MovieChat Forums > Prozac Nation (2003) Discussion > Terribly Filmed...

Terribly Filmed...

posted 19 years ago by gilhuly68
14 replies | jump to latest

Aside from the terrible acting in this movie the filming was just awful. They broke so many basic rules of filming and just used generally ugly shots throughout almost the entire movie, I missed the first half hour but I'm pretty sure it would have been just as bad. I'm sure that the ideals behind the movie were good, the story seemed slightly intrigueing but I wasn't really paying attention to it. I was too busy watching the amount of times they crossed the "line of action" or left way too much dead space in most of the close up shots. But yea, honestly I've seen better filmed movies in a first year university class...

[–] cecropiia 19 years ago

Whine, whine, whine.

When you can do better, come back.

[–] peaceandcharm 19 years ago

Wine?

<<<<<<<<myspace.com/happyhappyval>>>>>>;

[–] gilhuly68 19 years ago

I may be "whining" but I notice that you have nothing to say to defend the movie, or it's filming.....thanks for coming out though....

[–] oc12311 19 years ago

It's one thing to say it was terribly filmed, but terribly acted? Did you not watch the same movie as I did? Christina Ricci was terrific.

[–] gilhuly68 19 years ago

I dunno what it was, I just didn't believe her character...maybe I wasn't in the mood for this kind of movie but I just couldn't get into it, or the characters

[–] Samuel909 18 years ago

I think this is one of the best films ive seen in relation to Prozac and been depressed and if you are a sufferer or have been you will understand I think this is a great example and im glad i paid £20.00 for this film it was well worth the wait, Christina once again played a Great role she a terrific actress and played the part of wurtzel very well.

It is sad but very true I could relate to alot of this film I rate this film a 7/10 Ive watched this film 4 time and would watch it again.

Lifes a gift and Its not intended to be wasted i think this film kinda puts that point across

[–] MrKneebone 18 years ago

I tend to agree with gilhuly 68. While I appreciate that the story and the subject matter were interesting and worthy, I found a lot of the breaks in continuity quite distracting. It kind of felt as though some of the intentional snappy editing was an afterthought to cover up gaps in continuity that might have had to be reshot to work smoothly. This aside, there were still a lot of instances of camera angle cuts which showed anomolies in stances and clothing and hair positioning.

The acting sometimes felt a little forced and insincere - which is surprising given the high calibre of the cast. Perhaps the awkwardness was more in the script than the acting. Some lines are going to come off awkward no mater who is saying them.

More than anything, it just felt like it could have been so much better.

[–] ss_ks 18 years ago

i'm surprised to see negative comments about the acting. i didn't particularly think the movie was well done (compared to the book) but i thought christina ricci did an amazing job!!!

[–] m-anbar 17 years ago

i dont know how you can criticize a movie like that when you havent watched the whole thing or paid attention to the story.

if you did you might have realized that it was intentionally shot awkwardly and in an unconventional way to serve the story, to show the deep emotions and the empty feelings the character Elizabeth Wurtzel felt.

[–] Jimmmm 17 years ago

thats such a cop out. i watched the entire movie. you dont intentionally shoot your entire movie wrong to convey the feelings of an unlikeable main character. if anything that only serves to further my dislike for the [anti]protagonist.

there are basic rules to film making. and if you want to tell a good convincing story, and not have people hate your movie, they should be followed.

only pretentious mtv generation directors with their flashy montages and pointless edits. and college film students think that breaking established theory is a good idea.

its not. ever. the same people who buy into that are the same pretentious hipsters who listen to unlistenable music and claim it has redeeming qualities. ("theyre playing random notes and screaming on purpose. its a statement" its not. same applies here)

honestly, i only wanted to see this movie for ricci's boobs. but the story and characters were enticing enough that i kept watching. Unfortunately for me, they acted stiff as boards, if boards could be insincere. The cinematography, acting, and script are all sub par. Not all depressives are self centered whining whores, and i think the message and the subtext took a back seat to dawson's creek esque conversation, and sloppy camera work.

[–] m-anbar 17 years ago

You said:
"there are basic rules to film making. and if you want to tell a good convincing story, and not have people hate your movie, they should be followed."

..Who the hell are you?! the ruling judge of film making?

my friend, there ARE NO RULES to film making. you could say there are guidelines maybe? or basics you can be aware of and build upon?

instead of showing some originality and expressing your own creative vision, You're selling your soul by confining your self to those "rules".

what are those rules? go a head and tell me if you can!

the part:
"...and not have people hate your movie, they should be followed."

the last time i checked the user rating for this movie was: 6.2/10. that means that A LOT of people liked it, the majority in fact!

then you said:
"only pretentious mtv generation directors with their flashy montages and pointless edits."

so thats whats really bugging you. you need to seek psychiatric help here, it seems you have a real issue with mtv mainly. and people expressing their own creative vision.... what do you have against the "pretentious mtv generation directors" as you call them? all i see them doing is really expressing them selves in their own views, did they hurt you by doing that?

"its not. ever. the same people who buy into that are the same pretentious hipsters who listen to unlistenable music and claim it has redeeming qualities."

dont randomly judge people just be cause you dont understand them...

"("theyre playing random notes and screaming on purpose. its a statement" its not. same applies here)""

Yeah its a statement! whats wrong with that? its their own statement.. their wrong for having one?

"i only wanted to see this movie for ricci's boobs"

nice, i can see your a real movie appreciator... : S

"Not all depressives are self centered whining whores"

your right, and what she suffered from wasnt just "depression", it obvious that it was a case of a more severe mental illness.

you know i think people just go "this sucks" to a film or movie or whatever, just be cause they dont get it! they dont get the message the maker was trying to send, so they just go "oh no this is a bad movie.. bla bla". same thing goes for all art forms when people dont get it they label it BAD!

IF YOU DONT GET SOMETHING, just say: i dont get this, this is not for me... instead of judging peoples work like you know what you're talking about!

if you keep an open mind and just say i didnt get this, maybe someone will explain to you how they saw it and then you'll see it in a different light!
and if you still dont, just keep an open mind about it!

[–] keeponrockinn 17 years ago

I think the acting was well done but I agree that the filming was terrible X<

[–] darrell4562000 17 years ago

Keep Thinking Inside The Box....Mushroom!!

[–] ryjec 17 years ago

I kinda agree with you. What they used to depict the film was pretty terrible. Bad lighting, acting, camera moves etc... Though I did like few of the montages in it, even though I think after the third one I kinda got the point. And that voiceover annoyed the crap out of me. Overall I enjoyed maybe 10 or 20 minutes of this film. About 3 stars out of 10.