Fantastic show this week. Thanks first of all for the one and only Ryan McNeil (aka Mad Hatter) from The Matinee and the MatineeCast for coming on board this week to fill Kurt’s shoes who is soulfully too invested with TIFF to talk to us right now. With a voice absolutely made for podcasting, Ryan can take Gambles punches with the best of them – or just deflect them altogether. We have slight differences of opinion on Steven Soderbergh’s Contagion, but not before Gamble and I take Refn’s new film, Drive ***SPOILERS*** out for a spin around the block. Ryan has quite the TIFF experiences to share as well including some of the lowlights and highlights of the festival so far and Matt caught an early screening of Brad Pitt in Moneyball. All of this plus DVD talk (Star Wars on Blu-ray!) and some other tangents and film nuggets. Enjoy!
As always, please join the conversation by leaving your own thoughts in the comment section below and again, thanks for listening!
|
|
http://rowthree.com/audio/cinecast_11/episode_228.mp3
Full show notes are under the seats…
IN-HOUSE BUSINESS:
– Welcome Ryan McNeil!
MAIN REVIEWS:
– Drive ***SPOILERS***
– Contagion
TIFF SCREENINGS:
– From up on Poppy Hill (Ryan’s review)
– Urbanized (Ryan’s review)
– Pearl Jam 20 (Ryan’s review)
– Alois Nebel (Ryan’s review)
– Keyhole (Ryan’s review)
– Extraterrestrial (Ryan’s review)
– Dangerous Method (Ryan’s review)
– The Artist (Ryan’s review)
– The Eides of March (Ryan’s review)
– You’re Next (Ryan’s review)
– Shame (Ryan’s review)
THE WATCH LIST:
Matt
– Moneyball
– “Sherlock”
Ryan
– Adventureland
– A Face in the Crowd
Andrew
– Half Nelson
– Red Belt
DVD PICKS:
Ryan
– Citizen Kane [Blu-ray]
– Incendies [Blu-ray]
– Meek’s Cutoff
Andrew
– O Brother, Where Art Thou [Blu-ray]
– Incendies [Blu-ray]
Matt
– Conan O’Brien: Can’t Stop
– Hesher
– Drac Pack
OTHER DVDs NOW AVAILABLE:
Jandy’s DVD Triage
OTHER STUFF MENTIONED:
New HIGH AND LOW BROW episode!
NEXT WEEK:
Mozart’s Sister
Moneyball
Pearl Jam 20
PRIVATE COMMENTS or QUESTIONS?
Leave your thoughts in the comment section below, or email us:
feedback@rowthree.com (general)
andrew.james@rowthree.com
kurt@rowthree.com
Yes! Long live the Mad Hatter.
Connection between Drive and Contagion?
Cliff Martinez did both of the scores. At least one Chili Pepper is doing some amazing work.
Spoilers for Drive:
The best scene in the film is the David Lynch style stripper club.
I want more David Lynch style action films.
antho,
that was my girlfriend’s favorite scene too. That dressing room was seriously wicked. Very 80′s in lighting and vibe and all the women were nearly motionless mannequin types. Looked fantastic – plus the added tension of what was going on in the scene.
The opening scene is the ONLY decent scene.
Albert Brooks is horrid? I think not. I do agree that the praise he’s getting is a little undeserved. People are enthralled with the performance just because it’s an unlikely choice. But I still think he’s pretty damn good in this.
Goon, you are completely wrong.
Good to Great Scenes:
1. The opening.
2. The Driver and Albert Brooks comedic, first encounter.
3. The stripper club scene
4. The elevator scene
5. The scary scene with the mask.
6. Albert Brook’s first kill
7. Albert Brook’s second kill
8. e.t.c
Albert Brooks is horrid in this.
You know how in music videos sometimes they cast well known actors and they read crappy stilted dialogue… crappy because well, what do you expect, it’s a music video. The actors don’t seem to give a shit because hey… it’s a music video.
That’s what he’s like in this movie.
In fact a good chunk of this movie just feels like an extended music video for a shitty hipster synth band trying to tap into 80s chic. They’ve moved on from the Napoleon Dynamite-ish 80s chic straight into the douchey Miami Vice gaudy fashion and model-robot pretention zone of filmmaking. It’s there right down to the font selection in this film, hot pink and straight out of hair salon.
I mean seriously… scenes like the strip club where they’re all sitting so detached and drugged out like they’re posting for a Vice Magazine shoot, and the Zola Jesus-ish music playing at the party that those characters would probably never would listen to. Very quickly this movie passes an acceptable level of style over substance to the point I was completely detached from the film and fell right into the nitpick zone. The fucking jacket, the closing “human/hero” song. The violence is presented in such a way that again… reminded me of the over-the-top douchebag Vice Magazine sense of retro fashion, shock and aesthetic. And there’s elements of the characterization that I hated for the same reasons I hate Malick so much.
It’s been a long time I’ve seen a film I hated so much that I got the angried up blood feeling, raspy throat, as I watched.
Well yeah, the 80s thing is SERIOUSLY over-done in the music world today. With a few exceptions, I’m completely sick of it. I’d rather just listen to The Outfield than listen to a band trying to be them. But that hasn’t been done in a film before. I like the 80s vibe this movie gives off. The font, the music, the styles – but not actually taking place in the 80s. Very cool tone I thought.
The movie isn’t flawless. But it’s a damn good romp with an interesting style and I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree about the performances. I loved them all. Despite the needlessness of Mulligan’s character, I still liked watching her on screen. And Gosling to me is the absolute fucking man. At this point, I’ll go into anything he makes blindly. That’s in some pretty good company right there.
I don’t know, I’m more and more getting the feeling this character is a blank slate you can put whatever meaning you want upon, depending on how you look at his expressions. But to me he looks like a braindead hipster, he talks like a braindead robot, the style recalls the Vice magazine idea of retro-hipster chic, so I fall into ‘if it quacks like a duck’ territory and think this film gets infinitely more credit than it deserves as far as any intelligence is concerned. Does anyone think this thing really has anything to say about humanity or interaction, simply by nature of this character being silent? Can you really justify that idea by his actions in this film?
I think at best this film taps into some general idea out there of what “cool” filmmaking is, or what a modern badass is, and I’m just not on board whatsoever. Apparently is a thin moron in a dirty scorpion jacket. This film is as alien to me as that band Wavves and as obnoxious as the public image of Crystal Castles.
I keep going… yes, I really have nothing better to do today. Slow work day.
I guess what I’m trying to wrestle out as I prattle the ‘hipster’ word around, referencing Vice Magazine… the element of modern hipster chic I think i detest most of all, is so much of the apathy and emptiness towards everything. and it’s all over Drive.
- He stares at people, expressing nothing in particular. They stare back.
- Kid doesnt’ seem to care that his dad is getting the crap kicked out of him
- The strippers stare at violence, glazed over, who gives a shit
- Guy gets his head stomped in, nobody seems shocked or revolted
- Even at a party the music selection is droning and expressionless
It’s a void. It’s emptiness. But if there’s some artfulness everyone lines up to attach meaning and depth to the great void. Sometimes a void is just a void. I think this is a void, but as you know I think a lot of Malick is like this too. Bow down to the pretty flowery void. Bow down to the blood soaked void..
It’s still a void.
I’m not sure anyone is claiming real depth to the story or the character – at least not in this Cinecast. I (we) agree that it’s style over substance. But style is all I need a lot of the time. The story is as simple as it gets, agreed; but when everyone is really cool and the cinematography looks awesome and there some great shots of gratuitous violence and the action sequences are exciting and you have great performances, it all clicks. Kurt might have something to say about that (his tendency for the need of films to say something interesting), but I think even he would agree we’re just talking about a straight up genre flick here. And often time genre flicks are all about just having fun and looking cool and doing awesome shit. If you don’t agree that all of those points apply to this film, then fair enough. But I think they do.
Also, I get maybe (maybe) not liking the movie. But 0/5? Pure rage? I think that’s really getting to you. The stuff you don’t like isn’t even nit-picking. It’s just elements of the film that don’t work for you.
Your points:
- Ok, well whatever. I think Gosling does it like a boss.
- He seemed to care. Or at least was pretty scared. Also remember he doesn’t really know his dad all that well. He’s a little kid and much of his life his dad was in prison.
- The strippers (like I mentioned in a previous comment) are props. They’re there to just give an aesthetic awesomeness to the scene. I think it looks fucking fantastic. Also, there’s only a hand break in that scene – not much more violence. The strippers probably hate that guy anyway and are more fascinated and curious than anything else. It’s obvious they’re not really in much danger so they look on in startled disbelief – like deer in headlights.
– nobody seems shocked? Who? Mulligan is the only character that sees it and she stands frozen in absolute horror with her mouth hung open. As for the audience, every single person in the packed theater audibly “ooh’d and ah’d” at that scene. Many looked away.
- music – again just part of the style of the film. Doesn’t really matter if the characters are into it or not.
Goon,
I hate hipsterdom and nostalgia ( e.g., Die Hard and Ghostbusters are terrible films), but I still like/love the film.
Die Hard is terrible?
Never come back here.
I’m gonna have to let the rage go, but yeah, when the story is as meh as this, and I hate the style as much as I do… out it comes.
Would you concede there are a lot of people ascribing Gosling’s character as having this massive depth and emotion which makes the silence of the film brilliant. Lot of people saying the silence says more than a decent script ever could etc etc, and I reject that outright.
It is not terrible, but it is not a great film.
So we watched the first episode of SHERLOCK last night. Awesome. I like it much better than the RDJ/Guy Ritchie version.
In places it’s almost Tim Burton-esque (like Beetlejuice sort of in places). It’s got this drab, comic book feel to it. It’s funny and interesting and shot incredibly well. The Sherlock character is not a huge name so it’s easy to latch on, but throwing in Martin Freeman as Watson was a stroke of genius – his character is almost more interesting than Holmes.
I like the mystery of episode one, so so far I am hooked! Planning on watching ep 2 tonight. Can’t wait.
Thanks for the recommendation Gamble!