p.m. CST
by the new transported man
Yeah, even though R. Kelly (!) is reliably detailed, insofar that every bit of dialogue or plot should have relevance, it's fairly possible that some of these items might just be missteps in service of the plot. Like you don't absolutely need to know the innerworkings of the Vessel to tell a story about moral dilemmas & paranormal experiments on humankind, so it takes a backseat. More insight into the Vessel & experiment would have served the story well.
Nov. 7, 2009, 10 p.m. CST
thats what she said.
Nov. 8, 2009, 7:40 a.m. CST
it ended up being laughable. So many examples, but my favorite (and most irritatingly inept) being the slackjawed zombie sauntering across the backyard window. All the mind control people scenes were nothing but awkwardly funny. Same for the ridiculously over-the-top piano and strings score that was trying to be moody and evocative but was just plain annoying. And when the husband is so on-the-nose with his "Yes, but what is it to truly know someone?" Wow. Laughably bad. This movie ranks way down there with Funny Games.
Nov. 8, 2009, 7:49 a.m. CST
fun of pretentious "cerebral" sci-fi, it's a classic. About an hour and ten minutes in, you realize the director's going to cop out and have no satisfying explanation for any of the previous events that demand a meaningful explanation. This movie is the perfect storm of overripe dialogue, bad music, particularly lazy scripting, bad acting, bad accents (Virginia is south of the Mason Dixon, therefore our main characters must have really thick Southern accents that, of course, fade away like Kevin Costner's Robin Hood after the first few scenes), and an inability of the director to hit the emotional tone. I'm almost fascinated by how bad this movie is, and thus, at least it's better than a bad movie that's bad for it's predictable cliche`s. I'll give it that.
Nov. 8, 2009, 8:19 a.m. CST
by the new transported man
I really liked the "know someone" exchange. An average writer wouldn't have addressed that, leaving it to the audience as yet another plot hole to discuss.
Nov. 8, 2009, 9:39 a.m. CST
Kelly continues to make movies for himself. You're either with him or your not. I'm with ya Richard, you crazy nut.
Nov. 8, 2009, 9:46 a.m. CST
or something else? And are we talking the old series or the newer one? <p> Oh and while I loved DD to bits (the original cut, not the Director's), this movie was basically over in the first act. Enjoyed it until the end and then the big "that's IT?". I set out hoping to really love it after Darko and with the Matheson story, but - oh well...
Nov. 8, 2009, 2:53 p.m. CST
excellent work Beaks. And thanks for identifying yourself at the Universal IMAX screening.
Nov. 8, 2009, 2:55 p.m. CST
Its the 80s twilight zone, in color. I think the title is "the box".
Nov. 8, 2009, 5:53 p.m. CST
Ok, it wasn't as bad as SOUTHLAND TALES, but, then again, nothing really is. It did have that SOUTHLAND TALES feeling of being scrawled on the back of a high school notebook over some bong hits, tho. As if Richard Kelly were at home watching the old Twilight Zone episode stoned. "Oh yeah, and I'll throw in INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS! And, and THE ABYSS! And Sartre's "No Exit!"<br /><br /> Which reminds me -- Sartre and (Arthur C.) Clarke are used as pretentiously here as Eliot and Frost in SOUTHLAND (or, for that matter, WATERSHIP DOWN in the (bad) director's cut of DONNIE DARKO) The movie is just a terrible, sprawling mess...it's flat out embarrassing at times.<br /><br /> Mind you, I really liked the original DONNIE DARKO, but it's gone all downhill from there, and each successive failure makes DARKO look that much worse. Only Richard Kelly can take a great little story like "Button, Button" and think it would be better with water tentacles and Trek-speak like "the altruism coefficient." Just irritatingly bad.<br /><br /> But, to be charitable, I felt bad for Marsden and Langella, both of whom seemed better the material. Diaz, maybe not so much.
Nov. 8, 2009, 10:36 p.m. CST
Did Kelley not give you a free poster?
Nov. 9, 2009, 12:27 a.m. CST
I concur. I'm pretty sure Sartre is in there so Kelly can get into chicks pants by claiming to be deep. Kinda like: Walt Berkman: Yeah, it's very Kafkaesque. Kelly = the new Rat
Nov. 9, 2009, 2:52 a.m. CST
Nov. 9, 2009, 2:59 a.m. CST
Why adapt a short story into a feature length film if all the stuff you added is completely pointless and makes zero impact on the actual story? What was the point? The stuff with the couple and Langella was fine. The other stuff literally served no purpose. What was the point of the Employees? What was the point of their library? What was the point of the video the wife watched? What was the point of the magical blocks of water? How did the middle path lead to his salvation, when it seems to have zero impact on the plot? (A special effect, cool though it may be, is not a plot element!) What was the point of the second Deal? How could either choice be in any way construed a moral victory? Is Kelly just trying to say that women in general are evil? How can Langella's character give any pretense of being an impartial judge of humanity, when he is clearly exerting his mental influence on everybody involved? If he isn't pulling the strings, there is absolutely no way he could have timed the last death with the last button push. If he is pulling the strings, and he caused the button to be pushed and the trigger pulled at the same time, his experiment is utter bullshit. Who sent Marsden the photo, and why? Did the NSA and the CIA know what was going on? If they did, why were they allowing it? If they didn't, why were they supporting it? Why is Langella's entire experiment laid out in detail in a Human Resources Exploitation Manual? Who published it, and why is it never seen again after it is found? Why am I even thinking about any of this?
Nov. 9, 2009, 1:13 p.m. CST
Have to agree with everyone's objections to the gaping holes in the plot of this thing. Terribly confusing and, even when it gets some things correct, unnecessarily misleading. Langley is famous for the CIA headquarters right outside D.C. in the Va. suburbs, right? It annoyed me that they kept showing LANGLEY as the space research place where Marsden works and saying they were in Richmond. I had to go to the Internet and find out that there is also a Langley Research Center, run by NASA, in Hampton, which is down the road from Richmond in Tidewater Va. OK, so accidentally correct but terribly misleading. Anyone who is a fan of thrillers hears Langley and thinks CIA, Fairfax Co., D.C. area. Should have made the distinction clearer. Unless the director is trying to be unnecessarily cloudy everywhere he can. Diaz accent sounds more like one of the Carolinas, or even Georgia or Mississippi, than Richmond. One thing I will give Kelly is his eye for picking real lookers for his leading men: Jake Gyllenhaal in DARKO and Marsden here. Both of these guys would have to go onto anyone's top ten list of the best looking actors currently breathing.
Nov. 9, 2009, 2:44 p.m. CST
Looks like she's 50. What the hell happened to her???????????????????
Nov. 9, 2009, 3:45 p.m. CST
For me it was interesting. However, it was more on par with a bad twilight zone, fringe or x-files episode. Not a good one. A bad one.
Nov. 9, 2009, 4:55 p.m. CST
Same hard-left turn into vague alien territory.
Nov. 10, 2009, 11:29 a.m. CST
i'm sorry - i'm a HUGE donnie darko fan - have two movie related tattoos, I'm such a darko nerd. But i will never, ever see a Richard Kelly movie ever again. I've never seen such a bad film as the Box. The film was boring, pointless, too long, poorly acted and horribly directed - it's almost like somebody else wrote and directed Donnie Darko. Given the chance of watching paint dry or re-watching The Box, I'd obviously choose to watch the paint dry.
Nov. 10, 2009, 4:23 p.m. CST
And thus deprive us of his justification for his conclusion? This is a post-release interview, and the Web gives you many options for obscuring text.
Nov. 10, 2009, 11:23 p.m. CST
Clearly, you did not see Southland Tales.
Nov. 11, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST
DUDE, if you can't share here, think you can email HOW it "took the story in a different direction?" You don't have to ruin it if you don't want to give away Kelly's secrets, but please man-Tell me what the difference was
Nov. 11, 2009, 1:09 p.m. CST
This is a film cements Kelley's ability to make a compelling adult film (too bad he's being skoffed off like a wachowski instead of embraced like a Lynch). SPOILERS: Despite a couple missteps (diaz's "I love you" scene was like nails on chalkboard for me. Maybe due to acting? And the 3 water columns come off as a pointless distraction. I thought the two finger hints must have been referring to the final scenario, because the columns just had no weight). I really enjoyed the film and am still thinking about it. I wholeheartedly disagreed with the ending. It seemed clear to me that he shouldn't try to fix one murder with another. Also thought it clear the kid would be better off crippled but with two loving parents than physically whole but an orphan. Not sure the director agrees. I thought the mom's foot problem was going to be the twist that led her to accept a crippled child (but it looks that was just there so she could inexplicably profess love for a stranger. eh. hmmf.). I'm stunned that so many people are refusing to open their minds to the film's philosophies, or their eye's to it's visuals. Are hollywood PR politics squashing it? Are Americans just angered by entertainment that offers smart philosphical questions?... I dunno. I thought this was a very brave approach to adapting a short story (took it to much bigger sci fi world, then resolved with a new conundrum that mirrors the first). Mad props to Kelly for trying.
Nov. 11, 2009, 1:21 p.m. CST
Honestly, I think y'all are trying to make Richard Kelly cry. OK, I too was scratching my head while watching Southland Tales, but, years later, I do still find myself thinking about various scenes from the film. It and DD are vivid in my mind. My main problem was that is wasn't longer. I would have loved to see more of the set-up and had a lot of the loose ends fleshed out. I think it would have made a tremendous 10-hour miniseries delivered in tasty 1-hour arcs, each ending with a cliff-hanger. Trouble, I know, but I wonder if Kelly has ever considered exploring a continuing arc on TV like that.
Nov. 11, 2009, 3:12 p.m. CST
are more like gods than aliens, especially since James Marsden said "we're in purgatory" and Frank Langella's wife said "eternal damnation" and "eternal salvation". Religious phrases and words, not alien words. I could be wrong. Perhaps Kelly doesn't even know, right?
Nov. 11, 2009, 4:43 p.m. CST
don't forget all the voiceovers from the president ,and the fact that a large chunk of the sotrryline involved travelling to Mars-and the possiblity of life on another planet.And,they mention how "he" hasnt figured how to get into people's minds without causing brain hehmorgging(nosebleeds)-so I'd imagine a GID wouyldn't have that issue.I see what you mean,but the fucking sad truth is...with Richard Kelly, things get so convuluted...it's hard to know...untill he says it so on the commentary.persoanlly, i think he likes that style, becuase it would require multiple viewings...meaning more box office bucks for the backers!THAT'S my REAL interpretation of why he makes such bizarre shit sometimes...(although I think the BOX was pretty cool...just too vague)
Nov. 11, 2009, 9:36 p.m. CST
$7.5 million opening weekend. Kelly = one hit wonder.
Nov. 13, 2009, 5:46 p.m. CST
Did it occur to you it may have been intentional to invoke BOTH ideas? At the SAME time? The idea that Aliens ARE ostensibly Gods? You forgot they also make a big deal of Clarke's quote about science as magic. Bilbo, why do you use one as an argument against the other? You HAD it there for a moment, man! <p> But thanks so much Bilbo for the reply on the episode. I do appreciate that. <p> In that vein, Bswise, the "10 hours miniseries" you're thinking of is actually a hundred-plus hour T.V. Show called The Twilight Zone! <p> Getting back to it, I swear TBers are the most direct, literal thinkers in the world. God forbid anyone makes a ALLEGORICAL film! Or dares for a bit of Ambiguity - especially in the motivation of the Aliens/God - the Aliens/God are only a device, like the box. They're not important, other to be unknowable/inscrutable, and set the plot in motion so we look at the PEOPLE. The POINT is how the PEOPLE react, and whether they can evolve and break the chain. I didn't like the end either, but Jesus, pretty much EVERY Twilight Zone story is an allegorical, existential tale! How it could be considered "vague" is beyond me! God may be omnipotent and all-powerful, but people do die, Jimmy/Milkshake. <p> And Warren, yeah, they really fumbled the 'crippled' thing. Although that direction would have given us a happy ending, which doesn't seem quite right either. But "You won't see another..." and your defence implies it as original. I've been watching original Zone eps (and the movie remake) this year, so I guess I have (although I haven't watched the original of this particular one or read "Button, Button") seen another. Or were you lamenting it's the only one of this type of filmmaking (you did reference the original story)? At least you got the metaphors. Jesus, I thought a big red, candylike button (they even ram home the symbolism by showing no workings!) was pretty fucking obvious! I shake my head at TBers too. Not trying to be a bloody snob but fucking hell!
Nov. 13, 2009, 5:57 p.m. CST
Speaking of the chain, I reckon we still would have got the symbolism (well not TBers but anyway) of the human daisychain if they'd saved the shooting end of one couple/pushing the button start of the next synchronising/synchronicity 'til the END and not overplayed the point of the timing in the first act. It would have been a more satisfying beat rather than what we got got with giving the game away in the first act then confirming what we all already knew at the end. It sorta seems backwards that the characters knew the significance of the timing in the first act but seemingly NOT at the end, too.
Nov. 13, 2009, 6:40 p.m. CST
I probably shoulda said chain-reaction.
Nov. 14, 2009, 1 p.m. CST
I obviously saw the REAL point of the film (aside from entyertaning and making $) is that we ARE flawed, and it's the whole exsistential question of the valdiity of mankind in general (given we can be capable of love and hate/ peace/destruction)...and blah blah blah.HOWEVER...when I pay $10.00 to see a film-I am buying into someone's defintive vision.I expected something, and in a way...Kelly DID deliver a very old fashioned twilight-zonish film (it being very HEAVY HANDED with it critiques in humankind and societal going-ons)...but I didn't want that only.I want a director who is secure enough to say "these are aliens, and etc." and basically connect the dots he created for us.I like when some films leave it open....but NOT when it involves extraterrsitrial life (ala science fiction).Much like he did with Darko-a tale, which seemingly was this very reality-based story, but had the slightest seasoning of the science fiction element.In The box, according to rumor-0there was ALOT edited out(for the running time the studio wanted)...so what I expected was more of the backstory that I presume Kelly filmed.And Although it wasn't important to you(or the real point)-I want MORE concrete answers on the fact that it was aliens.(I don't think he meant aliens are gods...but if you mean he was implying there is NO GOD, that perhaps aliens have been "over" us the entire time we've been in exsistance...well,KELLY-as the filmaker should say that)
Nov. 14, 2009, 11:25 p.m. CST
by Adelai Niska
The whole aliens as god thing sucked in KNOWING and it sucks here. If you can't stick to reality, scifi OR fantasy, then really you're just making shit up with no rules. <p> Also, the ending (spoilers, of course) clearly undermines the movie in several ways- first in that it shows a LACK of free will because the murder happens only when placed in a brutal situation where murder is the only choice AND someone was pushing the magic button. Second- because the movie was set in the 70s and we're still alive in 2009, we know humanity passed the test despite the movie indicating that we failed. <p> Also, what was with the babysitter at the end? First they indicate that he "enters their heads" like he's possessing people, but then those same people volunteer to create even more misery? Did Steward put out a want ad for stalkers with nosebleeds? <p> At this point Kelly's record is 1 good (Darko), 2 bad (Box, Domino) and 1 unwatchable catastrophe (Southland Tales). Not a good record for someone who started so strong.
Nov. 14, 2009, 11:32 p.m. CST
by Adelai Niska
How can an advanced power actually judge anyone based on pushing a pointless button? If he's so all-knowing, he'd know that Marden ,a scientist, and Diaz, a teacher, would not actually believe the button does anything. They saw with their own eyes that the button wasn't connected to a transmitter, so in their minds it was as harmless as tapping an empty cigar box. They KNEW that Steward couldn't possibly know if they pushed it or not, so how can they be judged for not taking the thing seriously? If Kelly was punishing these characters for lack of faith, lack in faith in what? A stranger with an empty box? Who'd believe him- and more importantly who'd punish people for not believing him? <p> It's like when someone taps you on your far shoulder and you turn your head to look, except in this movie human kind is damned to hell because you fell for it.
Nov. 15, 2009, 2:51 a.m. CST
but you're sorta arguing apples and oranges, and being outrageously demanding of a director to tailor "their vision" to your requirements, which is an anachronistic request to say the least, and certainly a bit much to ask for your lousy 10 bucks. By the way, a movie ticket down here in Oz is $17.50, and considering our dollar buys over 93 cents U.S. at the moment, imagine how pissed off I (I'd make that bold or italic if I could) must be! <p> And boy if you're so specific with your sci-fi requirements you musta hated Clarke and Kubrick's 2001, and their valid (re: Aliens and ambiguity) point of "Extraterrestrial life is probably not only stranger than we imagine, but stranger than we CAN imagine". I'm sure I'm paraphrasing, but they're words to that effect anyway.
Nov. 15, 2009, 10:41 a.m. CST
I KNEW YOU'D MENTION 2001.And Clarke.Guess what? I love them both.I love Clarke-and collect alot of his first prints, and I love 2001-the ORIGINAL version he wrote(which explains everything!!)I even loved 2001_the film(which I know practically everything about)..and I am aware Kurbick made things more open-ended and less definitive (and much more cinematic), although essentially, they are the same exact stories...just Kubrick doesn't necessarily explain it all.In fact, when I first saw 2001-I was BLOWN AWAY(i was 15??) although I FELT THE ending was SOOOOO ambiguous.So I read the book, and well-it explains things greatly.And that's what I mean.Kelly left me hungry to know the WHOLE STORY mate,not walk away with questions.Questions to a SCIENCE FICTION film are just that, questions-not some portal into a great, deep conversation about something important and relevant in mankind's mindeye that we MUST discuss.....noooo.It's a damn sci-fi film that was either edited for runnin time, or perhaps gutted by all to be more ambigious(some director's think there films are special, and begining slicing away the very plot points we are somewhat interested-untill we're left with A VERY AMBIGUOUS FILM).So I feel Kelly is on the cusp of becoming a much better story-teller, but here..sadly, he left things out which would've strengthened the overall story. And I would be doubly pissed too if Kelly made me fork out $17.50+ for a dodgy film.But, I respect your opinions amigo-you write very well.
Nov. 16, 2009, 4:32 a.m. CST
I understand about wanting to know more - if you like the hard, analytical, unambiguous stuff, you must love Fall of Moondust. Gotta read that again. I haven't looked at it since I was a kid, but that was Clarke at his best I thought. Gets right down to the minutia!
Nov. 16, 2009, 11:46 a.m. CST
by Royston Lodge
Such restraint from the talkbackers!
Nov. 16, 2009, 12:14 p.m. CST
Those were angels. They're not depicted as the angels we're used to seeing though. I think that threw some people off. Call me crazy, but for my dollar, that film hit me on just about every level. The only problem I had with it were minor ones (why would you leave your kids in the car in the middle of the woods?).
Nov. 16, 2009, 4:13 p.m. CST
OF RICHARD KELLY'S TASTY JELLYtm after watching the box? I did,I got good-greif grape,and it was fucking awful.
Nov. 16, 2009, 7:41 p.m. CST
and I've only done that maybe 3 times before. This movie was childish.
Nov. 16, 2009, 9:39 p.m. CST
by Magnum Opus
So many dullards railing against it because "it didn't make sense." I guess Kelly is at fault for assuming his audience doesn't need to be spoon-fed answers like Joe TV Viewer, and would be able to decipher metaphor and allegory on their own. Evidently even most AICN readers aren't capable of that. Brilliant film.
Nov. 17, 2009, 10:15 a.m. CST
Always felt like a student film with a huge budget to me... Lynch's duo of movies about alternate realities were the real deal for me (Mulholland and Lost Highway) or for suburban satire we already had American Beauty. Darko with it's monster bunny costume and Tears for Fears sequence just seemed to have a little bit of the amateur style jerkoff elements to me. I respect that he made a cool scifi movie...(Darko is like a novel scifi short story you might run into in an anthology) but I don't think the movie was great! It was great by film student standards. I am interested in seeing The Box. I think he has potential to become really good.
Nov. 17, 2009, 11:19 a.m. CST
but so far, SOUTHLAND TALES MASSIVLEY SUCKED...so I don't hate his films, I actually am anticipating him making a truly brilliant film ahain(Donnie Darko was pretty good).AND the box was decent too-so magnus,sucka dick for allowing people to have opinions(which you really don't have...other than how tasty rich kelly's cock is)
Dec. 22, 2009, 2:53 a.m. CST
Having taken Mr. Beaks advice, I finally watched it last night. It was so bad it made me angry. <p> Unlike what Beaks said, it's pretty much exactly the same as the short story. They just go past the ending and try to explain why. <p> And the "why" is so primitive and banal, it will blow your mind with its simplistic awfulness. <p> I wanted my money back. <p> Anyone who thought *this* piece of shit was too complicated, should go back to watching Tellytubbies. At least that won't tax what they laughingly choose to call their minds.