Drive - Ryan Gosling and Nicholas Winding Refn

Also, one thing that few people that liked the movie care about, is the fact that Ryan Gosling unlocks a 2012 Ford Mustang GT with a slim jim, but that is not possible with that model of the car. It makes it feel like the Mustang was blatant product placement, or disregard for real drivers knowledge of cars, which hurts the whole vibe and credibility of the film. (going off a car buff friend of mine for that info)

That and some awkwardly cut or filmed scenes, a wtf fork in the eye moment (felt forced, as most of the violent scenes did), the odd opening credits, the ending, most any scene dealing with the husband, stereotypical characters(not in a good way), poorly dressed Christina Hendricks, many setups which you think are going to surprise you but don't, the "is driving backwards really beneficial in a car chase?"(but I still liked it) scene, the "let's feature the scorpion on the jacket one more time" scenes, the heavy CYAN/ORANGE color grading, and repetitive shots of Ryan staring and then breaking into a subtle smile, all mean... you have to like the movie in order to like it.

Anyways, I am sure you've seen this, but here is the trailer which kind of shows what I meant about the cinematography. It looks better in the theater, looks a bit digital in the highlights on youtube.
There are things done well that I learned from, and things done poorly that I learned even more from this film.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I noticed the slim jim and knew it would be useless on that car. It is better than showing him picking the loc, in 5 seconds with a single lock pick probe, like we have seen in hundreds of movies. It is like silencers on guns just making a "phhtt" noise, or the Mr. Orange character in "Reservoir Dogs" lying in a pool of more blood than is in the human body and still being able to shoot Mr. Blonde. I let the slim Jim go.

I like the cinematography in "Drive". I give you that the cyan/orange color grade is not the most pleasing that would be possible. However, I do have to say that these colors are prevalent in the modern urban environment. I can understand the aesthetic, and logistical, choice being made to go with that. For a low budget movie, which this film was, I am sure that a whole lot of, "Using what we got" had to be used, especially in regards to the lighting of night exteriors. The lighting choices that bugged me was a couple that showed Gosling lit with a very warm beam of light, suggesting late afternoon sun, but he is looking out a window and you can see it is NOT late afternoon/early evening. I might go back and check them out latter, but they stood out when I first watched the flick and that bugged me. Overall, I am impressed with the visuals. The lighting in the car at night is very good, IMHO. I think the director and the DP, who is no slouch, made some very deliberate choices about the look of the film. I like many of their choices and "Drive" is a modern movie with a definite visual style that I am going to study closely.
 
David G. Smith said:
Yeah, I noticed the slim jim and knew it would be useless on that car. It is better than showing him picking the loc, in 5 seconds with a single lock pick probe, like we have seen in hundreds of movies. It is like silencers on guns just making a "phhtt" noise, or the Mr. Orange character in "Reservoir Dogs" lying in a pool of more blood than is in the human body and still being able to shoot Mr. Blonde. I let the slim Jim go.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I let it go, just like I let it go that the Impala used in the beginning was an automatic, but they used the sound fx's of a manual. lol. or the front end of a car being in perfect condition after ramming another car - most likely for the sole purpose that the DP needed a light source.

Nah, it is an alright movie. Deceptively advertised, and overly acclaimed. Only the drama generated by people who have liked or disliked the film is what keeps it in my mind. I can't help but to try and analyze why a mediocre film would resonate with people, but then again, it has a cast of tumblr faves, is beautifully shot, and has a music aesthetic that distinguished it from others that year.

I will reiterate that the first minimalist car chase, was cinema at its finest. It just didn't have a payoff. You'd think that the violence would have opened up the film, but it all felt like a deliberate ploy to get a reaction. Kind of like a kick in the groin in an 80's comedy, or an old lady rapping and saying overtly sexual things in comedies more recent. Though, at one point, there is a scene when Ryan has Hendricks in a motel (nope), and the bad guys try to sabotage and kill them. It is not very believable, but was fun. .... I think the book was probably better.

There is so much potential in this film that it is inspiring, but it is also blatantly bad in some areas. Melancholia was another film that was so seemingly well done, but just doesn't do it. Although, I think its truth hits home better than Drive's does. This is sad, because these kinds of films are usually my favorite.

I think some people just like an ambient anti film (no dialogue, lead dies, chaos, love never materializes, random in your face violence). Now Gosling and crew opened that up to the mainstream.

If you feed someone the finest cut of the finest beef which you've ruined, they will hardly think about whether you over cooked it and it is dry and hard to get down. They'll love it. If you put Ryan Gosling in a film made by a hot European Director, people are going to like it. And for some viewers they probably thought they were going to see 'the Transporter" and were surprised with an ambient moody film speckled with over the top violent gimmicks, and Gosling reinvented, all package in a beautifully shot film with little homages to other films that critics like.

The irony is when Albert Brook's villain mob boss character in the film says, something to the effect of: "I used to make films. Some people even said they were European. I thought they were crap!"
 
Last edited:
Anyways, I am off to go watch some racing today. I am not really a car buff, but a few friends of mine are in the races, so it should be fun.

If you or anyone else wants more on Drive, I suggest going to the IMDB review page which is somehow far more negative than the rotten tomatoes page:
Users:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780504/reviews
and critics:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780504/externalreviews

here is one random reviewer:
Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn's Bronson was an attempt to do something strange which came across as depressingly ordinary, whereas his latest – starring a stolid Ryan Gosling as the nameless "Driver", and Carey Mulligan as his angelic neighbour, Irene – seems to be something very ordinary made quite strange, mostly through the use of slo-mo in the emotional bits as much as the action.

There isn't all that much action. Certainly very few car chases. When it hits, the violence hits hard, but it's all mired in long stretches punctuated by wordless glances, pregnant with nothing but beauty and elegant framing. It's like some crawling period drama for angrily repressive mechanics. Thankfully it is accompanied by Cliff Martinez's delicious ambient score, so you could just close your eyes.

The plot is first-rate "meh": a one-last-job affair with sexless damsel-in-distress underclothes. The Driver gives his clients a strict five-minute window (the reason for which, even after he's explained it twice, is never entirely clear), before he bails out – but five minutes is all he needs. He doesn't carry a gun; he'd prefer to force-feed his enemies bullets.

We know that Driver is our hero because he's the only man who doesn't shout all the time. Bernie (Albert Brooks) and Nino (Ron Perlman) are particularly perturbed. Their over-the-counter barneys are strongly reminiscent of those Grand Theft Auto cut scenes we tend to skip. In fact, the whole italicised neon credits thing and the 80s-esque synth score is pure Vice City, except without the fun.

At least Mad Max had a reason to be mad. From where does Driver's psychotic streak stem? Valhalla Rising suggested that Refn positions man's capacity for violence somewhere deep in his soul, so I guess a backstory isn't necessary. Bryan Cranston puts on a good show as the half-crippled Shannon, who might as well have an enormous glowing target on his forehead.

Comparisons with Michael Mann are inevitable, particularly the neo-noir nightmarescape of Manhunter, and the homoeroticism of Heat. Difference is, in both cases Mann was shooting a screenplay of quality and distinction. Drive, by comparison, is about as distinct as a cigarette flicked from a passing car.
 
Last edited:
SPOILERS

My first impressions of this film were positive. Off to a great start, but long before the third act I think things fell apart.

Definitely one of the better films in 2011, but seemed more like a mediocre film made by amazing talent. The story was trite.
Click to expand...
Having skimmed this thread before seeing this film, I vaguely remembered that quote. I was like, "what a turd in the punchbowl, this is great!" But I think things started going south (Jumped the shark, if you will) when the husband got shot at the pawn shop. From there on out, the film got kinda dumb. (i.e the car driving backwards)

the odd opening credits
Click to expand...
That I loved. Interesting song and very stylized. Cool 80's font.

Gorgeously shot with an awesome soundtrack
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, yes. The music was fantastic, although a bit heavy-handed in some scenes. I was trying to imagine what some of the scenes would be like w/o that cool synth soundtrack.

I might give it a second watch.
 
James0b57 said:
here is one random reviewer:
Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn's Bronson was an attempt to do something strange which came across as depressingly ordinary, whereas his latest – starring a stolid Ryan Gosling as the nameless "Driver", and Carey Mulligan as his angelic neighbour, Irene – seems to be something very ordinary made quite strange, mostly through the use of slo-mo in the emotional bits as much as the action.

There isn't all that much action. Certainly very few car chases. When it hits, the violence hits hard, but it's all mired in long stretches punctuated by wordless glances, pregnant with nothing but beauty and elegant framing. It's like some crawling period drama for angrily repressive mechanics. Thankfully it is accompanied by Cliff Martinez's delicious ambient score, so you could just close your eyes.

The plot is first-rate "meh": a one-last-job affair with sexless damsel-in-distress underclothes. The Driver gives his clients a strict five-minute window (the reason for which, even after he's explained it twice, is never entirely clear), before he bails out – but five minutes is all he needs. He doesn't carry a gun; he'd prefer to force-feed his enemies bullets.

We know that Driver is our hero because he's the only man who doesn't shout all the time. Bernie (Albert Brooks) and Nino (Ron Perlman) are particularly perturbed. Their over-the-counter barneys are strongly reminiscent of those Grand Theft Auto cut scenes we tend to skip. In fact, the whole italicised neon credits thing and the 80s-esque synth score is pure Vice City, except without the fun.

At least Mad Max had a reason to be mad. From where does Driver's psychotic streak stem? Valhalla Rising suggested that Refn positions man's capacity for violence somewhere deep in his soul, so I guess a backstory isn't necessary. Bryan Cranston puts on a good show as the half-crippled Shannon, who might as well have an enormous glowing target on his forehead.

Comparisons with Michael Mann are inevitable, particularly the neo-noir nightmarescape of Manhunter, and the homoeroticism of Heat. Difference is, in both cases Mann was shooting a screenplay of quality and distinction. Drive, by comparison, is about as distinct as a cigarette flicked from a passing car.
Click to expand...

Haha that review is actually really entertaining and with some good points... except those points actually make me LOVE the film rather than detract :)
 
James0b57 said:
Also, one thing that few people that liked the movie care about, is the fact that Ryan Gosling unlocks a 2012 Ford Mustang GT with a slim jim, but that is not possible with that model of the car. It makes it feel like the Mustang was blatant product placement, or disregard for real drivers knowledge of cars, which hurts the whole vibe and credibility of the film. (going off a car buff friend of mine for that info)
Click to expand...


Seriously- LOL. That's the problem. Hot wiring cars or slim jim, may look cool in a sequences of actions, however it's kinda like watching someone pick a digital door lock.

James0b57 said:
Anyways, I am sure you've seen this, but here is the trailer which kind of shows what I meant about the cinematography. It looks better in the theater, looks a bit digital in the highlights on youtube.
There are things done well that I learned from, and things done poorly that I learned even more from this film.
Click to expand...


Ok, I see what your talking about.


Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
 
PappasArts said:
Seriously- LOL. That's the problem. Hot wiring cars or slim jim, may look cool in a sequences of actions, however it's kinda like watching someone pick a digital door lock.
Click to expand...
That is right up there with...
-Gun slide locks back, denoting an empty mag, but the character can keep shooting without reloading.
-Turning VGA resolution video into 4k with an "enhance" function with police/spy technology.
 
Last edited:
Deepfocus88 said:
..."what a turd in the punchbowl, this is great!" But ...
Click to expand...
Haha. Thank you!


Deepfocus88 said:
Yes, yes, yes. The music was fantastic, although a bit heavy-handed in some scenes. I was trying to imagine what some of the scenes would be like w/o that cool synth soundtrack.

I might give it a second watch.
Click to expand...
Other cerebral crime thrillers with complex characters that I like are Heat and Training Day.
For moody ambient films mixing beauty and depravity There Will Be Blood and Valhalla Rising. Valhalla Rising is also by Refn. It is not much for a "movie movie", but it is a very straight forward type of thing. It's like Apocalypto, but more of an impending invisible presence.

Drive, Tree of Life, and Melancholia were all films of 2011, and all the kind of films that I typically like, and generally get high praise from me, but they all just didn't quite come together. I would like to think that I just set the bar too high for these already quite amazing filmmakers, because of their past impact and achievements. That would put me to blame, and is a simple way to explain it away. But I think it is more than that. Anyways, I liked what each Director was trying to accomplish. Tree of Life was my favorite of the bunch, in part probably due to the fact that I watched it at 3am in a state between sleep and wake, which I believe is most likely the best way to watch that film.
 
Last edited:
yeah - I was not a fan of this movie at all. It was blatantly ripping off movies left and right. Mock soup - not the real turtle. From The Fugitive Kind (Gosling stole the whole character from Brando in that film - to Thief / Heat - it just didn't stop. Yeah - it was shot nice - big deal. I really found it emotionally pornographic as well. And like porno I felt degraded after watching it. A gladiator event.....​
 
Last edited:
"Steal from One, It’s Plagiarism — Steal from Many, It’s Research"

I liked that it was ripping off/paying homage to many things! I felt the most immature and rampant glee at the end of the film. I think it deserved the Best Director at Cannes Award. It's a shame that it didn't get a Best Director nod at the Academy Awards- especially if a film like The Artist (amazing film too IMO) got the nod for Director.
 
Lammy said:
"Steal from One, It’s Plagiarism — Steal from Many, It’s Research"

I liked that it was ripping off/paying homage to many things! I felt the most immature and rampant glee at the end of the film. I think it deserved the Best Director at Cannes Award. It's a shame that it didn't get a Best Director nod at the Academy Awards- especially if a film like The Artist (amazing film too IMO) got the nod for Director.
Click to expand...

I am sure more work went into the organizing and planning of "The Artist". Well deserved over Drive.

Drive was largely brought about because Gosling wanted to make the film after reading the book. So, I think that is why the film was a bit off. Any film where there is possible mix of visions, (Refn working with Goslings vision, rather than just his own) is going to get a bit messed up. Also, somethings work in a European context, but when done by American actors can come off unnatural. Like, I would've liked the film a bit better if it was done in Denmark, then I would just except everything as plausible, but I am much more perceptive to American behaviors and context, which would cause me to be less likely to go along with things that don't work. That and everything I mentioned above.

I actually met Ryan a couple weeks before seeing the film. He was filming "Lawless" with Mr. Malick. He showed up at a little bar where I was filming The Oh Sees. Ryan kind of moved about in that Hollywood-slow-motion and posing in real life too, which looks a bit out of place off-screen, so it probably made me not take his performance in "Drive" as believably. But he is a super nice guy, and I think he is a great movie star. Well deserved. I liked him in Blue Valentine and a lesser known film where he is a young troubled Jewish guy. He has done well for himself to go from the Mickey Mouse club to a serious mega star. And while it may not have been the most critically dramatic role, he played to the female audience in "Notebook" superbly.

I wish I had talked with Terrence Malick though. But he was working. Word of encouragement to other filmmakers... It was cool to see Terrence looked burned out and confused while filming. I do that too. He is definitely a sensitive genius, just glad to see he has his moments of doubt.
 
Last edited:
Ist five minutes were great....it can be argued at great length but for me the over the top violence was gratuitous, and turned me off
 
Aye I met Ryan Gosling at the Cannes premiere. Although, by met it was more like "Sat in the cinema near him, give him eye contact and the thumbs up, and walk out the back exit of the Lumiere awkwardly". You're right, he does have that aura of time slowing around him (I think it's his eyes...) but yeah cool chap. Surprisingly tall too.

I never really the saw the film Drive as distinctly American or bound to the real world. To me it seemed to exist in it's own weird bubble dream universe, where slow motion and awkward silence is filled with euphoric sound mixing and music lol.
 
Baaammm!! I thought it was an amazing movie!
Wonderful pace, wonderful story telling, wonderful moments, Tino style gory reality, great cinematography, good acting, AMAZING soundtrack! (Chromatics), and enough action to justify the title.
I can accept some of the little flaws, conveniences and all. A small town with a "touch of tha mob" would probably be pretty well tied together. Living in a shady apartment building with low rent and no questions, your probably going to find a load of single mothers (... ill be it, not that hot.) and excon husbands.
In the real world, yes...the 5.0 could handily outrun a 300c, but in weaving through traffic, the 5.0 sucks for handling... so you'd have to slow down anyhow :)
Okay, gear changes... ill give ya that one! ;)

So some of those MINOR flaws aside, its really a perfect movie for me. Mind you, my movie taste are for stuff like Old Boy, Fear & L, Tino's..., Requiem/Pi, Enter The Void, etc.
So maybe, its just me... and a select group of viewers like me.
I guess I should be more main stream, and spend my monies watching more movies with less middle stuff and more chocolate coatings....

Anyone who bases a movie on it's trailer and wants action involving driving, would probably be satisfied with Fast and Furious or those Nicolas Cage movies of recent.
 
Last edited:
I only just saw this internet meme, lol:

tumblr_lygkil3HHO1qm6ppwo1_500.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top