| Author | Message | ||
     Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Yesterday I went to see DRIVE, starring Ryan Gosling, Carey Mulligan, Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman as the principal players in Nicolas Winding Refn's adaptation of James Sallis' novel. I had high expectations for this movie, Refn's Valhalla Rising was one of the movie highlights of 2009 as was last year's Bronson. I also believe Gosling to be one of the finest, most exciting actors among such contemporaries as Philip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti in cinema at the moment (that's something of an understatement for me...I think he's arguably the greatest actor in the last fifty years alongside Giamatti). Coming out of the cinema I realized my expectations should have been set even higher. I can honestly say that Drive was one of the most perfect examples of cinema I'd ever seen. Of course, too much gushing will no doubt have most of you suspicious and unable to accept the movie on the same terms as I have described it. That's alas inevitable. This is film noir that eschews all the comparisons made between it and Bullit. There are only four scenes which involve the 'driving' of actual cars in high speed chases. This is not a film about cars and getaways, etc. But neither was Bullit, so perhaps the comparisons about the lead protagonists are apt after all. I don't really want to go into the film too much as I don't want to give any details or plot developments away. Needless to say you have probably heard about the explicitness of the violence. Well, unlike Tarantino, this is violence as comparable if not far worse in its intensity than Taxi Driver or Goodfellas. (I doubt that would be a problem for anybody here). The direction is flawless. Pitch perfect. The screenplay is airtight, a smooth, heavenly beauty of writing.The photography is a masterclass in visualizing noir for a modern crime film. There are only four or five songs used in the entire film, but they had me wide-eyed with astonishment at just how seamlessly they blended in with the scenes. This is a film of aching beauty, laden with so much atmosphere that I felt crushed by the whole emotional experience at the end. Scenes between Gosling and Mulligan with very few lines between them had the kind of chemistry you could believe of real people, not movie star chemistry, but a chemistry that stops you from realizing this art, not real life. There's a scene in which they barely speak, hardly touch, just look at each other, smiling, and its magical and earnest and mesmerizing. It's been compared to a whole host of disparate films, some of which I think are understandable, some of which I disagree because I think it's lazy and obvious why those comparisons were made. I love Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs and especially Jackie Brown as crime films, but Taratino's movies are those of a film fan. This is a crime film of brutal and believable honesty, that though following its own conventions as set down by crime films in general, is charged with long drawn out scenes of unbearable quietness, to unexpected convulsions of terribly brutal violence that impact so strongly, that it is impossible not to care. Only Memento, The White Ribbon, Incendies, have made me feel so enamoured of a film in recent years. Most of you will probably see the film and think Frank has gone way over the top on this, and that's fine, understandable, but I do urge anybody who wants to watch a film with a thousand reasons to recommend it, to do so. Here's the WIKIPEDIA LINK which is quite detailed: just skip the plot description. (INTERESTING to note Refn's real inspirations weren't as obvious as some reviwers claimed, credits via Risky Business!!!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_%282011_film%29 | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
And ignore the comparisons between the brooding characters Clint Eastwood's used to play, and Ryan Gosling's character. Sure, they say very little, and they are barely restrained from their own inner rage, but Gosling's character has nothing in common with that type of character that Eastwood had played. I love Clint, who doesn't, but these comparisons are truly off-mark. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Sounds like this one's as good as I hoped it would be... This and Bellflower are my most anticipated films in the past 4 or 5 years. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Yep, but it has to be seen on the silver screen. The music and the tension grip the viewer to the point of absurdity. *** A woman walking out of the cinema ahead of me was chattering away about the film. I couldn't understand her Polish, she was way too fast for me to understand. I asked Ewa what she was saying, and was expecting to learn that the woman thought the film a waste of time, or too violent, etc. To the contrary, she said it was depressing, and gloomy and yes, violent, extremely so, but that, she said, was how it was supposed to be. "It had to be like that." Enough said. One final thing. Albert Brooks plays one the most exquisitely contradictory gangsters seen in any crime movie. Probably the best role he has ever played. Completely against type. A character who plays his savagery against this ever increasing backdrop of compromise and sad-eyed weariness. The dialogue in this film is not the banter, quip filled love-fest of other modern day crime films, but of people, not cinema. Though to say that this film is not also a love-letter to cinema would be remiss of me. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAc23x2JJG0 Don't watch it all...PLEASE. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
I'm afraid I don't do the silver screen. I shall wait for the DVD, as usual, so I can watch it alone and in complete silence. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
I would break that vow of cinema chastity just to see this. Honestly. DRIVE got a 15 minute standing ovation when it won the Cannes Festival award for best director. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Jesus H. Christ! If it's even half as good as you say it is, Frank...  Meanwhile I'm off to see 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' tonight on the similarly gobsmacked recommendation of mates and having learnt over the weekend it was directed by Tomas Alfredson... of 'Let The Right One In' fame. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
No thanks, mate - I cannot stand the cinema. It makes me angry. I can't even stand to watch a film with my wife these days...and she doesn't make a sound. Stevie, "Tinker, Tailor..." is another one I'm looking forward to. I keep hearing that it's excellent. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
"DRIVE" moves from scene to scene with an unparalleled level of confidence and precision; style and mood, resulting in the only film of 2011 that I'd consider perfect. Above all else, it's a directorial tour de force. Director Nicolas Winding Refn leaves his mark on every inch of "DRIVE," creating a singular vision; beautiful, brutal, and wholly original. The cinematography, the soundtrack, the grit, The subtle brilliance of Gosling's performance, the shocking bursts of violence, and the film's refreshing European sensibilities all gel to make an extraordinary slice of cinematic art. This is the best film of 2011. "DRIVE" is a genre film that defies genre description and leaves just about every Hollywood film out there in the dust. March 11, 2011 One reviewer. Refn accomplishes the near impossible in modern movies: combining uncompromising art-house style with the real potential for mass-market accessibility, in a pitch-perfect blend of pulp narrative and pure cinema. Another reviewer, and so on. I'll stop now. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Yes, Stevie, TTSS has been getting rave reviews. Can't wait to hear what it was like. Most likely I will be seeing it this Wednesday. I won't have time at the weekend as I'm getting married on Friday. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 82.11.101.24 |
Oh. I thought you were talking about the Mark Dacascos SF-actioner from 1998. That's good too. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
I'm with you now, Zed, I can't stand the movie theater anymore. Oh, and I hate watching films with your wife, too. | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
There's a good reason it's called Cinema and not TV, imho. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Craig:  | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Stevie: Er, yeah. Right. (Backs away slowly, with no sudden moves.) I see. Yes, you're right. (Darts out of door and locks it behind him.) | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Audiences in Poland seem to be quite considerate of other people. Usually. Though one student of mine told me about the man sitting next to him who was so drunk he vomited over his shoes. I told him that in Britain he might very well have been hospitalized. I tend to go to the cinema on a weekday when it's quiet or on Sunday mornings, when the audience are made up of people my own age or older. Problem solved. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
I work on a weekday and help coach my son's U8s football team on Sunday morning, so can't spare the time. To be totally honest, I've come to loathe watching films with even well behaved audiences. For me, the best way to watch a film is alone. I'm not really into communal viewing. Unless it involves a backstreet club in Amsterdam. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
Just learned that Refn and Gosling are making a proper adaptation of Logan's Run. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.156.210.82 |
Yeah, that one's been talked about for a while now. They've also signed on to do another film together (a thriller, I think), but I forget what it's called. | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
I hadn't even heard of this until about a day ago. I'll give this a go, although probably not until it comes out on DVD. | ||
| Frank (Frank) Username: Frank Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 85.222.86.21 |
http://www.facebook.com/notes/kim-newman/drive-2011/10150307705602776 | ||
| Tom_alaerts (Tom_alaerts) Username: Tom_alaerts Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.176.169.134 |
A few years ago, I read the short novel my James Sallis which is at the basis of the novel. It was published by specialist mystery publisher Poisoned Pen press. Quite lean and mean, that story, and I am looking forward to the adaptation. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
So I finally got to see Drive... Wow, what a brilliant film. A weird, fetishistic, grim LA noir fairytale. Loved it | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.132.248.106 |
I also watched DRIVE last night. Very good movie. I'll admit that, early on, I found some of the stylistic choices a bit comedic. At one point I considered timing the pauses in each conversation. But the story and the performances were strong enough to carry me through that early uncertainty. I'm not aware of having seen Ryan Gosling in anything before, but here he was channelling the effortless charisma of a young Steve McQueen, with an economy of language and movement fairly rare in cinema these days. Uniformly strong turns from the supporting cast as well, although I did think they wasted Christina Hendricks a little. The juxtaposition between extreme stillness and extreme violence reminded me of Friedkin and Scorcese at their best. One thing I particularly liked was how obviously directed the film was. A lot of direction tends to be fairly anonymous, but that really wasn't the case with DRIVE. There was one shot in particular, with The Driver standing on the ridge of an incline leading down from the highway, headlights and streetlights creating a haze around him, looking down on a survivor crawling from the wreckage of the car he's just run off the road, which - if it was a painting - I would gladly frame and put on my wall. Of course, I wouldn't be me if I didn't have some criticisms. Carey Mulligan only has two facial expressions - secret joke and concerned; and there was one vocal song that was used at two key moments in the film which I found totally out of place, clumsy and annoying. The performances were so good that we didn't really need an obvious vocal telling us what to feel. But, overall, I really enjoyed it. Definitely a director and actor pairing worth watching. Mind you, word is they're planning to remake Logan's Run next... | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
A well rounded review, John, that highlights many of the frustrations and delights I myself experienced on watching the movie. It has all the hallmarks of a director in love with his own talent, and that of those around him, but in need of some humility and polishing off of the rough edges. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.253.77 |
I loved all the elements you point out as flaws, John - those were the fairy tale parts. The heavily stylised direction, the music choices, the mannered performances. Scrumptious stuff. The whole film felt to me as if someone had lifted one of my dreams out of my head and stuck it on celluloid: the father-son stuff, the psychotic lone avenger, the extreme violence, the often stilted conversations. Fucking brilliant. McMahon's movie heaven.  | ||
| John Forth (John) Username: John Registered: 05-2008 Posted From: 82.24.1.217 |
We all liked it, though, and that's what's important!  | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.29.252.215 |
It was a very, very good but somewhat overblown pulp crime thriller and, imo, Albert Brooks was the best thing in it - a stunning performance. Ryan Gosling still leaves me a bit cold, I'm afraid. Steve McQueen he isn't! | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
So I finally caught up with this film... and was alas, less enamored of it than you, Stevie. Perhaps it's just that I read a lot of scripts in a year, but throughout the film, my mind kept zooming into the script behind the dialogue/action; and no, I've not read the script to DRIVE - I just mean my suspension of disbelief kept locking up, and I would zoom in on what these characters were saying and doing on the page. And when you boil it down, it really all adds up to no more than an unspectacular, nay rather tiredly conventional, and extremely film-school-level wannabe (wannabeing, specifically, neo-noir). By the end, when Albert Brooks in the Chinese restaurant is telling Ryan Gosling the "girl won't be touched," when the double stabbing at the end occurs... the film doesn't even try anymore, instead just sputtering out into aching cliches to put a too-late-to-be-merciful bullet in the head (to mangle metaphors). I found Ryan Gosling maddening in the film, and his relationship with "Michelle Williams" (sorry, no one's going to tell me that wasn't Michelle Williams) with all the mawkish music swelling over it... painful. Not the good kind of painful, either. Bryan Cranston was fine playing Walter White, but even that wasn't enough to save this. Take away the fine actors and the glitzy look and the excellent cinematography, and you end up with no more than just another tepid indie flick. Sadly.  | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.18.174.156 |
As I said at the time, too much effort put into the style of the movie at the expense of any real substance. It reminded me of one of Coppola's overblown misfires from the 80s or 90s - visionary talent wasted on vacuous projects. Like Stanley Kubrick had directed an ad for McDonalds. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 99.126.164.88 |
Whoops! I must have just assumed you wrote that top review, Stevie, I clearly didn't read it was Frank. Sorry Frank! And sorry Stevie! Frank?... not gonna lie: not a great movie. But beautiful direction/camera work! And a great love-letter to Los Angeles, in its own way. (I've heard these are actual locations in the film; like Vincenzo's, the pizza parlor, that was the exterior/interior of that place as anyone could go to today... though you won't get the same gruesome show you got in the film, thankfully....) | ||
| Stevie Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.18.174.156 |
You can read my thoughts on the film on the "Films of 2011" thread, Craig. My take was pretty much the same as your own. A lot of good technical stuff in there and it certainly looked great but cardboard characters (apart from Albert Brooks) and a join-the-dots excuse for a storyline. Personally I thought Gosling lacked charisma in the lead but that's just my opinion. |