i had to force myself to get through it. if i had paid to see this i would be so mad right now.
Larry Gaylord: "a billion come in on a day off,and they don't flip out!"
Personally I thought it was excellent. What didn't you like?
sharenot enough explosions and CG robots for ya? I paid to see it, twice, and love it more everytime I see it. Brilliant, original, engaging film.
share"not enough explosions and CG robots for ya?"
Pathetic argument.
Unbelievabvle how many people ssy this if someone doesn't like a film they love.
That or "you're not intelligent enough".
Seriously I wish people would stop that crap, it may make you feel better about your self/tastes but it is a ridiculous statement and as far as I'm concerned anyone who uses it is a prick.
And I'm also starting to feel sorry for Transformers 2. The way everybody uses it to justify how someone couldn't like something more serious.
Why always Transformers 2?
Anyway you may not be a moron but using that argument doesn't help your cause.
My TV, Films & Stand-Up - http://www.imdb.com/user/ur11529350/boards/profile
Because Transformers 2 is the best, most recent example of a terrible movie. Seriously, anyone who likes that movie is undeniably retarded. I'm assuming you're included in this group. You know what Libertarian douchebag, you're obviously not intelligent enough for a film like Brick.
BOOM!
I got my Master's Degree, Graduated with top honors. I enjoyed Transformers 2. God, I must be retarded.
shareMy only problem with transformers 2 (actually tell a lie there are a number of minor cringe worthy moments) is really the length. So all the things people claim only idiots like must be accepted by me on some level. I personally thought this film was just a bit boring. It was great in the first third when it was establishing the story but some point around there i just switched off (mentally). It was like 'who cares' especially when we were meeting the characters with a certain amount of info who didnt tell us what was going on even when they had no real reason to hide it. I liked the idea and the premise but it just got boring.
By the way anyone who only watches one type of film and only watches so called smart films as if anything else is beneath them, must be a social retard and is clearly missing out on a wide range of human emotions
Libertarian person, the problem isn't that the poster didn't like it.
everybody's entitled to their own opinion, don't be so defensive.
The problem is someone posts a discussion called "god this movie is just so bad" and when you open it, you find no reasons why the poster feels that way. at all.
just some lazy statement about struggling to get through it.
and typically, the reason these individuals can't get through the film is because their minds are set for speed from the likes of lost, transformers, avatar, etc.
it's profiling and it's not nice, but pathetic?
thats a little harsh.
IIRC, this film was all speed for the first 30mins.
Libertarian is dead on, any hint of dislike of a film and a poster is bombarded with the "not enough CGI" or "not intelligent enough" quips.
Like heaven forbid someone with a brain not liking this pretentious indie film...
The first 30 minutes of Brick are not fast like the examples I mentioned (Avatar, Lost, Transformers).
Abrupt, maybe. But all speed? Maybe the dialogue.
Visually it dragged.
Disliking any film does not exclude one from the "having-a-brain" catagory. I was expressing that it's what you do with that dislike that determines the relevance of the ADD/CGI argument that so often comes up.
Posting a one sentence complaint on a discussion board without specifying the basis for the complaint can very easily lead one to believe that they are reading a post from a hyperactive mind. Perhaps one that couldn't focus during the juxtaposed speeds of the dialogue and action. Perhaps one who better enjoys themselves with the mindless, explosion-a-minute simplicity of a Transformer film.
If an IMDb poster doesn't like a film, and posts about it in a vague, one sentence comment, they should be prepared for other posters to accuse them of the unforgivable crime of having a short attention span.
If they don't like these accusations, they can elaborate on their point.
If they don't want to, then what they hell are they posting for to begin with?
I will agree that many users fall back on the "you're an idiot for not liking this movie" argument much too often. As if there's a guidebook for what films to like in order to be smart.
Like what you want and shut the hell up. They're just movies. Taste does not denote intelligence.
Are you kidding? It didn't drag one bit. The entire movie flew by. I think you really are one of those brain-dead Transformers-loving dudes. That's okay, perfectly normal, but your opinion holds no weight with me.
shareI can't believe I missed this post. This is a deliciously ironic post.
Despite the occasional sporadic edit, visually it dragged. Aesthetically. If you disagree, you must not understand what that means. That's okay.
The irony is your concern for my brain, and your assumption I need my opinion to hold weight. With you or anyone. These are movies we're talking about. They're as relevant as farts. We give them relevance. So, seeing your sweeping assumption of my personality, intellectuality, or preference of film based on one statement is pathetic.
Let me give you an example. It's like me saying: "I think you are one of those pretentious film-felattio artists who watch independent films that polarize, but gather a cult following, and generalize any and all who don't see eye to eye with you,"
How the *beep* would I know that? From your short, sparse sentences? No. I can't know that about you any more than you can know if I like the Transformers films. Which I don't, already proving your lack of knowledge regarding the psychology and sociology of film watchers.
I am aware of my lack of knowledge, but not only do you not seem to realize yours, you seem to flaunt it. So, I'm assuming your opinion not only holds no weight with me, but with anyone you've encountered.
But I doubt I'm telling you something you don't know.
EDIT:
Almost a year later and I never got a response from this idiot.
Too bad.
Because Transformers 2 is possibly one of the worse films in existence, it's racist, offensive, dull, plotless, terribly acted and relies solely on CGI to gain an audience of idiots. Anybody who enjoys it clearly lacks an IQ, I would say that transformers 2 is possibly as bad as battlefield earth.
share"not enough explosions and CG robots for ya?"
Its funny how people love to use this line, as if taken literally that cgi robots and explosions=a bad movie, then terminator 2 must be a bucket of crap
I think that the fact that the "enlighted" minds -who swarm the internet calling people idiots just 'cuz they hate the crap they dare call art- always use the same argument is prove in and of itself that they have no imagination whatsoever. No surprise they've got no taste either when it comes to film-making.
shareso true. there are some ugly pathetic idiots in this world. makes me sick
shareI thought is was a bit messy but overall really good. And JGL is one fantastic actor.
The Final Frontier - August 16'th
sorry i didn't add more. the reason it was terrible is because it was waaaay too full of banter and we are expected to believe these high school kids are a bunch of modern day shakespeare characters. and we weren't given enough of a reason to care. if someone is going to experiment like this, they need to go above and beyond to make people care if they are going to sit through something this pretentious. it's a movie that is just trying to show people how smart it is. if somebody asked me for an example of what is wrong with indie movies, i would use this as a good example.
Larry Gaylord: "a billion come in on a day off,and they don't flip out!"
Havent you ever seen a Noir film? The Maltese Falcon? M? Sunset Blvd? This movie was film-noir in modern day high school. The "banter" is basically the essence of a noir. The cheesy dialogue, the femme fatales, the mysteries. On the contrary, I found this to be quite genius.
Watch a few Noir films and you will understand this film better.
it was more like a movie making fun of film noir without the comedy. and if i wanted that, i'll just rewatch the old steve martin parody film, which would be worthwhile because that was funny.
Larry Gaylord: "a billion come in on a day off,and they don't flip out!"
[deleted]
I really think you need to re-watch this film and take it in fully. There's nothing "high school" about it except the setting. The focus is on the character's emotions, the hidden meaning's in their language and vernacular. I disagree with your take on it being Shakespearean, but I can see where you'd gather that idea.
I completely agree that this film would not have been the Noir piece that it is without JGL.
All in all, give it another try seeing them as adults, because honestly, that's how they're portrayed.
Sometimes, if things are closed, you just, open them up.share
I just got done with this movie and couldn't believe I made it to the end. The dialogue sounded like a Diablo Cody movie minus the funny; literally every character sounded exactly the same.
I couldn't believe how up its own ass this movie was.
I really didnt enjoy this movie either. I found the dialogue lacking and alot of it unnecessary. I found myself in no way engaging with the story or a desire to follow the charachter. This movie was screaming that it was made by a Film school student who was with, diploma in hand, trying to make a smart film noir movie. Thats a place It messes up first. Its trying to be a smart witty noir film. Films should never do this. Smart people for example are either smart or they are not. Studying only does so much, smart people just have a diffrent ability for using their brains in a more problem-solving manner. People who try to sound smart usually look stupid in the fact their trying too hard. This is what Brick does. I also felt like Rian Johnson didn't VISUALLY give us a sense of who these characters were. For example.
When Levitt's character is with de ravins character where he eats lunch behind the school and she accuses him of being a loner and cutting himself off from others, thats better off shown than said. Like to give us and idea off him cutting himself off. Show how he got there. Maybe walking through a crowded lunch room with kids all around and plenty of open seats, as he exits with his lunch and opts for solitary behind the school. That way you get an idea VISUALLY how hes seperating himself voluntarily.
I also dislike the amount of times the Director uses the same establishing shots. the most prevelant one is that damn ankle or feet shots he does at the beginning of alot of scenes. For gods sake watch this movie again and count the number of those shots...its too much...it looses its effect and frankly it calls out that he is a terrible mind for laying out a storyboard.
Thats my opinion on Brick. I like a few of the actors, mostly JGL(i felt like at times he was alittle too stiff and almost nervous looking fo the character). But this felt like watching a student film that was better off as a short. Also for people whos comments defend this film because its a 'Noir' film...thats bs. Movies are meant to evoke emotion, entertain, and let us leave with something inside our soul that wasn't there when the lights wen't dim. Stop kidding yourself by sticking up for movies that lkack theses things, big-budget or Independant, they apply. So stop talking if all you can say is that this is a Noir film and thats why the lighting was dark and the unlinear story and the bantery dialogue, give me a break. Most good noir films aren't trying to be good noir movies per say. Memento, great noirish film not trying to be. Brick, tryed too too hard to be a good noir.
Perfectly said. You said everything that I was thinking but was too lazy to type.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you.
You are looking at it all wrong. Sure, the feeling of loneliness maybe would have been delivered better but that´s not how the movie works. It´s a a very mis en scene noir movie. Mis en scene means that only one setting or even one shot tells a story. Change in settings are almost always linked together by music or sounds that follows into the new settings. The best example to describe this is the scene where Levitt is running from an attacker dressed in black. The settings move as they are running but there is no music only the sound of the shoes on the asphalt. The sound is so important! It binds the settings together and the sequence is ended by a "GONG".
If you stick to this. What´s better than showing loneliness by putting the character behind a school, completely isolated and with his own lunch pack so that he DOES NOT have to go to a crowded lunch room? (it´s far thinking for a movie)
In a noir film everything is as it is for a purpose. The ankles and foot shots? It shows us where Levitts character walks. When Levitt is meeting the guy with the informations he is clearly walking on top of a small "wall" where he jumps on. And the more the scene continues the camera goes up and you DONT see his feet and if you look closely you see that he is NOT making any effort at "balancing". It looks like he is walking on the street. This is shown many times in the movie.
If people are saying Brick has a bad story... well couldn´t completely disagree. It´s nothing mindblowing. But that´s not what the movie is about. The movie is playing brilliantly with the Noir genre (the high school setting is perfect, because in a normal noir movie everything is over the top at times too) and I think that´s what it´s about.
PS
sry for my bad english ^^
I think that describing this film as terrible is to be way too generous. Actually saying this is a "film" is already generous enough!!!
shareit's not terrible its brilliant but definately not for everyone. and why has this turned into a post about transformers 2?
"It's the Law"
"Then the Laws Crazy!"
I really loved it! Very different and refreshing but that's not the only reason for me. It had a very moody vibe, I was compelled by the story and I thought the acting all around was spot on.
I try to take movie in the spirit they are intended and I think this one was right on the mark.
Oh, and Kara made my pants fit funny :oP
I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!
Indeed, a pathetic movie. And people who say "not enough CGI?" are even more pathetic and should get their heads chopped off, because they are not even using them.
My top 100:share
http://www.imdb.com/list/g41XE9AVM7k/