|
Post by Nora on Jan 3, 2019 19:34:33 GMT
but he had No interest in roberta so their future to me is futile. Also I just red a bunch on the real story and now like the mocie even less since they deviated quite a lot. too bad because the real story and real mark is much more intresting... I liked the movie enough and thought the performances were solid but it made me want to watch Marwencol documentary more than anything. same.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Jan 3, 2019 19:56:30 GMT
I liked the movie enough and thought the performances were solid but it made me want to watch Marwencol documentary more than anything. same. Have you seen foxcatcher at all.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Jan 3, 2019 19:57:26 GMT
Have you seen foxcatcher at all. yes. quite liked it. he did a great job there, i really enjoyed him in a first not so positive role.
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Jan 4, 2019 8:33:26 GMT
But in the end, his potential future is with Roberta ... I would say that Mark's redeeming qualities are his capacity for creativity, reinvention, and sensitivity. Initially, he could have shown greater responsiveness to Roberta, but that failure and his overwhelming interest in Nichol speak to the film's theme about confusing fantasy and reality. but he had No interest in roberta so their future to me is futile. Also I just red a bunch on the real story and now like the mocie even less since they deviated quite a lot. too bad because the real story and real mark is much more intresting... He shows some interest in the end, and to me there is an implied future because Mark has learned over the course of the film. He now knows that Nichol—or some glamorous woman like her—is a fantasy ... Based on the following website, there are some deviations from real life (as there always will be with a movie), but most of the basic points are accurate: "History vs Hollywood"
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Jan 4, 2019 8:48:20 GMT
Have you seen foxcatcher at all. yes. quite liked it. he did a great job there, i really enjoyed him in a first not so positive role. check out documentary component as well.
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Jan 4, 2019 8:59:39 GMT
Have you seen foxcatcher at all. I thought that Foxcatcher was a "great" film, one of four "great" ones from 2014 (along with American Sniper, Fury, and Joe). Foxcatcher is homoerotic, masochistic, chilling, and ultimately brutal.
|
|
|
Post by Vits on May 1, 2019 17:32:33 GMT
The documentary MARWENCOL showed a man named Mark Hogancamp who creates a miniature village with dolls, takes photos of them and displays them in galleries. I didn't like it, because so much of the running time was Mark telling the fictional stories that represent each photo. It's not until the last part that the connection between his art and his traumatic past starts to be shown, even though I (and I'm sure most viewers) could tell that he had a psychological problem from minute 1. WELCOME TO MARWEN is a fictionalized version of this real story. From the beginning, we see MARK suffering due to PTSD. It's not enough to justify the 115-minute running time, but it's an improvement over what should've been a documentary short. I was moved by MARK's journey. What I don't get is why does one the men who assaulted him have his sleeve rolled up (thereby showing his swastika tattoo) during his sentencing hearing? I understand that the scenes representing MARK's imagination are supposed to be over-the-top, but Alan Silvestri's music score is just as intrusive in the real-world scenes. Also, those scenes don't make for a very entertaining subplot. Did they have to take up half of the movie? Even though they showcase a lot of visual effects, Robert Zemeckis' directing and C. Kim Miles' cinematography during the quieter real-world moments impressed me more. Steve Carell's performance is great, while Leslie Mann's and Merritt Wever's are good, but Gwendoline Christie's is bad. Seeing the female dolls throwing themselves at MARK's doll was clearly making fun of his male ego, especially since one of them is based on a porn star. When he met his new neighbor NICOL, I thought "She's clearly going to be the love interest whose only purpose is to make the protagonist feel better, which is also a bad way to write female characters, so it will seem like a hypocrisy." It turns out that NICOL only saw MARK as a friend. However, she's still a character without personal motivations. She's the kind of woman who always wears pretty dresses and doesn't move a lot and only speaks when it's needed for the scene (yes, kind of like a doll, ironically). She doesn't even react properly to this man she has just met using dolls named after them and describing a love story. You know who else doesn't have personal motivations? ROBERTA, MARK's friend with whom he decides to go out at the end, which makes us go back to the first problem. This wouldn't bother me so much if MARK's doll hadn't said to an evil Nazi doll "Women are the saviors of the world!" You didn't earn that. Also, it's heavily implied that the way MARK chooses people to base his dolls on depends on how much they affect his life. I like porn as much as the next guy, but is the actress really comparable to his friends?! Early on, there's a line that reminds the audience of another one of Zemeckis' movies. What's said could be included in different contexts and could make one think of other movies, so it's a subtle allusion. However, during the climax, that idea comes back as a reference so direct and so out-of-place in the plot that it made me cringe. 6/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 1, 2019 18:41:37 GMT
The documentary MARWENCOL showed a man named Mark Hogancamp who creates a miniature village with dolls, takes photos of them and displays them in galleries. I didn't like it, because so much of the running time was Mark telling the fictional stories that represent each photo. It's not until the last part that the connection between his art and his traumatic past starts to be shown, even though I (and I'm sure most viewers) could tell that he had a psychological problem from minute 1. WELCOME TO MARWEN is a fictionalized version of this real story. From the beginning, we see MARK suffering due to PTSD. It's not enough to justify the 115-minute running time, but it's an improvement over what should've been a documentary short. I was moved by MARK's journey. What I don't get is why does one the men who assaulted him have his sleeve rolled up (thereby showing his swastika tattoo) during his sentencing hearing? I understand that the scenes representing MARK's imagination are supposed to be over-the-top, but Alan Silvestri's music score is just as intrusive in the real-world scenes. Also, those scenes don't make for a very entertaining subplot. Did they have to take up half of the movie? Even though they showcase a lot of visual effects, Robert Zemeckis' directing and C. Kim Miles' cinematography during the quieter real-world moments impressed me more. Steve Carell's performance is great, while Leslie Mann's and Merritt Wever's are good, but Gwendoline Christie's is bad. Seeing the female dolls throwing themselves at MARK's doll was clearly making fun of his male ego, especially since one of them is based on a porn star. When he met his new neighbor NICOL, I thought "She's clearly going to be the love interest whose only purpose is to make the protagonist feel better, which is also a bad way to write female characters, so it will seem like a hypocrisy." It turns out that NICOL only saw MARK as a friend. However, she's still a character without personal motivations. She's the kind of woman who always wears pretty dresses and doesn't move a lot and only speaks when it's needed for the scene (yes, kind of like a doll, ironically). She doesn't even react properly to this man she has just met using dolls named after them and describing a love story. You know who else doesn't have personal motivations? ROBERTA, MARK's friend with whom he decides to go out at the end, which makes us go back to the first problem. This wouldn't bother me so much if MARK's doll hadn't said to an evil Nazi doll "Women are the saviors of the world!" You didn't earn that. Also, it's heavily implied that the way MARK chooses people to base his dolls on depends on how much they affect his life. I like porn as much as the next guy, but is the actress really comparable to his friends?! Early on, there's a line that reminds the audience of another one of Zemeckis' movies. What's said could be included in different contexts and could make one think of other movies, so it's a subtle allusion. However, during the climax, that idea comes back as a reference so direct and so out-of-place in the plot that it made me cringe. 6/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog.I still say it would've greatly benefited the movie if they had skipped the doll portion entirely, and kept everything in the real world as that was a bit more resounding.
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on May 19, 2019 5:44:31 GMT
Having viewed Forrest Gump in the theater in late February (my second viewing overall of Gump and my first in a theater), I would somewhat analogize Welcome to Marwen to that earlier Zemeckis film. In both cases, the male protagonists are—for very different reasons—psychologically stunted, emotionally addled, and romantically disappointed or confused. Both movies are "very good" in my estimation, but Welcome to Marwen and its protagonist are much more intricate, complex, and troubling, and unlike Gump, Hogancamp is not a blank slate or an "everyman" stand-in for the viewer. Therefore, Welcome to Marwen's box-office fate proved very different.
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on May 19, 2019 6:03:45 GMT
I didn't like the look of this from the start. Steve Carrell is off-putting for a start. I find him very insipid and unappealing to watch. The film looks like too much hollywood forced sentimental schmaltz as well. Why was this thing even greenlighted? It bombed BIG time. Welcome to Marwen plays as a fable of sorts, but it is really not sentimental schmaltz, or "typical Hollywood." Part of the reason why it flopped at the box office is because Universal evidently seized on the "fairy tale" aspect and threw the movie into the Christmas season, whereas its darkness and quirkiness really called for a fall release or a spring release. Either way, the film probably would not have scored commercially, but at least expectations would have different if the studio had actually understood Welcome to Marwen. Again, it is a "dark" fairy tale, more troubling, ironic, and gradually rewarding than easily uplifting. Zemeckis could have sold out and compromised for commercialism, but he did not.
|
|
|
Post by Maly Class Productions on May 19, 2019 18:36:49 GMT
Zemeckis is one of my favorite directors, but after The Polar Express and then Beowulf he went downhill a lot.
Like in this movie he could have made a very moving film, but most of the emotional parts were shown with the toys doing the acting. So after the movies I mentioned he became too much in love with his CGI effects. I hated the movie.
|
|