I didn't detect any effort to update "Oil!" from the original Sinclair Lewis novel -- it was dissected and the vital parts removed, leaving the bare bones. There's an auteur synthetic style that didn't grip me and shake me up, it just kind of vibrated. It was still trying to look historic but it made me remember my worse history teachers in school who purposefully made the subject boring because they only thought that it was necessary. I was just sitting there wondering how Daniel Day Lewis was going to top each scene with the next scene. Well, I'm afraid it was trying to be like Ravel's "Bolero," relentless but, unfortunately, without any tempo and a coda which just simply died off instead of reaching a crescendo. It really reminded me of another Western which was shot with absolutely stunning cinematography -- give me awhile and I'll remember it. Oh, hmmm, I guess that's the point -- it's something engaging in its imagery making one forget that there really isn't any story being told, at least one that hasn't been done before a trillion times. I'll have difficulty remembering this movie.
About the only things to remember about the movie are DD Lewis' performance and "death by bowling ball."
The death by bowling ball was the tympani joining in.
My favorite part was the beautiful tracking shot of when one of the oil well catches fire, and it follows DDL as he runs towards and away it to save his son. Paul Thomas Anderson is great with those.
jasonrest wrote:"NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN" was brilliant but the ending made me want to harm myself.
Ooh, this worries me. I've been looking forward to seeing this one, too. I'll put away the knives first.
cyphercat wrote:jasonrest wrote:"NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN" was brilliant but the ending made me want to harm myself.
Ooh, this worries me. I've been looking forward to seeing this one, too. I'll put away the knives first.
Don't get me wrong it was a ******* awesome movie. I mean it was easily one of the year's best but again the ending just left you on a roller coaster at the top, no descent, no hands in the air and screaming, just credits rolling past signifying your departure.
cyphercat wrote:jasonrest wrote:"NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN" was brilliant but the ending made me want to harm myself.
Ooh, this worries me. I've been looking forward to seeing this one, too. I'll put away the knives first.
It's one that you have to keep an open mind to. You have to let yourself think about the ending (and the scenes preceding it) after the movie, and what it meant in relation to the rest of the movie. It definitely is going to let down lots of casual moviegoers.
Ticomaya wrote:Lightwizard might be along momentarily to explain to you why you're wrong.
Momentarily does not mean presently.
And presently does not mean now.
Jonsey wrote:cyphercat wrote:jasonrest wrote:"NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN" was brilliant but the ending made me want to harm myself.
Ooh, this worries me. I've been looking forward to seeing this one, too. I'll put away the knives first.
It's one that you have to keep an open mind to. You have to let yourself think about the ending (and the scenes preceding it) after the movie, and what it meant in relation to the rest of the movie. It definitely is going to let down lots of casual moviegoers.
I agree.
I am sure there is more to the film, that went over my head because I am
a casual moviegoer. Even though the ending leaves me begging for a climax or tie off...anything, I still think it was very well done.
Tell me what did I miss?
How is it that you are pleased with the ending, when the story is abandoned midway?
McTag wrote:Ticomaya wrote:Lightwizard might be along momentarily to explain to you why you're wrong.
Momentarily does not mean presently.
And presently does not mean now.
Hey, look ... the grammar police have arrived.
Oil" was a book with acircuitous route that, to me, centered more around the several lives of the "oil patch" and was more involved in thge labor movements common in the early decades of the 20th century. The movie, couldnt figure out where it wanted to go. It left so much unresolved . It was a loose stringing together of violent acts. I did like the rattling bones sound track and the wide angle camera work of the oil fire.Everyone was running about like ants, and the triggering the explosives was really believable 9from a technical perspective) I know the fire hadda be staged because it would have been a natural disaster to torch a pressured well.
The rest of the movie merely displayed the destructive ego of Lewis character.
Iwas overall , disappointed.
I finally rented and watched this movie with my wife. It was tiresome and weird, and I'm sure glad I didn't pay the theatre price to see it.
This is the second or third movie I've seen hailed as a "masterpiece" and "classic" in the last few months that left me angry for wasting my time. Not entertaining, not informative, not inspiring. Just CRAP.
I got it through Netflix so it ran me about 1 buck. So we could have spent the remaining 19 on gas to get to the mall.
snood wrote:I finally rented and watched this movie with my wife. It was tiresome and weird, and I'm sure glad I didn't pay the theatre price to see it.
This is the second or third movie I've seen hailed as a "masterpiece" and "classic" in the last few months that left me angry for wasting my time. Not entertaining, not informative, not inspiring. Just CRAP.
Your opinion is obviously wrong. After all, Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 91%.
[/sarky git]
well, go see it you meshuga meshpuschen vogeldupen. SOme of the scenery from the unf**ked up area in S California was interesting. Just like out of a CAlifornia Impressionist painting.
The rest was drek.
Plus it was about 2.54 hours , or in lawyer math, about 2 full billing days
snood wrote:I finally rented and watched this movie with my wife. It was tiresome and weird, and I'm sure glad I didn't pay the theatre price to see it.
This is the second or third movie I've seen hailed as a "masterpiece" and "classic" in the last few months that left me angry for wasting my time. Not entertaining, not informative, not inspiring. Just CRAP.
I didn't have the nerve to say how I really felt about the movie, being that some film buff would clap me on the back of the neck, but snood does, so I'll stand behind him echoing.......YEAH! Pure Crap!
dadpad wrote:??? errm........ which movie?
LOL! Yeah, I was making myself the same question...
Well, finally saw it; I liked it. Couldn't see how the ending was a problem, either...huh! Ah well, to each their own, eh...
cyphercat wrote:Well, finally saw it; I liked it. Couldn't see how the ending was a problem, either...huh! Ah well, to each their own, eh...
Right to each his own, I agree.
What was the moral? or the point?
