Movies that drag on a story they have established in the 15 minutes

This movie is no way entertaining. Gimme a standard 3 act structure over this arty wanker crap

That's a rather naive statement. Could one imagine cutting The Good, The Bad And the Ugly down to 20 minutes? How about Bergman's Persona, or Fellini's 8 1/2 or Tarkovskiy's Zerkalo? That's absurd. Some movies run for far too long, and quite frankly, Mr. Nobody was one of them. Personally, I don't know if it could be crammed into 20 minutes without losing its main themes and meanings, but it could certainly have been contained to an hour. This movie started with a semi-original message, one we've all considered before, and decided to show it in a pretty basic manner insofar as the content could be dealt with. Unfortunately, Mr. Nobody lacked any real depth beyond its main exploration of the choices and crossroads that confront us in each of life's decisions. It explored that aspect to death and ended up trying to be more important than it was precisely because it thought that it had more to say than it really did. I think the director took on took much here, and besides the Anna story, the rest of the movie felt greatly in need of further development. Intellectually, it was rather disappointing. We were given long intervals of time before anything new or interesting was said or done. The one thing that managed to keep my attention, and keep me from turning the film off an hour before it ended, was the cinematography, which was quite stunning.

Mr. Nobody is certainly a good movie to begin with for young teens or anyone who has taken an interest in philosophy, but that's where it ends. It's an introductory film to deeper, sophisticated films, as its subject matter demonstrates clearly enough, and there's nothing wrong with that. But people need to stop pretending that it's greater than it really is, although I suspect the same people who are doing this are also those people who are using it as an introduction. If that's the case then I don't mind, and I'm glad to see their enthusiasm.

Actually, there is a director's cut, about 15 minutes longer, which goes on to explain, for example, how his father ended up like he did.

Her name was Jean. Don't refer to people as Oriental.

I disagree with you. The film actually uses both the many worlds theory and determinism. Otherwise there would be no sense in predicting or having a sense of predicting. When the boy speaks of knowing what is to come, it has nothing to do with what could happen, but what will happen in his specific timeline in one non splitting linear path. Also, his ideas about contraction and causality just pissed me off. He tries to make it so that time will go backwards but at a brief moment forward to actually have us experience it(moving forward and apparently with positive outcomes). At times, I feel the director/writer just didn't know what he was talking about. I agree with your last statement though.

perfect length, there was too much to say... if it was shorter it wouldn't have worked so well... Loved it, every minute of it.

--------------------------
RIGOLETTO: I'm denied that common human right, to weep.

Hm. I had no problem having an emotional connection with the characters, despite the non-linear plot line(s).

You can also take a drink every time this movie reminds you of or references another, usually better movie.

Butterfly Effect is mentioned.

The whole premise is stolen from Space Odyssey 2001 ending (which makes sense if you get it, but this moviemaker team didn't get it).

Forrest Gump 'feather flying' scene is repeated with a leaf.

I think even The Terminator makes some kind of appearance, and everyone should think of Donnie Darko with this movie.

It's a mish-mash of other movies, but not done very well, and it tumbles down the pit of its own gimmicks and never gives the viewer anything coherent to chew on, except thousand tons of injected romance.

If I TRIED, I couldn't make a movie this bad and badly messed up.. and I don't even make movies.

Gallup question? Answer: no.

Yeah but Nemo can never be happy, or at least never experience it. Living life in reverse is exactly that: reverse. That means, no action is ever to be experienced the way it came about with intention. Essentially, life, if anything, will become meaningless in every way that life has meaning now. It would only be "meaningful" to anything that caused all of it to happen in the first place.

Lol. No one cares.

I really don't understand what you mean that children were sexualized. There is a difference in representing teenagers having sex with each other, which is something teenagers do (also, those sex scenes were in my opinion beautifully done and really conveyed how strong the bonding was between the two characters), and sexualizing them as in putting them in sexualized outfits, make them do sexualized poses etc. I think you are confusing romanticism and sexualization. Some scenes like the sex scenes were highly romanticized but this is not to say they are also sexualized.

Also, clearly the focus and emphasis was not on the fact that women want sex. The point of the film was to portray love, and people in love also tend to have sex, so there's that.

If you don't understand why it's set in the future when the film actually exposes the viewer to this towards the very end, you need to go rewatch it. It's set in the future because as old Nemo says, it's all the creation of a 9-year-old child. None of it really exists. The future doesn't exist.

Last but not least, if you don't like being mentally jerked around, stay away from films that follow a non-linear plot and attempt to portray deeper messages than Mr. Nobody then, because those films tend to try to jerk with the viewer's minds because that's what good art does.

The box office merely reflects the narrow view of today's watchers. This film is not highly accessible to the general audience because it is confusing, has a non-linear plot, has deeper intellectual messages and a story structure that the general audience may not be accustomed to, in addition to the cinematography which is gorgeous.

I think it's a beautifully told film but definitely not for everyone as it does require some investment from the viewer's part. This is what the box office numbers really depict, as they do most other films that requires a bit of an engagement from the viewer.

[deleted]