Author Topic: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho  (Read 15783 times)

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 23916
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #10 on: April 28, 2009, 10:01:04 PM »
I would agree that both are character focused.

However, I would say that the characters are perhaps the weakest elements in both films. And what it boils down for me in both films is an inability to understand the character's actions.

In MOPI Gus Van Sant sets up this interesting world of male prostitutes. It seems to focus more on their homesexual encounters, although at least one female client exists in the film. My curiosity from the get go is why have these characters turned to prostitution. I want to understand the events the led up to this so that I can better understand who these characters are. After all, the Reeves character comes from a rich family and is well off. Furthermore, he fully plans to inherit his father's money when he comes of age. So why is he sleeping on the streets and selling his body when he could be living a easy life? Does it have something to do with Bob, a man who he calls his true father? Or is this some kind of rebel ion against his father? It could be seen as that but I feel like that is the easy way out. I don't believe his rebellion would go as far as prostitution. I want to know more of the why so I can understand the who but I just never got it.

Likewise in OS I wanted to know why Clooney applied his sharp with and charming personality to crime when he could be working his way up the corporate ladder, living a leisurely life instead of one constantly jumping from place to place. Does he like the traveling? Is he simply lazy and wants easy money? Did he hit a dead end at his job and turn to crime in frustration? I have a similar problem with the Jennifer Lopez character. Why is she a cop? I know you are all saying because of her dad. But still, what makes her tick, where was her mother and why is she hanging around with ugly white douchebags from the FBI? And why all of a sudden does she go for this criminal? I felt there should be more of a struggle with that but she seems pretty cool with it from the moment the two are cuddled in the trunk.

Melvil

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9978
  • Eek
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #11 on: April 28, 2009, 10:08:29 PM »
I did also take note of how both movies play with different genres and even combine two completely different feeling stories within themselves, but I think the effect is really very different for each movie. In Out of Sight I think it drew less attention to itself, the romantic comedy aspect was played into the story pretty well. There's that moment in the trunk scene where they acknowledge that the plotline is going to be a little silly and unrealistic, but it's a good move because then you kinda just go along with it.

In My Own Private Idaho, it's much more noticeable. Here it really felt like we were intercutting between two different movies, it didn't form a cohesive experience as well as Out of Sight did. I primarily attribute this to the language. I loved the Shakespearean stuff, but it is so abrupt when it cuts in and out of it that you can't help but notice it. I'm not sure how well the rest of the movie would have worked if they had worked more of that type of language throughout, but I was definitely thinking about it more than I would have liked. Still, it's excusable because the whole movie feels like a mishmash of scenes, and it's played in such a surreal / absurd way that it's not too out of place.

jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #12 on: April 28, 2009, 10:08:49 PM »
Likewise in OS I wanted to know why Clooney applied his sharp with and charming personality to crime when he could be working his way up the corporate ladder, living a leisurely life instead of one constantly jumping from place to place. Does he like the traveling? Is he simply lazy and wants easy money? Did he hit a dead end at his job and turn to crime in frustration? I have a similar problem with the Jennifer Lopez character. Why is she a cop? I know you are all saying because of her dad. But still, what makes her tick, where was her mother and why is she hanging around with ugly white douchebags from the FBI? And why all of a sudden does she go for this criminal? I felt there should be more of a struggle with that but she seems pretty cool with it from the moment the two are cuddled in the trunk.

Really? You're questioning why he's a criminal instead of working in a white collar job?  Smells like bullshit to me.  I don't see why either of their backstories need to be spelled out in the detail you seem to be looking for.

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 23916
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2009, 10:10:12 PM »
I loved the Shakespearean stuff, but it is so abrupt when it cuts in and out of it that you can't help but notice it.
For once I was not pleased to hear Shakespearean dialogue in a film. It took me out of a lot of the middle scenes of the film.

Really? You're questioning why he's a criminal instead of working in a white collar job?  Smells like bullshit to me.  I don't see why either of their backstories need to be spelled out in the detail you seem to be looking for.
I think that's a legitimate question for this character because without it I think he lacks depth and simply becomes a caricature of a smooth talking criminal. He needed some kind of weakness or vulnerability, something the characters in MOPI had. Instead, he's just this slick, cool character that could only exist in a silly heist film. It's his Oceans series mode where it's all about mood and style.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 10:13:41 PM by lotr-sam0711 »

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #14 on: April 28, 2009, 10:11:26 PM »
I loved the Shakespearean stuff, but it is so abrupt when it cuts in and out of it that you can't help but notice it.
For once I was not pleased to hear Shakespearean dialogue in a film. It took me out of a lot of the middle scenes of the film.

I loved it so much.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

Melvil

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9978
  • Eek
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2009, 10:14:22 PM »
The characters didn't bother me a lot. Sometimes I'm willing to go along with "this is just who they are, and it's not something that can be explained." I felt like both movies gave us enough on the characters for me to go along with that.

But still, what makes her tick, where was her mother and why is she hanging around with ugly white douchebags from the FBI?

Surely you're not talking about this devilishly handsome creature.


Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 23916
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2009, 10:16:09 PM »
I loved the Shakespearean stuff, but it is so abrupt when it cuts in and out of it that you can't help but notice it.
For once I was not pleased to hear Shakespearean dialogue in a film. It took me out of a lot of the middle scenes of the film.

I loved it so much.
Don't get me wrong, I love the dialogue, I just think it's jarring and unnecessary in the context of the film.

jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #17 on: April 28, 2009, 10:17:17 PM »

Surely you're not talking about this devilishly handsome creature.


I saw him on Letterman last week and was shocked by how much he's looking like Richard Simmons these days.

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 23916
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #18 on: April 28, 2009, 10:19:04 PM »
The characters didn't bother me a lot. Sometimes I'm willing to go along with "this is just who they are, and it's not something that can be explained." I felt like both movies gave us enough on the characters for me to go along with that.
I think Melvil hit on my core problem of Out of Sight, the film demands a suspension of disbelief. The film demands it to such a degree that I simply can't accept the movie world it presents. The premise is preposterous in itself. Add in the stupidity of the black criminals in the third act and it was just too much for me to take.

jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: 90s US Round 5: Out of Sight vs. My Own Private Idaho
« Reply #19 on: April 28, 2009, 10:20:58 PM »
The characters didn't bother me a lot. Sometimes I'm willing to go along with "this is just who they are, and it's not something that can be explained." I felt like both movies gave us enough on the characters for me to go along with that.
I think Melvil hit on my core problem of Out of Sight, the film demands a suspension of disbelief. The film demands it to such a degree that I simply can't accept the movie world it presents. The premise is preposterous in itself. Add in the stupidity of the black criminals in the third act and it was just too much for me to take.

I find this very, very odd but can't say I'm surprised.