Yeah it was . Just saw it tonight! It was like a really bad chick movie. What are they thinking? The only good actress was the hooker! I just don't get it! No offence meant to our chick filmmakers!
I have not seen it but what I like about the acclaim (based on what I know) is that it is such a small movie, small budget, small cast, small, small, small and a film like this?
Dare I say it?
A Pani DVX100 would accomodate it well. What I mean is, it is so far from the typical Academy/Hollywood film and look what it did! Reminds me that I don't need CGI Trolls, 18th Century Sailing ships, full scale Civil War re-enactments or a huge Production Design budget and a race horse.
It reminds me that sometimes, all you need is a story and a vision.
She considered shooting it on video, but her father gave her the advice that she might as well shoot film while she can. I believe that snippet is from the Filmmaker issue with her (Coppola) on the cover.
I really liked the look of it, and I think it's a very cinematic movie... it has a good theatre presence. I also loved it storywise. It was reaffirming to me that you can still get by without a million cuts per minute.
I won't go into my own review of the movie - in a nutshell I found it very enjoyable - but I did notice way too many boom microphones throughout the film. They were everywhere! Jump around from scene to scene on the DVD, you'll see what I mean. I spotted them in the theater, and although I don't have the DVD, I'm curious to see if they somehow fixed this for the DVD release.
.. it was entertaining, but really very pointless in the end. i didnt really care in the end.. nothing happend.. nothing changed... nothing went anywhere.. and i never understood their attraction in the first place.. it seemed unreasonable.. but such is life i guess. anyway despite all this, i though it was good.
Daughter is just playing off of dad's name and talent. Her father practically carried her over the finish line being a Exec. Producer and who knows what else. I think the film was O.K. just a bad casting job, the two had little chemistry. Murray, good man, good actor. Look at us, were bitching about films ;D All in All, not a bad start for her, we'll be seeing more of her (and her daddy along side) soon I'm sure.
[quote author=PurposeDriven link=board=movies;num=1078119186;start=0#8 date=03/01/04 at 07:51:36]Daughter is just playing off of dad's name and talent. [/quote]
Totaly agree, if it has been done by some one "no name", it will be flap hard. Film fill to long, most sience is strached for time, boring, camera setings and positioning simple. It has filling of student test movie.
I can see that being a part of it as Hollywodd can be he Nepostism machine, but it wasn't too long ago that the girl was lambasted by evryone and their mother for her role in The Godfather 3.
Chick factor aside, I thought it would have made a good *short*. All that the film could say should have been done within the 20 minutes.
It was too long and drawn out for a feature. God know I love Bill Murray but I think his talents in this film went unutilized.
Don't know much about 'critical analysis' and what's supposed to be good and bad, but when I saw 'Lost', it was like a breath of fresh air for me. A pleasant story at an easy pace that had me leaving the theater pleased that I went to the movies that night. Don't get that very often.
I loved "Lost in Translation," a studio movie that felt like a home movie. It's quite intimate and indeed quiet, but would one prefer loudness for the sake of distraction (probably from lack of intelligence)? Coppola's influences are European and Asian (her Oscar speech named one American film influence), which explains her use of long takes and a really simple premise.
Elephant was the other favorite American film of last year, IMO. The sound mix alone is better than most films these days.