Drive (2011)

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by jayj15

Almost everyone I talked to before I saw this movie compared it to "No Country for Old Men" Now that I've seen it, I don't see that comparison at all. Maybe if "Drive" actually took place in the 80s like "No Country for Old Men" did, I would understand the comparison more. With the soundtrack, and the fact that mobile phones didn't play a role in the movie, I think it should have just taken place in the 80s. Good movie though.

I dont think the date in which the films take place is the reason for the comparison to NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN. The reason is the pacing.

[spiritfox]

Originally Posted by jayj15

Almost everyone I talked to before I saw this movie compared it to "No Country for Old Men" Now that I've seen it, I don't see that comparison at all. Maybe if "Drive" actually took place in the 80s like "No Country for Old Men" did, I would understand the comparison more. With the soundtrack, and the fact that mobile phones didn't play a role in the movie, I think it should have just taken place in the 80s. Good movie though.

Ralph Potts, one of the reviewers on AVS Forum, compared Drive to The Man With No Name movies--this works for me. I love those early Clint Eastwood westerns and the Drive character really does remind me of Clint's character. Never really thought of No Country for Old Men and I watched it again just a few months ago.

[Monty70]

Originally Posted by retablo

It's all the quick shocking violence, that seemingly comes out of nowhere. I'm not a Tarantino fan, so maybe that's why I didn't vibe too well with this. I loved the beginning until all the dumb mafia stuff got in the way of a really good story.



I'm a huge Mann fan, so if Refn used his films as inspiration, I'd say he failed. Perhaps he did so because he shot digitally. But Mann's films are studies of criminals; The Driver wasn't a bad guy, then all of a sudden he becomes this cold blooded killer with no character development to set that up. Seemed unrealistic to me. As he said, he never carries a gun, never gets involved. Then all of a sudden he's stomping guys heads in without a second thought. I get that they were after him, but a good film needs set up if we are to believe a character is capable of something that violent. Oh well, glad some of you liked it. I'll side with the Academy on this one.

[Show spoiler]The Driver was driven to this level of violence to protect the two most important people in his life, the women he loves and her son. Nothing unbelievable about that.

The only major problem I had with Drive was the manner in which some of the violence was portrayed.

[Show spoiler] I am not sure you could stomp a skull flat like driver does in the elevator.

Some of the violence seemed amped up to the point where suspension of disbelief was jeopardized.

Oh, and the Academy is a joke. (little more than an front for advertising labels on dvd and BD snap cases these days)

[Batmon77]

If Driver wasnt a bad guy, why was he driving for robberies?
Helping people steal = innocent?

[Icedburden]

Originally Posted by Rusty100

No difference, both are made by Steady clothing. Not sure how gogoretro sells them for cheaper though.

I used GoGetRetro, I have heard a lot of horror stories of people that have ordered through Steady. My jacket came two weeks earlier with GoGetRetro and I know a couple of people that are waiting for their Staedy jackets a month after the estimated date.

[Mike Z]

Finally picked this up last night, going to watch it this weekend

[joenostalgia23]

Originally Posted by retablo

It's all the quick shocking violence, that seemingly comes out of nowhere. I'm not a Tarantino fan, so maybe that's why I didn't vibe too well with this. I loved the beginning until all the dumb mafia stuff got in the way of a really good story.



I'm a huge Mann fan, so if Refn used his films as inspiration, I'd say he failed. Perhaps he did so because he shot digitally. But Mann's films are studies of criminals; The Driver wasn't a bad guy, then all of a sudden he becomes this cold blooded killer with no character development to set that up. Seemed unrealistic to me. As he said, he never carries a gun, never gets involved. Then all of a sudden he's stomping guys heads in without a second thought. I get that they were after him, but a good film needs set up if we are to believe a character is capable of something that violent. Oh well, glad some of you liked it. I'll side with the Academy on this one.

Strange that you mentioned how it's "un-Mann-like" to shoot digitally when Michael Mann has used digital cameras on his last three films.

There may be spoilers, though nothing explicit.

The lack of character development and his sudden, violemt change in character are what the entire story is based around. They're completely intentional.
The Driver is supposed to be mysterious, just like The Taxi Driver or The Man With No Name. If his character didn't change, there'd be no story for the film. It's about how his love for this woman drives him to go against almost everything that he believes in to protect her, even if it means that it'll turn him into a monster who she could never love. Like a tragic fairy tale romance, with hyper-violence.

[Strevlac]

Originally Posted by spiritfox

Ralph Potts, one of the reviewers on AVS Forum, compared Drive to The Man With No Name movies--this works for me. I love those early Clint Eastwood westerns and the Drive character really does remind me of Clint's character. Never really thought of No Country for Old Men and I watched it again just a few months ago.

The Man With No Name flicks had a sense of humor. Drive is dead serious about itself, like Mr. Nicolas Winding Refn thought he was making some kind of existentialist masterpiece or something. It's a completely hollow film that grows more preposterous and tiresome with every frame.

[joenostalgia23]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

If Driver wasnt a bad guy, why was he driving for robberies?
Helping people steal = innocent?

He's an anti-hero. He doesn't follow the rules of society, but does follow his own moral code.

[Strevlac]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

The Driver is supposed to be mysterious, just like The Taxi Driver or The Man With No Name.

Travis Bickle was 100% plausible as a character, and not really all that mysterious. There are people like Travis in every city. Socially inept, spending too much time by themselves in small apartments, nurturing various strange fantasies. Perhaps as a result of combat shock (we know Travis is a veteran of the Vietnam war) and inability adjust to "normal" life. Maybe he had mental problems before that and the war experience pushed him over the edge. Doesn't really matter, the point is he is a real person and Taxi Driver is a serious movie about that kind of personality.

Drive is just adolescent fluff for people who fancy themselves into "artsy" movies.

[keldons]

I think the film implies that Driver has been working for criminals for awhile as a way to make his hobby (driving) productive. Shannon knows all about it and the criminal he meets at the diner (talking about a robbery 6 months prior) confirm this. Thus his capability for violence really isn't a surprise, as it seems likely that he has had to deal with some unsavory characters before.

The Michael Mann influence comes from Thief (which has a very similar story, which I won't spoil for those that havent seen it) and Refn has acknowledged that as a main influence. The look has been influenced a lot by Mann's Collateral, I've never seen LA shot as skillfully as both of these films (keep an eye out for the multiple overhead shots of the city which Mann and Refn seem to love).

I don't get the Tarantino references. Not to mention, slick, stylized, and shocking violence, has been around long before Tarantino. So its a bit of a pointless comparison.

[Rocket75]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

If Driver wasnt a bad guy, why was he driving for robberies?
Helping people steal = innocent?

How else is was he going to be able to get the thrill of driving?

[Batmon77]

Originally Posted by keldons

I think the film implies that Driver has been working for criminals for awhile as a way to make his hobby (driving) productive. Shannon knows all about it and the criminal he meets at the diner (talking about a robbery 6 months prior) confirm this. Thus his capability for violence really isn't a surprise, as it seems likely that he has had to deal with some unsavory characters before.

Exactly.

And the way he spoke to the criminal at the diner reveals his penchant.

This is not some peter parker/geek gets beat up and now wants revenge story.

[Batmon77]

Originally Posted by Rocket75

How else is was he going to be able to get the thrill of driving?

By driving.

[joenostalgia23]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

Exactly.

And the way he spoke to the criminal at the diner reveals his penchant.

This is not some peter parker/geek gets beat up and now wants revenge story.

I'm surprised that so many people have labelled this as a "revenge" film. It really isn't.

[Rocket75]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

By driving.

You said if he wasn't a bad guy than why was he driving for robberies, because it gave him a thrill that he couldn't get until Shannon and Bernie set up a deal for him to race legally. I think thats why when in the diner he told that guy to shut up because he didn't want to think about his past driving for robberies.

[Strevlac]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

I'm surprised that so many people have labelled this as a "revenge" film. It really isn't.

You're right, it isn't. Problem is, it isn't about anything else either.

[Batmon77]

Originally Posted by Rocket75

You said if he wasn't a bad guy than why was he driving for robberies, because it gave him a thrill that he couldn't get until Shannon and Bernie set up a deal for him to race legally. I think thats why when in the diner he told that guy to shut up because he didn't want to think about his past driving for robberies.

And Stunt Driving does what?

[Rocket75]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

And Stunt Driving does what?

It doesn't give him the freedom that Professional Driving would, he's only doing that for a little extra cash that he and Shannon split and with them wanting to get him into the racing circuit they would be in business with only one other person and they'd have much more freedom.

[Batmon77]

Originally Posted by Rocket75

It doesn't give him the freedom that Professional Driving would, he's only doing that for a little extra cash that he and Shannon split and with them wanting to get him into the racing circuit they would be in business with only one other person and they'd have much more freedom.

The Driver wasn't a bad guy, then all of a sudden he becomes this cold blooded killer with no character development to set that up. Seemed unrealistic to me. As he said, he never carries a gun, never gets involved. Then all of a sudden he's stomping guys heads in without a second thought. I get that they were after him, but a good film needs set up if we are to believe a character is capable of something that violent.

I was responding to this statement.

He helps in robberies. Driving "Thrill" or not he isnt a 'good guy'.