The Criterion Collection

[Rich Pure Doom]

Just watched Boyhood:

This is one of the worst films ever to receive critical acclaim. I felt like I was watching something from Lifetime or ABC Family. The script was laughable, as was the acting. It just throws cliche after cliche at you for nearly 3 hours. I've rarely been so angry at the world of film critics after finishing this. It was a complete and utter disaster. Instead of showing me how wonderful growing up is, it showed me that life is incredibly mundane, dull, and predictable. Linklater really dropped the ball. He spent 12 years of his life producing something anyone with a camcorder could achieve. This film will NOT be well regarded in the years to come and I feel like most people will look back and wonder "What was I thinking liking this movie in 2014?". Ugh.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Just watched Boyhood:

This is one of the worst films ever to receive critical acclaim. I felt like I was watching something from Lifetime or ABC Family. The script was laughable, as was the acting. It just throws cliche after cliche at you for nearly 3 hours. I've rarely been so angry at the world of film critics after finishing this. It was a complete and utter disaster. Instead of showing me how wonderful growing up is, it showed me that life is incredibly mundane, dull, and predictable. Linklater really dropped the ball. He spent 12 years of his life producing something anyone with a camcorder could achieve.

Finally someone that agree's with me haha - I found the acting most the time pretty bad, even Arquette at times was quite weak in her delivery. I was so disappointed. Also I found so many scenes had no time to develop and it just didn't work for me.

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Finally someone that agree's with me haha - I found the acting most the time pretty bad, even Arquette at times was quite weak in her delivery. I was so disappointed. Also I found so many scenes had no time to develop and it just didn't work for me.

Every single character in the movie is just a character archetype. Not one person has any real depth. The dad is into music and hasn't figured his life out yet (cliche!!!). The mom is a modern mother, working hard and studying to be a better person (cliche!!!) The two husbands? Gag. The migrant worker who "betters himself" because of cliche advice? This movie is the equivalent of vomit.

[lordmorpheus72]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Finally someone that agree's with me haha - I found the acting most the time pretty bad, even Arquette at times was quite weak in her delivery. I was so disappointed. Also I found so many scenes had no time to develop and it just didn't work for me.

I watched it a day or so ago... I didn't hate it, I liked it. It was however, long. I'm not against long films, but it felt long. I like Linklater, but this isn't his best, imho. I prefer Before Sunrise.

I will say it was an insane idea and he pulled that off well.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Every single character in the movie is just a character archetype. Not one person has any real depth. The dad is into music and hasn't figured his life out yet (cliche!!!). The mom is a modern mother, working hard and studying to be a better person (cliche!!!) The two husbands? Gag. The migrant worker who "betters himself" because of cliche advice? This movie is the equivalent of vomit.

I personally found the whole 'filmed over 12 years (or w/e it was)' a huge gimmick to sell the film, yes it was cool to see the characters age infront of us, but remove that and it is a really empty film.

I doubt it would have done as well if they used special effects/make up etc to show ageing lol, just a gimmick to sell the film and hide the poor story lol, I didn't even think it looked good, cinematography wise... and the soundtrack, well I cant even remember it and usually I am pretty good at remembering them lol.

Originally Posted by lordmorpheus72

I watched it a day or so ago... I didn't hate it, I liked it. It was however, long. I'm not against long films, but it felt long. I like Linklater, but this isn't his best, imho. I prefer Before Sunrise.

I will say it was an insane idea and he pulled that off well.

Not seen his other work and tbh I am not tempted after Boyhood :P

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

I personally found the whole 'filmed over 12 years (or w/e it was)' a huge gimmick to sell the film, yes it was cool to see the characters age infront of us, but remove that and it is a really empty film.

I doubt it would have done as well if they used special effects/make up etc to show ageing lol, just a gimmick to sell the film and hide the poor story lol, I didn't even think it looked good, cinematography wise... and the soundtrack, well I cant even remember it and usually I am pretty good at remembering them lol.




Not seen his other work and tbh I am not tempted after Boyhood :P

The soundtrack was just pop hits. Another negative. It shouldn't be nominated for anything except razzies.

[lordmorpheus72]

[/B]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Not seen his other work and tbh I am not tempted after Boyhood :P

You should give the Before trilogy a look. Especially Before Sunrise. It is a great piece of story telling, and an incredible script. All dialogue.

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Every single character in the movie is just a character archetype. Not one person has any real depth. The dad is into music and hasn't figured his life out yet (cliche!!!). The mom is a modern mother, working hard and studying to be a better person (cliche!!!) The two husbands? Gag. The migrant worker who "betters himself" because of cliche advice? This movie is the equivalent of vomit.

Did you only watch the first half, or something? Most of the characters have depth and change quite a bit through the course of the movie. Ethan Hawke's transition from liberal idealist to a more laid-back country dude is a good example of this. I loved the scene with his parents in law out in Texas at the church and with the guns. The migrant worker thing was vomit worthy though, yes. I also thought the ending was stupid and should have taken place a few months after he moved into his dorm, or something, but whatever. Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette are both great in this movie and bring a LOT more to it than simply aging over 12 years. Very few of the characters fall into tired cliche. Like, the pot smoking roommate/bandmate of Ethan Hawke's would be portrayed as a bad guy in virtually any other movie, here he's just presented matter-of-factly as someone that the kid would find cool (which he would!) and who's not a bad guy at all. Another scene I found very realistic was the one where they're in middle school and hanging around with the two jerky high schoolers; the older guys are much how I remember older jerky guys being. They like to taunt and make fun of the younger kids and encourage them to do slightly bad things, but it's actually kinda just how they show affection. The movie is loaded with these kinds of minor characters that are much more truthful than any movie stereotype, despite not being in the movie enough to be "three dimensional." It's like life, most people you interact with you never really see again after the few years you're around them due to circumstances.

The first husband plot with the drinking was a bit more plot-driven than the rest of the movie and thus a bit distracting, but it worked for me. I mean, if you'd lived through that as a kid, it would probably occupy your memories much more strongly than all of the non-events that take place the majority of your childhood. I liked the way it just dropped the guy's kids out of the main characters' lives permanently, it was rather brutal and just like how that kind of thing does happen.

Of course the soundtrack is all pop hits, that's what all of Linklater's movies are like. The only really on-the-nose annoying ones are at the beginning with Coldplay and Britney Spears.

I think it was the best of the best picture nominees, which isn't saying that much, but I'd give it an 8/10 or so. I liked at least 10 movies more than any of the nominees this year, which is odd, I usually really love at least one of the best picture nominees.

Before Sunrise and Before Sunset both destroy Boyhood, imo, but that's not saying much as they're both way better than just about anything

[demonknight]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Not seen his other work and tbh I am not tempted after Boyhood :P

At least check out Dazed and Confused.

[Rich Pure Doom]

To be honest I found Tree of Life to be a much more wondrous and realistic look at growing up and being a boy.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by demonknight

At least check out Dazed and Confused.

Oh I didn't know he did that film - I don't know much about it tbh, Boyhood is only film I have seen of his lol

[Ausjdm]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

Did you only watch the first half, or something? Most of the characters have depth and change quite a bit through the course of the movie. Ethan Hawke's transition from liberal idealist to a more laid-back country dude is a good example of this. I loved the scene with his parents in law out in Texas at the church and with the guns. The migrant worker thing was vomit worthy though, yes. I also thought the ending was stupid and should have taken place a few months after he moved into his dorm, or something, but whatever. Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette are both great in this movie and bring a LOT more to it than simply aging over 12 years.

Of course the soundtrack is all pop hits, that's what all of Linklater's movies are like. The only really on-the-nose annoying ones are at the beginning with Coldplay and Britney Spears.

I think it was the best of the best picture nominees, which isn't saying that much, but I'd give it an 8/10 or so. I liked at least 10 movies more than any of the nominees this year, which is odd, I usually really love at least one of the best picture nominees.

Before Sunrise and Before Sunset both destroy Boyhood, imo, but that's not saying much as they're both way better than just about anything

I liked Birdman as movie of the year. Even whiplash was damn good. There's nothing wrong with Boyhood i wouldn't be that harsh. Plus good to see Patricia Arquette get some prase. The oscars in general are a joke politics run it as one article said Weinstein buys a lot of Wins. the artist won that year and not many people voting on it saw it. Also the director won that year and he made like 2 movies ever? Malick has won zero times?

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

I liked Birdman as movie of the year. Even whiplash was damn good. There's nothing wrong with Boyhood i wouldn't be that harsh. Plus good to see Patricia Arquette get some prase. The oscars in general are a joke politics run it as one article said Weinstein buys a lot of Wins. the artist won that year and not many people voting on it saw it. Also the director won that year and he made like 2 movies ever? Malick has won zero times?

Don't get me wrong I adore Arquette and she was great in it at time,s but there were a lot of poorly acted scenes - she has had better performances in different roles, but it is nice seeing her recognised.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by CinemaBlu

I pretty much ignore all the other ones. I read who won later but don't watch them. The Oscars is the only one I watch from beginning to end.

I try to ignore them but whatever network is showing them makes sure that they saturate bomb me with with commercials and promos with the usual overused, overhyped taglines "If you only watch one awards show this season....!", "Appearing will be...!" etc.

Sometimes the beginning is the end for me and that falls on whoever is hosting the Oscar show. Ever since Billy Crystal exited his annual hosting job it's been a revolving door with very mixed results with some real low points like James Franco looking like he wanted to be somewhere else and Seth Macfarlane's "We Saw Your Boobs!" song. Heck, I like seeing celebrity (female, that is.) boobs as much as anyone but that song was more appropriate for a Mr. Skin promo than an Oscar awards show.

[cakefactory]

I think the BAFTAs are the most entertaining one to watch, since they always have the best host (Stephen Fry just destroys everyone the Oscars has had host in my lifetime). Their awards/nominations also tend to align with my opinions slightly more than the Oscars, but that's kind of besides the point with these kinds of things.

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

I liked Birdman as movie of the year. Even whiplash was damn good.

I liked Birdman, but didn't love it. The style really started annoying me after a while. I'd have to watch it again to really give it a fair shot, I'll probably get the bluray when it inevitably ends up at clearance prices in a few months (the same way similar prestige movies like American Hustle, Gravity, etc did).

Whiplash was idiotic and actually offended me, but that's because I've been around jazz musicians all my life and seeing a movie present such an insane portrayal of jazz that so completely misses the mark in every single respect actually angered me in a few scenes, especially the climactic drum solo, which was absolutely tone deaf garbage that would cause ANY jazz audience to throw stuff at the stage or just walk out, it was like something from a Dream Theater concert. However, I still sorta enjoyed it as a cartoony thriller, cause I'd seen the writer's previous movie, "Grand Piano" (which is about Elijah Wood as a concert pianist who must play an insanely difficult piece perfectly or else John Cusack will shoot him with a sniper rifle) and thus went into this with that movie in mind instead of with it in mind as a best picture nominee. The fact people seem to be taking it seriously or thinking it's realistic in any way, shape or form in its depiction of jazz music really blows my mind.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

Just watched Boyhood:

This is one of the worst films ever to receive critical acclaim. I felt like I was watching something from Lifetime or ABC Family. The script was laughable, as was the acting. It just throws cliche after cliche at you for nearly 3 hours. I've rarely been so angry at the world of film critics after finishing this. It was a complete and utter disaster. Instead of showing me how wonderful growing up is, it showed me that life is incredibly mundane, dull, and predictable. Linklater really dropped the ball. He spent 12 years of his life producing something anyone with a camcorder could achieve. This film will NOT be well regarded in the years to come and I feel like most people will look back and wonder "What was I thinking liking this movie in 2014?". Ugh.

Though I cannot agree with you completely about how "overrated" Boyhood is, I admit I really admired Linklater's effort in making something different using the same actors over a 12 year period. At the same time, it is hard for me to want to revisit this film anytime soon. I don't feel this is a movie with high re-play value for me, unlike say a movie such as Kubrick's "The Shining", because there isn't anything here that challenges my intellect and even my imagination. It's purely an achievement on an emotional level, but on an intellectual level there is very little to grasp at. Linklater's greatest films are vignettes of childhood, boyhood and adolescence and that's pretty much it. Sure, the "Before" trilogy is Linklater's great success, but Boyhood, somehow, didn't challenge me when I first saw it in the theater. I will give the film a second look but even if it wins for best picture tonight at the Oscars (and I hope Birdman takes best picture), I'm still not going to be tempted to watch the film again anytime soon.

[Polaroid]

I really hope 'Ida' gets the cinematography award, isn't it the guys first film and its breathtakingly beautiful.

I love Birman and think it was very well done and but Ida is just stunning.

[Scottie]

Marion Cotillard deserves to win.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Marion Cotillard deserves to win.

She is incredible in La Vie en Rose... (hint hint Criterion :P)