| (07.26) | Lady in the Water  |
| (05.21) | Da Vinci Code, The  |
| (05.06) | United 93  |
| (02.05) | King Kong  |
| (01.29) | Syriana |
| (01.24) | Walk the Line |
| (01.05) | Chronicles of Narnia, The: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe  |
| (01.02) | Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire |
| (12.30) | Jarhead |
| (12.27) | Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit |
| (12.05) | randy: Polar Express, The |
| (12.02) | Geoff: Polar Express, The |
| (07.27) | Jen: Lady in the Water |
| (07.27) | Justin: Lady in the Water |
| (07.12) | Sarah: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.25) | Chris: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.25) | Acceler8: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.21) | Mr Plow: Da Vinci Code, The |
| (05.11) | Sarah: United 93 |
| (05.11) | Bread: United 93 |
This is one of those movies that you can't really watch passively. There's so much going on, and none of it is cleanly laid out, so you really have to pay attention. Sometimes movies like that end up being really disappointing because you find that, after spending so much effort trying to figure out 'what the heck is going on', it turns out that nothing really special was actually going on. I found 21 Grams to be really rewarding though -- and one of the best movies I've seen this year.
There are three main characters involved in the story: Naomi Watts as a housewife, Benicio Del Toro as an ex-con turned devout Christian, and Sean Penn as a man dying due to a bad heart. At the beginning of 21 Grams, the characters appear to have no connection whatsoever to one another, and the first third of the film covers a lot of ground in all three of their lives. There's so much covered here, with a very jumbled timeline (director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu jumps all over the place, backwards and forwards through time), and little in the way of explanation that things begin to get a little confusing. Just before it becomes tiresome, however, a tragic event occurs, and things start to come together immediately afterwards.
To reveal any more about this event, or about the relationship between the three main characters, would be to spoil much of the film. Suffice to say that 21 Grams is one of the most compelling films I've seen in the "multiple-intersecting-characters character study" genre. If you're up for a bit of a challenge -- that is, a film that offers plenty to think about but very few easy answers -- then this is a good one.
overall pretty good, though i've certainly got some beefs (three beefs?)
shakey hand held camera...i don't know if i just got used to it after the first third or so of the film, but the beginning was TERRIBLE
grainy quality...this stuff just doesn't appeal to me, i almost didn't want to see it because of this, but figured it was worth giving a chance anyway
the title/end monologue...who the hell says you lose 21 grams when you die? what the hell does that mean? does a chocolate bar really weigh the same as five nickels? meh, i just didn't like that crap
...oh wait, a fourth beef, WAY too many "art shots"...i forget them for the most part, but some of the shots just came across as corny to me...a crucifix hanging from the rearview mirror framing a shot of del toro makes sense, but there were so many others that i was just groaning at
all that said, i dug it...there were a few scenes that i couldn't fit into a timeline even after knowing what was going on, but overall it was fun piecing it together, well done
ps, i loved the way sean penn said "and that's bad" heh
Heh, for some reason it seems like you often pick up little things in films and find them really annoying, yet I barely notice them :-)
I never thought much about "who says".. But I found the ending monologue really quite meaningful -- basically summing up the whole movie. How much is it worth to you when someone dies? How much is it worth to you when someone else's death allows you to live?
What lengths would you go to to try to make yourself feel better about someone close to you dying? Would you take someone else's life, and would it really be worth it?
That's more what I was thinking about at the ending monologue, rather than "who says that you lose 21 grams, blah blah?" :-)
Didn't notice too many overly "art-y" shots, and didn't really notice too much shakiness. I did notice the graininess, but I liked it and thought it was a good artistic choice.
Somewhat similar to the shakiness though: you say you noticed it more in the first part of the film. I noticed that the first part of the film (the 'confusing' time-shifting part) was edited a lot quicker and more abruptly then the latter part of the film. ie: the camerawork seemed to mimic how jumbled the first part of the film is -- but when the certain event happens that more-or-less lays out the story and characters' connections, the camera became a little more steady and scenes played out a little longer.
Glad you liked it though. It really was a good movie.
i really wonder how it was shot...as it was played out, or chronologically, then mixed up after
must have been confusing if they played it out in the right order and had to pick and choose which scenes were going to have shaky camera and whatnot (so maybe i just got used to it)
overall, i'm kind of against voice overs at the end of movies, i don't know why...the idea of this one is a bit better than some expository thing, but i found the whole 21 grams of chocolate/nickels/hummingbirds/whatever part made it kind of corny
"how are you affected by this death? why? would you prevent it if you knew this thing would turn out?" etc, that IS interesting, but i guess i just didn't like the way that part was handled
Please keep trhownig these posts up they help tons.
CPJiID yiavxilsfhql
WXkJlD getwznpdrvnl