Posted on 09/15/2017 4:26:57 PM PDT by Haiku Guy
From the idiotic drug-addict hokum Requiem for a Dream to the overrated, overwrought and over-hyped Black Swan, which I called “a lavishly staged Repulsion in toe shoes,” the films of wack job Darren Aronofsky have shown a dark passion for exploring twisted souls in torment. But nothing he’s done before to poison the ozone layer prepared me for mother!, an exercise in torture and hysteria so over the top that I didn’t know whether to scream or laugh out loud. Stealing ideas from Polanski, Fellini and Kubrick, he’s jerrybuilt an absurd Freudian nightmare that is more wet dream than bad dream, with the subtlety of a chainsaw.
This delusional freak show is two hours of pretentious twaddle that tackles religion, paranoia, lust, rebellion, and a thirst for blood in a circus of grotesque debauchery to prove that being a woman requires emotional sacrifice and physical agony at the cost of everything else in life, including life itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
Weren’t those last century?
Aren’t you forgetting that nitwit Adam Sandler who’s movies aren’t worth a cup of warm spit?
Is that the Rex Reed from many years ago? I thought he was long dead.
Within the last 100 years.
Movie 43 is the worst movie ever.
Nothing is even close to being as bad.
Who? Lawrence? You can't be serious.
IMDB reviews:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5109784/reviews?ref_=tt_urv
They seem to be more informative as to why the movie is bad.
I’ve not seen “Empire of the Ants”, but I can imagine it is pretty bad. I did rent “The World According to Garp” on video some years after it was in the theatre. Not completely and thoroughly bad, but I’m sure you’d agree it was disappointing in many instances. It was sort of like “Class” as it was something as a 12 or 13 year old, I wanted to see it when it first came out, but was a tad to young to be allowed, lol.
After reading some reviews, it appears the critics are more upset about the main character being portrayed as a traditional housewife than all the violence and depravity that surrounds her.
“Disappointing” is the perfect word to describe “World According to Garp.”
It’s getting a 71% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Of course, if you threw out all the God hating liberal reviews it would probably have a 0% rating.
Now its at 69% and if you look at the audience score its at 44%. I put more stock in the audience score generally.
I’ve dropped so far out of the culture that these names mean virtually nothing to me.
I have seen the photo of the Indian with the tiger in a canoe from Pi and that is it.
I had to watch the trailer for Mother to even put a face to this flavor of the month’s name. She looks a bit like Renée Zellweger. Maybe that’s why Renée got plastic surgery to alter her looks, who knows?
I won’t see it, why bother? Watching the trailer there are swipes/lifts from Hitchcock, Polanski, and Kubrick. Invest time in one of their movies instead of this shot on video rehash.
Didn’t Rex Reed get a sex change sometime last century to become Raquel Welch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywcr3lYuVo0
Watch the trailer for “Mother?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpICoc65uh0
And then watch this brief scene of a teacher’s fake “art” film from Ghost World.
Ghost World - Mirror, Father, Mirror
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrSIV1jyyN4
Mother is a pretentious stab at making “art” from “controversy” and “important messaging” for a mass audience that is culturally illiterate in film, history, and politics.
“I like to show it to people who I’m meeting the first time because I think it says so much about who I am and what it feels like to inhabit my specific skin.”
And for the record, Ghost World is the best comic book film adaptation ever.
Masked and Anonymous
Made in 2003,an almost improvisational “film” about the looming “revolution” in Boosh’s America.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/masked-and-anonymous-2003
...”Masked and Anonymous” is a vanity production beyond all reason. I am not sure, however, than the vanity is Dylan’s. I don’t have any idea what to think about him. He has so long since disappeared into his persona that there is little received sense of the person there. The vanity belongs perhaps to those who flattered their own by working with him, by assuming (in the face of all they had learned during hard days of honest labor on a multitude of pictures) that his genius would somehow redeem a screenplay that could never have seemed other than what it was, incoherent raving juvenile meanderings. If I had been asked to serve as consultant on this picture, my advice would have amounted to three words: more Tinashe Kachingwe...
It’s one of a handful of movies I’ve walked out of. I was watching a free screening and somewhere after the 70 minute mark I said that I cannot take 1... minute... more...
Also walked out of 2 of Lars Von Treir’s movies. I wouldn’t have attended a second one if I’d know it was the same guy. Again watching paint drying dull (with the camerawork of a retarded chimpanzee). If you remember that early Dockers’ ad, you know what I’m talking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0N5ZTIE3Yk
“Who? Lawrence? You can’t be serious. “
—
I certainly am.
.
Okay, I’ve seen some of her movies. She’s almost boring. What roles are you referring to?
"The whole movie is Allegory! And that's what you should keep in mind while watching it."
"Aronofsky is well aware of the fact that history repeats itself, and unless humans decide to take responsibility for our actions and stop the endless assault on Mother Nature, we might wake up one day to find that she has no more love to give."
"Jennifer Lawrence was representing "Virgin Mary"(that's why the film is called "Mother!") and also the "Home", "Earth"... Simply "Hera"- goddess in Greek mythology. That's why she had such a strong connection with the house! Trying to protect it from all of those guests trying to destroy it. She was getting crazy and feeling sick, when the house was being destroyed and hence she saw the blood in the house only in those moments etc"
"Without discussing the metaphor this would be a very hard film to review (because that is in essence everything), so let's get into some spoilers. As I understand it, Javier Bardem's character is 'God' or 'Him' as he is listed in the credits. The film serves as a commentary on how (according to the Bible at least) all God wants is attention and to be loved, no matter how many people in the real world have to be destroyed, killed or blown up for him to achieve that."
"In a nutshell..... The story of a writer-blocked poet (Bardem) and his beautiful young wife (Lawrence) who has adoring fans (including Ed Harris and his wife Michelle Pfeiffer) that flock to his home just to be in his presence. Forgive the run on sentence........Harris is dying of cancer, his two sons arrive to fight over his money, get into a fistfight and one gets killed, more fans arrive, Lawrence goes into labour, fans start to riot, tearing the house apart, she has the baby, he wants to show his fans, she says no, he sits and stares at her for days, she falls asleep, he takes the baby, shows his fans, they grab the baby, kill it and eat it, Mom goes nuts, runs to the basement with a wrench, bashed a hole in the oil tank and sets it on fire and blows up the whole place, Bardem carries her charred body, sets her down and proceeds to reach in her chest and take out her heart, with her permission. He squeezes her heart til it turns to glass, sets it in a stand, the next scene there's a new wife and the whole thing starts over again. There! Just saved you $10........you're welcome!"
Every movie ticket bought is a donation to the Democrat Party...
That's pretty much how I've felt for a long time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.