U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2009, 11:21 PM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,747 posts, read 5,047,174 times
Reputation: 2883
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnricoV View Post
It was okay, but ... bottom line, I don't think Brad Pitt can act. He kind of just walked through the film. Also had a bit of a problem with the logistics of the film ... but don't want to say what and spoil it for anyone.
Funny, I thought it was by far the best acting job I've ever seen Brad Pitt do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2009, 03:12 AM
 
Location: on an island
13,313 posts, read 29,378,847 times
Reputation: 12610
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnricoV View Post
It was okay, but ... bottom line, I don't think Brad Pitt can act. He kind of just walked through the film. Also had a bit of a problem with the logistics of the film ... but don't want to say what and spoil it for anyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
Funny, I thought it was by far the best acting job I've ever seen Brad Pitt do.
I liked his performance, too. Funny, I respect Pitt much more in recent years.
I think sometimes one person's over-acting is another's stand-out performance.

In Benjamin Button, Pitt's character was more symbolic than anything else, and the movie's logistics did not bother me because I never take the structure of fantasies too seriously; I am usually pretty good at suspension of disbelief.

I agree with what others said about how a good half hour of the movie could/should have been edited--and Katrina should have been left out all-together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,747 posts, read 5,047,174 times
Reputation: 2883
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWillowPlate View Post
I liked his performance, too. Funny, I respect Pitt much more in recent years.
I think sometimes one person's over-acting is another's stand-out performance.

In Benjamin Button, Pitt's character was more symbolic than anything else, and the movie's logistics did not bother me because I never take the structure of fantasies too seriously; I am usually pretty good at suspension of disbelief.

I agree with what others said about how a good half hour of the movie could/should have been edited--and Katrina should have been left out all-together.
I have seen Brad overact many times before, felt like I was watching a college drama student, but here he was brilliant and believeable as both an old man with a youth inside and as an older man in a younger man's body.

I like the fact that this was narrated by Daisy at the end of her life. I can't see anyway to bring this story line to the present day without mentioning Katrina. New Orleans is featured so prominently, that ignoring the effect of Katrina on the city would be disingenuous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 10:42 AM
 
Location: on an island
13,313 posts, read 29,378,847 times
Reputation: 12610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
I like the fact that this was narrated by Daisy at the end of her life. I can't see anyway to bring this story line to the present day without mentioning Katrina. New Orleans is featured so prominently, that ignoring the effect of Katrina on the city would be disingenuous.
Maybe so.
It felt intrusive to me, but I realize this was New Orleans' story too.
I guess I wish the city did not *have* to be synonymous with a hurricane; its history is so much more than that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Pacific NW
6,415 posts, read 5,242,478 times
Reputation: 5457
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWillowPlate View Post
I liked his performance, too. Funny, I respect Pitt much more in recent years.
I think sometimes one person's over-acting is another's stand-out performance.

In Benjamin Button, Pitt's character was more symbolic than anything else, and the movie's logistics did not bother me because I never take the structure of fantasies too seriously; I am usually pretty good at suspension of disbelief.

I agree with what others said about how a good half hour of the movie could/should have been edited--and Katrina should have been left out all-together.
I'm totally down with suspension of disbelief ... that's not my issue. I don't have any problem with the premise of the movie. But ... suffice it to say that his age vs. body size throughout the movie was inconsistent. Illogical. And that was too distracting for me.

As for Brad Pitt, I just found his performance really dull.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
Funny, I thought it was by far the best acting job I've ever seen Brad Pitt do.
I might even agree with you. But that doesn't mean I thought it was good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2009, 10:47 AM
 
7,490 posts, read 8,100,103 times
Reputation: 6253
I liked it better the first time I saw it, when it was called Forest Gump. [SPOILER ALERT] And it's no coincidence that both movies were written by the same person, Eric Roth. Just look at the similarities. Both characters are "simple men" who don't exhibit much growth and are really there just to follow along with. We walk through history through the eyes of Button/Gump while also seeing the life of his childhood sweetheart. Both eventually get together and have children with the girl. The only difference is that in this movie, it's Button who has to leave. Too many of the characters seem lifted right out of Gump. Button's adopted mother is like Gump's mother. The tugboat captain is Lt. Dan. Daisy is Jenny. He even inherits a business that he can live off of, much like Gump lived off of the money from his shrimping business.

But the movie overall was a wasted opportunity. The premise of a man growing younger wasn't really explored beyond just letting us see it happen. Just imagine if you were in your 50s and 60s, but you had the body of a 20 or 30 year old. What would you do? How would you live? How might it affect your decision making? This movie completely glosses over those questions with the exception of Button leaving behind Daisy. And Brad Pitt is truly blank in this movie. The problem with looking like pretty boy is you can't convey anything. Great makeup and special effects don't make a good performance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2009, 01:24 AM
 
Location: Georgia native in McKinney, TX
4,747 posts, read 5,047,174 times
Reputation: 2883
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane View Post
I liked it better the first time I saw it, when it was called Forest Gump. [SPOILER ALERT] And it's no coincidence that both movies were written by the same person, Eric Roth. Just look at the similarities. Both characters are "simple men" who don't exhibit much growth and are really there just to follow along with. We walk through history through the eyes of Button/Gump while also seeing the life of his childhood sweetheart. Both eventually get together and have children with the girl. The only difference is that in this movie, it's Button who has to leave. Too many of the characters seem lifted right out of Gump. Button's adopted mother is like Gump's mother. The tugboat captain is Lt. Dan. Daisy is Jenny. He even inherits a business that he can live off of, much like Gump lived off of the money from his shrimping business.

But the movie overall was a wasted opportunity. The premise of a man growing younger wasn't really explored beyond just letting us see it happen. Just imagine if you were in your 50s and 60s, but you had the body of a 20 or 30 year old. What would you do? How would you live? How might it affect your decision making? This movie completely glosses over those questions with the exception of Button leaving behind Daisy. And Brad Pitt is truly blank in this movie. The problem with looking like pretty boy is you can't convey anything. Great makeup and special effects don't make a good performance.
I was wondering if their was a connection with the Forrest Gump writer, I too saw a lot of similarities.

However, I saw this as the timeline of two lovers who can only truly be happy together for a short period of time because they are ships passing in the night as it were. Even though they had a true love for each other all their lives, the age factor caused them to only be compatible when things levelled out in the middle of their lives.

Gump was much more gimmicky in touching on too many historical events, with Gump being superimposed in almost every significant event in the 50s 60s and 70s. Button was touched by history whereas history was touched by Gump. Big difference.

I thought Pitt gave his most nuanced performance yet, you call it blank. I especially thought he did an excellent job of being an old man but with the innocence and naivete of a child. If the movie was too long, it was too long in the first half when he was older outside and didn't give enough time for him with the younger body to showcase an older soul. The adolecent and then the child with increasing effects of alzheimers were almost glossed over too glibly. But at this time, Cate Blanchett was sublime, and it became more her story as she became the caretaker that he had been for her in her youth.

Oh well, such is the reason there are multiple movies debuting every week. The guys that have taken over Siskel and Ebert were split as well (sorry don't know these new guys' names). One had it as the best movie of 2008, the other didn't even have it in his top ten.

It definitely is in the Forrest Gump genre, but not a remake or redo as you seem to imply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2009, 05:31 AM
 
Location: on an island
13,313 posts, read 29,378,847 times
Reputation: 12610
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnricoV View Post
I'm totally down with suspension of disbelief ... that's not my issue. I don't have any problem with the premise of the movie. But ... suffice it to say that his age vs. body size throughout the movie was inconsistent. Illogical. And that was too distracting for me.
The whole idea of aging backwards is illogical, but even aging forwards does not necessarily take place on a strict schedule--I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane View Post
I liked it better the first time I saw it, when it was called Forest Gump.
Yeah, we have touched on this. Definitely, Button is sort of an empty vessel, a symbol.
Quote:
But the movie overall was a wasted opportunity. The premise of a man growing younger wasn't really explored beyond just letting us see it happen. Just imagine if you were in your 50s and 60s, but you had the body of a 20 or 30 year old.
What would you do? How would you live? How might it affect your decision making?This movie completely glosses over those questions with the exception of Button leaving behind Daisy
What do you do when the love of your life is aging, and you are not?
As Saintmarks says: the age factor caused them to only be compatible when things levelled out in the middle of their lives.

This movie was less about the *mechanics* of aging backwards than it was about the ephemeral quality of time.

Quote:
And Brad Pitt is truly blank in this movie. The problem with looking like pretty boy is you can't convey anything. Great makeup and special effects don't make a good performance.
I thought Pitt was fine, but perhaps I had different expectations and thoughts concerning his character and its motivations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saintmarks View Post
I was wondering if their was a connection with the Forrest Gump writer, I too saw a lot of similarities.

However, I saw this as the timeline of two lovers who can only truly be happy together for a short period of time because they are ships passing in the night as it were. Even though they had a true love for each other all their lives, the age factor caused them to only be compatible when things levelled out in the middle of their lives.

Gump was much more gimmicky in touching on too many historical events, with Gump being superimposed in almost every significant event in the 50s 60s and 70s. Button was touched by history whereas history was touched by Gump. Big difference.

I thought Pitt gave his most nuanced performance yet, you call it blank. I especially thought he did an excellent job of being an old man but with the innocence and naivete of a child. If the movie was too long, it was too long in the first half when he was older outside and didn't give enough time for him with the younger body to showcase an older soul. The adolecent and then the child with increasing effects of alzheimers were almost glossed over too glibly.
To me, this felt on purpose--the way you suddenly realize you're on the other side of the hill, and time is passing more quickly than it ever did before.
Quote:
But at this time, Cate Blanchett was sublime, and it became more her story as she became the caretaker that he had been for her in her youth.
Blanchett was wonderful--it was a plum part, and she was perfectly cast.

Quote:
It definitely is in the Forrest Gump genre, but not a remake or redo as you seem to imply.
I agree.
Ironically, to me the movie, which was way too long, was all about seizing the day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 11:14 AM
Status: "La-dee-da" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: East Coast
2,319 posts, read 2,143,150 times
Reputation: 2858
Quote:
Originally Posted by graceC View Post
THe movie is completely different from the book. The screenwriter re-wrote the story to the point where the only thing he kept from the book is the title and nothing else.
We saw the movie on NYE and liked it a lot. I wouldn't mind going to see it again.

For those who HAVE seen the movie, check out the short story. As graceC posted, it's very different from the movie:

http://www.readbookonline.net/read/690/10628/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2009, 05:39 PM
 
35,000 posts, read 22,310,259 times
Reputation: 6092
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane View Post
I liked it better the first time I saw it, when it was called Forest Gump. [SPOILER ALERT] And it's no coincidence that both movies were written by the same person, Eric Roth. Just look at the similarities. Both characters are "simple men" who don't exhibit much growth and are really there just to follow along with. We walk through history through the eyes of Button/Gump while also seeing the life of his childhood sweetheart. Both eventually get together and have children with the girl. The only difference is that in this movie, it's Button who has to leave. Too many of the characters seem lifted right out of Gump. Button's adopted mother is like Gump's mother. The tugboat captain is Lt. Dan. Daisy is Jenny. He even inherits a business that he can live off of, much like Gump lived off of the money from his shrimping business.

But the movie overall was a wasted opportunity. The premise of a man growing younger wasn't really explored beyond just letting us see it happen. Just imagine if you were in your 50s and 60s, but you had the body of a 20 or 30 year old. What would you do? How would you live? How might it affect your decision making? This movie completely glosses over those questions with the exception of Button leaving behind Daisy. And Brad Pitt is truly blank in this movie. The problem with looking like pretty boy is you can't convey anything. Great makeup and special effects don't make a good performance.
Took the thoughts right out of my head, and arranged them better And I can get by for two or three more years now without Cate or her cheekbones, thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:14 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top