Well, I don't expect this list to get a lot of "signatures" only because not many people have seen it.
Aside from the actors themselves (not necessarily the acting), this movie was total rubbish.
you're the one who's total rubbish.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
i thought it was ok
not pta's best but not total rubish either
all you people need to calm down though, he wasnt trying to insult the movie he just wanted to know if anyone else didnt like it
we also have to tk into account the fact that this was PTA's first feature film. I personally think it is a very cool, neo-noir stoy and i love it ... especially philip baker hall's muted "sydney"..... very cool character. I also must mention that John C. Reilly's "John" is a great example of what he is good at... the man-child, he is a grown man, but very naive and immature.. which only brought me closer to his character. 9/10
share[deleted]
This movie is just BEAUTIFUL, so I'll sign as upset with YOU and this pointless THREAD.
shareThis movie was quite good actually. PTA is an aquired taste for people who know good movies. The characters in this as in all his movies were excellent and engaging. I think you're rubbish you bloody c*nt. Bollocks!
share[deleted]
I don't know how you guys can say this movie is "Amazing" and "Remarkable" and all that other *beep* I have read in this thread. The words that describe this movie best are "Boring" "Pointless" and "Bland". PTA has done better films and I understand that this was his first feature film but OMG was this *beep* BORING. Waste of an hour and a half in my opinion...
shareI think it is a beautifully absorbing character study. It's the lesser of his 4 films, but considering what it's up against that is no bad thing. The only thing that lets it done is the central revelation, which by revealing it Anderson tells us more than we need to know. Regardless, the film is a true gem.
share[deleted]
I Thought Sydney was great...though Magnolia and Boogie Nights from PTA were far superior IMO, it was better than Punch Drunk Love, which just didn't strike me as amazing...creative, but too OTT for it's cause.
shareIt's funny because while I think that Punch Drunk, Boggie Nights, and Magnolia are better films as far as the writing and directing, Sydney is still my fav PTA film. Maybe I just dug the characters in it more, and I felt that they were all grounded better, sometimes PTA tends to get over-dramatic, which is good at times, but sometimes it seems a little absurd. But no one can argue how amazing of a director and writer he is.
"There is no love of life without despair of life." -Albert Camus
i'm watching it now and i think it's rubbish
sharethe john character is too thick for real life
shareYea I'm watching too. Not keen so far but I'll see it through to the end...
"Yeah, laugh it up. I can have a gorrila touch you"
I registered here specifically to warn people about this annoying film. It was on tv last night and I watched it just to see what all the hype was about. What a waste of time! Can't believe I stayed up 'til 2am to see that when I could have been sleeping! Sure, the Sydney character is cool, but I felt so sorry for him surrounded by the rest of those numbskulls and lowlives. The John character was so unbelievably stupid that I kept thinking right up to the end that his stupidity would turn out to be an act and that he was in league with Samuel L Jackson's character in trying to get money out of Sydney...and Clementine - so self-destructive. What an annoying film!!!!
sharei agree , the first 3 quarters of the film are irrelevant and the ending leaves a lot of questions unanswered, one of the worst films i've watched in recent times - 3/10
shareThere's no accounting for taste. This movie is pretty much flawless. It never ceases to amaze me when people can't sit still and enjoy a small, solid, slow-paced film. This is as masterfully written and directed as anything PTA has done. It's just not as flashy or epic.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I am a huge fan of P.T. anderson and i think this movie is good, I wouldnt go as far as to say its amazing but it definitly has potential. If this wasnt his first picture and they (the producers) didnt *beep* with him so much he could of made it a hell of a lot better. They didnt let him do what he wanted so one really can't blame him. Nevertheless it is a very impressive first film, but its just no "Boogie Nights"
p.s. if anybody can tell me where i can find Anderson's short films ( The dirk diggler story, Cigarettes/Coffee etc.) it will be very much appreciated
It is a very formidable achievment to have made (written and directed) a film as good as this one at the age of twenty-six.
I am not a huge PT Anderson fan. The only one of his other films I love (and I loved this one) is Boogie Nights. But all four of his films are engrossing and artistic examples of great filmaking, and Anderson is certainly one of the brightest spots in Hollywood these days.
The fact that people hated this film, if they are in fact being honest, is troubling--and if they are not, well that's troubling too. I was startled and inspired by the fact that someone so young made this picture.
Anyone who wants to throw crticism of this movie around should either back it up or keep their mouth shut and reflect on what they were doing when they were 26, or peer into their crystal ball for a reality check on what they will be doing at that age (as I suspect most of this flippant and thoughtless crticism is coming from the very, very young.)
This film is flat out brililant, love it. P.T. Anderson is one of my favorites and this is the second best film from him (magnolia being numero uno). I think Phillip Baker Hall did a really awesome job and it has been said before but he character was really cool.
-I'm in a world of sh-t, yes, but I'm alive...and I'm not afraid.