This movie is a master class... - Drive (2011) Discussion

[–] NutMustardx 8 years ago

I liked parts of it overall was pretty good. The opening part when he's driving to the shop to get his car from Walt ftom breaking bad,he's wearing his driving gloves, the next shot from the passage side of the car he has them off . Poor editing. The music dragged on at times. The while idea of him saying his few days w her and the kid were the best times of his life...hard to buy. Unless she deflowered him by the creek? I thought it was boring ar first then watched it again and liked it alot more. A few more scenes added in here and there aND it could have a been spectacular.

reply

[–] aaron-wade-b 8 years ago

It's a great film.

I love the juxtaposition between sweet and hopeful, surreal and violent. And the music, acting, cinematography are stellar.

It's basically a love story with Travis Bickle.

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

You lost me at "Master Class."

It was an entertaining little flick but the effusive reviews that some seem compelled to give it, IMO, say more about the lack of quality films today.

This wasn't a heavy weight by any stretch. Decent and at times, impressive but the overall product was betrayed by the endless contrivances contained in the film.

An alright film but I just have contempt for hyperbolic statements about movies that deserve very little of it.

reply

[–] msvillager 8 years ago

I have contempt for people who who can't see beyond their own opinions because of their large inflated egos and sense of self worth. It's really sad that you have nothing better to do than troll IMDB boards posting replies to make you feel better about yourself. A normal person offers a differing OPINION without belittling and putting others down. Go crawl back to your pitiful, lonely existence and stay off my threads.

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

there are no contrivances in this film

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

Really?

Then, I suppose that C3PO and R2D2 weren't the droids that the storm troopers were indeed looking for..

I can only imagine that Bill Clinton did not, in fact, have sexual relations with that woman.

And naturally, Richard Nixon was not, in actuality, a crook.

Try again.

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

watch documentaries then

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

You don't know what a "contrivance" is.

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

you don't know whether i know what a contrivance is.

Judging by your examples, you definitely don't.

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

I don't think that you understand much of anything.

Those examples weren't examples of contrivances, you dolt.

That was me using examples of obvious BS statements in order to poke fun at your absurd claim that this half-assed movie had "no contrivances."

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

thought so

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

Funny, doesn't seem like you think much at all.

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

au contraire,
you need to think more.
It's a little foolish to criticize a work of fiction because you personally found it to be contrived, implausible, goofy and magical in places. Any piece of movie fiction is open to this criticism depending upon the viewpoint.

And whilst I would agree that some films do push the boundaries. These type of criticisms can invariably be justified or explained away. Particularly by the movie-makers themselves or viewers/fans of the movie.

I'll give you credit for not expecting everything to be explained in a movie, but with more thought given I think you could resolve some of your initial criticisms/issues with this film.

a basic example of how you have demonstrated a skewed viewpoint,
accusing the movie-makers of trying to be stylish and unique by naming a character standard when this was the name of the character in the book the film is based upon. Objectionable without foundation.

It sounds to me like you just weren't having some aspects of this film, which is fine, but don't spout generic lazy criticisms without first thinking how?, why? what if?

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply

[–] bigmyc04 8 years ago

I see that you googled "contrivance/contrived." Good for you. You are exhibiting enormous growth as an individual.

In reference to your highly debatable claim that any movie might exhibit instances of likewise forced plot and/or character designs I would simply disagree. Some movies are just better at assimilating their developing frames so that they evoke a more natural feel. To determine what constitutes "art" is a nebulous pursuit but there are commonly practical ways to determine what is "good art." I understand the perspective of relative critique but I simply ask people to be reasonable in their assessments..if you are not going to maintain honesty in your impressions of movies that your are unobjectively resigned to like, then there isn't much to talk about. Furthermore, what comprises a contrivance in a film can be much more obvious than the next and that is basically where I'm hanging my hat.

I don't want everything explained but I don't want ridiculous plot jumps either. I'd like the film's developments to run seemlessly, if not, chronologically. It's not so much about the lucid revealing of any plot lines or character background. It's about having the good sense to make a movie where the absurd isn't attempted to be passed off as gritty realism. "Drive" fumbles too many times on that front and it does it shamelessly.

Great, "Standard" was the character's name in the book...then the book is horse *beep*. Not for the simple inclusion of a goofball name that seems created to elicit a forced sense of Hollywood edge but for how the movie plays out in its totality. Like I said, it's not all terrible, but many scenes just drop the ball. There was nothing "lazy" or generic about my specific citations of what I thought was clearly ridiculous about this movie. It was to the contrary, actually.

reply

[–] sjaskew42 8 years ago

forced plot and/or character designs

not sure what you mean by this, seems generic/non-specific.

Some movies are just better at assimilating their developing frames so that they evoke a more natural feel

so you prefer movies that evoke a natural feel ?

created to elicit a forced sense of Hollywood edge

that's just a disgrace of a comment, poncey at best. not to mention being a name snob.

specific citations of what I thought was clearly ridiculous about this movie

must have missed that post.

I simply ask people to be reasonable in their assessments..if you are not going to maintain honesty in your impressions of movies that your are unobjectively resigned to like

are you suggesting that on occasions some people who don't agree with your generic criticisms of a movie aren't being reasonable, honest or objective ?. That's a poor argument if you are.

Specifically in relation to this movie I upgraded my admiration on second and third viewing having re-considered aspects of the movie that on initial viewing didn't feel quite right. In short, there is more to each scene and the script than you see first time round.

ridiculous plot jumps

not sure what you mean by this, seems generic/non-specific.

the absurd isn't attempted to be passed off as gritty realism

again, not sure what you mean, verging on poncey again.

If you've actually provided any examples for your generic/non-specific criticisms anywhere then please direct me to them and I'll give you my take, you obviously would not have to agree, but so far you're just spouting

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

reply