Author Topic: mother!  (Read 3586 times)

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 545
  • #IBelieveTaraReade
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: mother!
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2017, 03:36:56 PM »
AGB: I really don't appreciate the suggestion that there's absolutely nothing to this movie because of its obviousness. I also don't understand how you're "surprised anyone takes this seriously. I'm surprised anyone here is thinking deeply about this film," which you say just after calling it "a silly, campy, dumb horror movie" as if those aren't analyzed and written about over and over again. I've seen plenty of smart film people writing intelligent things about this movie. Heck, the podcast whose forum we're on had positive things to say about it and filled a 20 minute review without even talking much about the back half of the film. I suggest you investigate your own incredulity, or at least show a little tact when disparaging the movie and the people who enjoyed it. It is rarely a useful position to take, and even more rarely a useful one to express.


Me too! That's why I find it shocking. There's nothing here. Smart people aren't right because they're smart. Pauline Kael and Andrew Sarris have their share of poorly thought-out reviews/analyses. No one is beyond criticism for their thinking.

I am not here to convince anyone otherwise of their opinion. That's useless. I am here to express my opinion. If you choose to discuss it, fine. But I think it's rather disingenuous to tell me that I cannot be completely honest in my reaction. I am surprised. That incredulity is real. I explained why and you have chosen not to respond to my evidence, but my thesis, which I think is in bad faith. TL; DR for you: this film betrays all logic and characterization for a metaphor. Do you have a response to that?

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 28243
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: mother!
« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2017, 03:58:37 PM »
I do.

I guess my problem with your continued incredulity is that you seem to be ignoring the actual things that people are saying. Like, I get it, you think the film is vapid. But I don't see you tracking anything anybody is saying about the film except to dismiss it outright. It feels like you're standing in an apple orchard, looking for something to eat and unwilling to reach up and grab a snack.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10456
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: mother!
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2017, 05:27:59 PM »
DH: I thank you, and I appreciate your review as well. I think the horror movie for introverts angle works quite well. That's often a part of the paranoia horror I wrote about, and it always freaks me out pretty well. I guess it's also part of the home invasion thing, but this feels a little more intense for how isolated they are at the film's start and how innocuously the invasions begin. It's interesting that you see some of the devil, or at least demons, in this film. I don't find them anywhere. I've read people interpreting Mother as the fallen angel. I don't see where that goes, exactly, especially once the baby comes into the picture. I find it interesting how none of us particularly went for the environmental stuff, even when that's what Aronofsky and Lawrence explicitly state is the "point" of the movie. I think it works, even with the biblical stuff, because the metaphor is still about neglect and abuse that by all rights should be abhorrent to the religio(n)(ous) but is instead a central part of it. You can see the two brothers fighting as the first despoiling of the natural world. It's all there, it all works.

Oh, I think it is an easy step to take from the ending of my review to the environmental stuff. If humanity is spoiling Creation that could be taken to mean that we're litterally spoiling the Earth with our pollution. I didn't want to confine the message to that thought, because I didn't know about that authorial intent, and because I think it is more interesting if it is more open than that.

I don't know where the Lucifer-Lawrence identification can lead either, or rather, I don't see what you can say when you start going down that part. I think it works best if you see it as Aronofsky substituting the devil with a nurturing feminine archetype as the opposite of Yahweh, the narcissist, tyrannical male Creator. It's Aro. putting the Bible upside down.

I meant to reply more directly to your own review in proper terms but I haven't found the time yet. Will try to this weekend.

Question: You don't mention this in your review I think, what did you think of the constant use of close-ups?

(Also, I would love to read a piece linking this to Silence somehow.)

I guess my problem with your continued incredulity is that you seem to be ignoring the actual things that people are saying. Like, I get it, you think the film is vapid. But I don't see you tracking anything anybody is saying about the film except to dismiss it outright. It feels like you're standing in an apple orchard, looking for something to eat and unwilling to reach up and grab a snack.

What Junior said.

I would be incredulous if people starting universally praising Jurassic World but mother! is the easiest case of solving « Why are people talking about that movie? » ever. Even if you don't like it there's loads to dissect.

Now, where was that apple?
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

aewade90

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
    • Letterboxd:
Re: mother!
« Reply #33 on: September 29, 2017, 08:40:08 PM »
AGB: I really don't appreciate the suggestion that there's absolutely nothing to this movie because of its obviousness. I also don't understand how you're "surprised anyone takes this seriously. I'm surprised anyone here is thinking deeply about this film," which you say just after calling it "a silly, campy, dumb horror movie" as if those aren't analyzed and written about over and over again. I've seen plenty of smart film people writing intelligent things about this movie. Heck, the podcast whose forum we're on had positive things to say about it and filled a 20 minute review without even talking much about the back half of the film. I suggest you investigate your own incredulity, or at least show a little tact when disparaging the movie and the people who enjoyed it. It is rarely a useful position to take, and even more rarely a useful one to express.


Me too! That's why I find it shocking. There's nothing here. Smart people aren't right because they're smart. Pauline Kael and Andrew Sarris have their share of poorly thought-out reviews/analyses. No one is beyond criticism for their thinking.

I am not here to convince anyone otherwise of their opinion. That's useless. I am here to express my opinion. If you choose to discuss it, fine. But I think it's rather disingenuous to tell me that I cannot be completely honest in my reaction. I am surprised. That incredulity is real. I explained why and you have chosen not to respond to my evidence, but my thesis, which I think is in bad faith. TL; DR for you: this film betrays all logic and characterization for a metaphor. Do you have a response to that?

I don't know about a total lack of logic - I think there's an undercurrent there, at least enough to loosely link it to allow for interpretation. I think it has a lot in common with modern surrealism (and certainly helps with a plot association of "a woman in trouble" a la Lynch) and that has an inherent openness with it.

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 545
  • #IBelieveTaraReade
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: mother!
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2017, 04:42:46 AM »
I do.


I don't see how your review is a response to anything I wrote. All you do is explain why the allegory/metaphorical narrative is important to you in detail. You don't ever truly respond to the idea that the characters are 100% at the service of this allegory, which robs them of all logic or actual depth which is what I assert.

Then again, I don't think we are even on this same page:

Mother! gets much more metaphorical, but I think the central relationship still works and feels quite real, mostly.

I don't feel I know a single person who would agree with this statement. That is not a joke, that is not exaggeration. The relationship doesn't feel real at all. It feels so very heightened for the purpose of the plot. 


I guess my problem with your continued incredulity is that you seem to be ignoring the actual things that people are saying. Like, I get it, you think the film is vapid. But I don't see you tracking anything anybody is saying about the film except to dismiss it outright. It feels like you're standing in an apple orchard, looking for something to eat and unwilling to reach up and grab a snack.

I didn't call you or DH out in my review at all. If you read my following comments, it's not just the reviews I've read on this forum but elsewhere as well. It feels like you're suggesting the only way anyone can discuss their problems with the movie is in response to the raves already posted beforehand.

In other words, maybe you're projecting onto me that I am looking for something to eat. Maybe I just like strolling through apple orchards. Maybe I like to buy apples that were already picked and washed.

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 545
  • #IBelieveTaraReade
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: mother!
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2017, 04:44:55 AM »

I would be incredulous if people starting universally praising Jurassic World but mother! is the easiest case of solving « Why are people talking about that movie? » ever. Even if you don't like it there's loads to dissect.

Now, where was that apple?

Jurassic World > mother!

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10456
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: mother!
« Reply #36 on: October 02, 2017, 04:05:35 AM »
Two things.

It took me some internet talk to realise that the women at the beginning and the end of the movie were not Jennifer Lawrence. When I saw the last shot I had some impression it could not be her but I ultimately decided it was. Anyone else get confused? Am I at least right that they look alike?

Does anyone have any theories about the orange powder Lawrence is constantly drinking?
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

jdc

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 6572
  • Accept the mystery
Re: mother!
« Reply #37 on: October 02, 2017, 05:19:00 AM »
They look alike but are different. He has a type

No idea on the orange powder
"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

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10456
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: mother!
« Reply #38 on: October 02, 2017, 05:30:59 AM »

I would be incredulous if people starting universally praising Jurassic World but mother! is the easiest case of solving « Why are people talking about that movie? » ever. Even if you don't like it there's loads to dissect.

Now, where was that apple?

Jurassic World > mother!

Are you saying they're both terrible but mother!'s worse or do you actually like JW? This is bananas anyway but I'd like to know.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 25298
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: mother!
« Reply #39 on: October 02, 2017, 10:26:32 PM »
Quote
Does anyone have any theories about the orange powder Lawrence is constantly drinking?

Orange Powder.... Tang.... Pootie Tang.... mother! is an homage to Pootie Tang!