Darren Aronofsky - Noah

  On 8/16/2013 at 11:43 AM, trananhhung said:

 

  On 8/16/2013 at 11:32 AM, MadameChaos said:

 

_{Stravinsky’s Swan Lake?}

_{I'm working here, people. Give me a break. I couldn't stand her performance. Soap opera overacting. But like I said before, I don’t remember it very well. Thankfully.}

Oh I see, you are trolling! Haha very funny.

  On 8/16/2013 at 11:32 AM, MadameChaos said:

I could not disagree with you more. Natalie Portman delivered the perfomance of her career (for which she won an Oscar).

 

It's not a horror film. It's a psychological thriller about someone going insane from the pressure of their career.

 

Stravinsky’s Swan Lake?

her performance was a pretty clear case of "trying too hard". Which puts her in the company of actors like Tom Cruise. Who, frankly, I enjoy in his "try hard" mode more than Portman (well, at least before he got the cheek implants and dermal fillers and whatever else, now he's hard to look at no matter how hard he's trying to emote)

I admire her work ethic and getting all skinny and stuff. But she's no Christian Bale, either.

I'm not trolling. I was asked why I left the theater. Sorry for not remembering very well a film that I despised when it was released. And sorry for not enjoying an universally praised film.

Tom Cruise was great when trying too hard (Magnolia). Portman looks soap opera pathetic when doing it (Swan Lake).

At what point did you leave the theatre? Did you watch the whole film?

I left when she got wings and her eyes turned red. I couldn't take anymore silliness.

  On 8/16/2013 at 12:09 PM, trananhhung said:

I'm not trolling. I was asked why I left the theater. Sorry for not remembering very well a film that I despised when it was released. And sorry for not enjoying an universally praised film.

 

 

Tom Cruise was great when trying too hard (Magnolia). Portman looks soap opera pathetic when doing it (Swan Lake).

*strains neck muscles, rolls eyes like frightened rabbit*

(for 2 hrs)

in all fairness though, it was a good effort at a bare-bones, taut thriller. I like that instead of continuing in his silly grandiose vein (Fountain) Aronofsky scaled it back and did two "pretty decent" back-to-back character portraits (Wrassler and BS). But I do think Portman fell a bit short, I seem to remember some of the cg went a bit overboard to the point of being laughable, and the overall experience was just a bit to unpleasant in a "I have no desire to ever revisit that film" kind of way. You could take that as a sign the film achieved its goal of making the audience uncomfortable, but I'm not so sure. A descent into madness should be uncomfortable, I guess. But Aronofsky's woozy camera, and the fact that the characters are never likable (and the instructor guy is a cliche "sleazy French dude"), made it hard for me to connect to.

The lesbo stuff was not well handled either.

Mainly Portman is just terminally dull.

Mila Kunis tore up the screen, though.

If you really want to see a film about ballet with no surrealist psychobabble and CGI wings distracting from the experience, please try this http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040725/

Well I'm just going to finish by saying I disagree with you but respect your opinion. Even if it is wrong.

What Black Swan really needed to be an effective psychological ballet movie was bright orange blood spraying everywhere.

Suspiria! Now you're talking!

  On 8/16/2013 at 12:45 PM, lumpenprol said:

 

  On 8/16/2013 at 12:09 PM, trananhhung said:

I'm not trolling. I was asked why I left the theater. Sorry for not remembering very well a film that I despised when it was released. And sorry for not enjoying an universally praised film.

 

 

Tom Cruise was great when trying too hard (Magnolia). Portman looks soap opera pathetic when doing it (Swan Lake).

*strains neck muscles, rolls eyes like frightened rabbit*

 

(for 2 hrs)

 

in all fairness though, it was a good effort at a bare-bones, taut thriller. I like that instead of continuing in his silly grandiose vein (Fountain) Aronofsky scaled it back and did two "pretty decent" back-to-back character portraits (Wrassler and BS). But I do think Portman fell a bit short, I seem to remember some of the cg went a bit overboard to the point of being laughable, and the overall experience was just a bit to unpleasant in a "I have no desire to ever revisit that film" kind of way. You could take that as a sign the film achieved its goal of making the audience uncomfortable, but I'm not so sure. A descent into madness should be uncomfortable, I guess. But Aronofsky's woozy camera, and the fact that the characters are never likable (and the instructor guy is a cliche "sleazy French dude"), made it hard for me to connect to.

 

The lesbo stuff was not well handled either.

 

Mainly Portman is just terminally dull.

 

Mila Kunis tore up the screen, though.

 

i would agree, aronofsky has chosen the amplitude and the range of his projects very well. i like to watch portman playing in mila's kunis cuz i have penis.

for me black swan is a nearly perfect film. inspiration and glittery transformation, vile obsession, demonic possession, illusion, fierce visual terror, sex, creepy older women, beautiful musics with wings and feathers and things. i am harppy

^ agreed

Aronofsky films are generally different angles of the essence of the spiritual framework behind Pi (Pi and The Fountain are actually about the same thing). Wachowskis as well- the films are generally about spiritual enlightenment and the journey/angle that is the human form.

They are retelling the same concepts, to enlighten as many people as possible; trying to show the same ancient knowledge from different views.

They are spiritual workers, working from within a construct that has become a spreader of darkness (Hollywood), to shine light and awaken humanity in a medium that can reach many people.

Black Swan made me forget I was watching a film which in my opinion is the mark of a good film.

I liked Black Swan. I really love the Swan Lake score so that might be something to do with it.

This FX reel shows some of the subtle effects in black swan - removing cameramen from mirrors, cloning Natalie's face on other people, etc

[youtubehd]4n71sjmd-bM[/youtubehd]

Thank you so much for the FX reel. It makes me deslike the film even more!

I find it really annoying that he goes for this handheld cinema vérité style and then it's all post-production FXs. You can do half the stuff where he applies CGI on camera if he was creative and not lazy. It's much easier to it with computers, isn't it? It's all plastic and no real nerve. God I hate modern american cinema.

The story really fits into The Fountain / Swan style of storytelling. This is going to be awesome

Try doing this without CGI, Aronofsky.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke2CFuLQ6t8

  On 8/20/2013 at 12:03 PM, o00o said:

The story really fits into The Fountain / Swan style of storytelling. This is going to be awesome

agree. and it's going to have Clint doing the core again. he always adds much.

  On 8/20/2013 at 11:15 AM, zazen said:

I liked Black Swan. I really love the Swan Lake score so that might be something to do with it.

 

This FX reel shows some of the subtle effects in black swan - removing cameramen from mirrors, cloning Natalie's face on other people, etc

 

[youtubehd]4n71sjmd-bM[/youtubehd]

Wow thanks this is really intersting. It's funny how watching this actually makes the film more interesting for me rather than ruining the illusion.

[youtubehd]quvwC0VbtTw[/youtubehd]

  On 11/14/2013 at 2:03 AM, Rubin Farr said:

[youtubehd]quvwC0VbtTw[/youtubehd]

I'm not going to judge a film by a 18 second teaser.

but it looks shit.

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/paramount/noah/

here's the full thing

  On 11/14/2013 at 9:04 AM, Gocab said:

 

  On 11/14/2013 at 2:03 AM, Rubin Farr said:

[youtubehd]quvwC0VbtTw[/youtubehd]

 

 

I'm not going to judge a film by a 18 second teaser.

 

 

 

 

but it looks shit.

 

lol of course it does

"we muhst buihld ahn ahhhhrk"