Author Topic: Nocturnal Animals  (Read 790 times)

Totoro

  • Guest
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2016, 06:13:12 PM »
Misogynist trash.

That's all.

DarkeningHumour

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 8358
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2016, 04:00:35 AM »
Now that's a bit harsh. There is a whole woman who does not get raped in the movie.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19621
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2016, 08:21:36 AM »
I have a female friend on Facebook who in her little post noted "Warning: Unpleasant imagery in the first 6 minutes, one may want to fast forward or skip all together."

Now, in my review I say that the film starts in shocking fashion, but shocking and unpleasant are very different terms, and referring to the opening scene as unpleasant is pretty cruel body-shaming. It also seems an odd part of the film to note as unpleasant since there are so many truly unpleasant images that follow.

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27743
  • Marathon Man
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #13 on: December 22, 2016, 11:24:36 PM »
Nocturnal Animals
* * 1/2

There's just two things I don't get: the beginning and the end. Because of that, I'm not sure I understood what happened in-between.


What was the cinematic purpose of the obese women dancing during the opening credits? I get what it was doing in the story, though nothing about Susan made me believe she would put this show on. I don't get why Tom Ford chose to open the film with it, especially when we don't even get at the time that it connects to the story at all. It was like David Lynch B-roll before the movie begins.

I read the above posts, but man that last scene left me scratching my head. It just... ends. The problem is that the story is meant to be seen as a puzzle box. Like Inception, there are layers and connections and meta touches. Unlike Inception, I don't care to unpack any of it. I just have the Texas thriller being read by a woman reflecting on choices in her life. There' no interest in connecting the story with Susan's real relationship with her ex-husband. You put a toaster next to a blender and I understand they both go in the kitchen, but I'm not thinking about what I can make that requires both appliances. That pretty accurately describes my caring about the characters here. A room full of appliances.

At least I have nothing bad to say about Aaron Taylor-Johnson. Laura Linney though... yeesh. She should go back to playing a character delivery device. That hair, necklace and accent was right out of 1980s prime time soap opera.

jmbossy

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Generally Critical
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2016, 02:10:22 AM »
I don't know there's a lot to unpack here; puzzle box may be a bit much.

the film starts in shocking fashion, but shocking and unpleasant are very different terms, and referring to the opening scene as unpleasant is pretty cruel body-shaming.

I agree. In fact, for me it set up the only coherent thread I could find re: gender roles. Adams hosts this exhibition (wish she textually "doesn't get") that celebrates and emphasizes the bodies of women society may otherwise disregard. Adams is a character in complete contrast to these women, neither joyous nor free. She's a self declared realist, and acts entirely in accordance with social views on beauty and ambition. It is for these reasons (kind of?) that she leaves Gylenhaal.

Wasn't his weakness in the novel, and failure to save his wife/daughter, a comment on his perceived weakness in real life and inability to keep her and save his unborn child?

I think this is right. A bit extreme of a response to a break up, but the logic tracks.

I think it is as simple as he stood her up as revenge for her leaving him and aborting his child?

This makes the most sense for me, unfulfilling as it may be. I think the idea is that the book proved Gylenhaal was strong for sticking to his creative aspirations and creating something Adams actually engaged with (making her abandonment for some one more practically minded all the more meaningless, at the beginning of that relationship's decline). I don't know there's much more there :/

A potentially controversial question...
I'm doing my best to empathize with Gylenhaal after he learned his s/o aborted his child, but I don't know the film makes a good enough case to also describe Adam's choices as "unforgivable" (which, it does). Let's say, I reeeeeally loved a lady, and she was pregnant with my kid, and she aborted that kid without my input or whatever. I don't see that as an act, in itself, too far to return from. There are potentially religious implications that don't particularly effect me, but like i said, the movie doesn't really try to work any of those arguments in. The dishonesty is one thing, but it isn't like infidelity where the act signifies "i want something different". If my s/o didn't want my child, I wouldn't insist they still have it, and I wouldn't take it as code for "our relationship has no potential future" as Gylenhaal seems to. Like, they can get pregnant again in the future if that's what they want; if anything its rational to avoid children until you're confident in your relationship. which Adams previously made resoundingly clear, she wasn't. Maybe i'm too young or something, but i really don't get the big deal here.

DarkeningHumour

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 8358
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2016, 03:56:11 AM »
People rarely look at abortion with rational eyes in my experience. People rarely look at anything with rational eyes at all really, but abortion in particular.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

dassix

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #16 on: February 03, 2017, 12:07:10 PM »
What a great movie!  I took out a much different meaning in the movie than what I've seen posted so far.  There are various scenes in the beginning which portray the over-the-top security and pampering she has in her life.  The elaborate, solid metal gate to her house and then needing assistance with the manuscript gift because she got a paper cut.  I believe these were there to further show the audience she chose the safe path, both financially and through actual security.  How the manuscript actually connects with the story - I am unsure.  Maybe it represents the complete opposite of her life, but for what reason?

By the end of the movie, it's apparent she knows her husband is cheating on her and they have no love in their relationship (if that was ever there to begin with).  The ending is not Tony wasting a couple hours of Susan's time and money on overpriced cocktails.  The ending to me represented him giving her another chance to choose the unsafe path of 'love'.  By her showing up, especially to an establishment with the romantic vibe, and him ditching her - he's showing her how alone she really is and the fact she may never find love again.  It's the ultimate revenge. I kept thinking back to his quote where he forewarned her that you don't throw away love, especially because you don't know if you will ever get it back again.  He's rubbing the ultimate regret in her face.

The Nocturnal Animals novel in the movie I thought was beautifully shot.  It was super suspenseful and violent, without actually showing the violent acts. (Wife and child being raped/murdered, Jake getting hit with the tool in the eye towards the end, etc.) 

I went into the movie expecting something different, and I got just that - however, I still can't decide if I enjoyed the movie.

DarkeningHumour

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 8358
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #17 on: February 03, 2017, 03:25:13 PM »
I don't get it. You start with « What a great movie! » but your in final thoughts you're not sure whether you enjoyed it?
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

dassix

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #18 on: February 03, 2017, 04:25:38 PM »
I had to start and stop typing so many times in between meetings.  I believe in the course of thinking about the film - I stopped liking it so much. 

jdc

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 5774
  • Accept the mystery
Re: Nocturnal Animals
« Reply #19 on: February 03, 2017, 04:28:37 PM »
Meeting can change your perception on the good things in life
"Beer. Now there's a temporary solution."  Homer S.
“The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem of limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small children and great nations” - David Friedman

 

love