• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009
    Thor wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    Thor wrote
    But you guys are missing one crucial narrative component, namely his "transitional family", as I like to call it, i.e. Jillian and Barry, his temporary wife and kid (especially Jillian).


    And that makes his actions even more deplorable. There is no justification for just dumping your family. None what so ever!

    -Erik-


    Again, Erik, I do not disagree with you so much in the moral implications of the act in itself, as I applaud it for its power. To forsake your family is a serious matter, even if it means enlightenment and a step further for the entire human race. It's the whole Abraham and Isaac story that we know so well.


    Yeah... that still does wash with me. What is powerful to me is stuff like braking the communication barrier with music. That's simply brilliant and incredibly powerful. Neary's actions are not!

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009
    Erik Woods wrote
    Yeah... that still does wash with me. What is powerful to me is stuff like braking the communication barrier with music. That's simply brilliant and incredibly powerful.


    Yeah, that's powerful too!
    I am extremely serious.
  1. And demanded a lot of creative simplicity from Williams. Conversation is a GREAT piece.
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009
    I will say this... this type of discussion (especially over-analyzing a film) is something I don't normally do. I find that it sucks the fun out of watching these films. But since it's a Spielberg film and one that I'm fond of I will say that this has been an eye opening and freeing experience. Plus, it has peaked my interest in the film again and I can't wait to revisit it.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  2. I think Neary's bizarre behaviour gives CLOSE ENCOUNTERS a lot more value for its adult audience than it would have otherwise have had. There are people like that in the world (try dissecting the family life of a religious zealot), and I never though the film was holding it up as an example to it audience of how to live. Rather, it's a standout moment of character honesty in the Spielberg canon - so known for its incredulous sentimental gestures. Without it, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS wouldn't be worth returning to. It would have no bite.

    I only saw the film when I was in my twenties. And I marvelled at what I'd been missing. I couldn't help but wonder how the guy who told Neary's story ended up diminishing nearly every film he makes with third act cutesiness.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009 edited
    franz_conrad wrote
    I think Neary's bizarre behaviour gives CLOSE ENCOUNTERS a lot more value for its adult audience than it would have otherwise have had. There are people like that in the world (try dissecting the family life of a religious zealot), and I never though the film was holding it up as an example to it audience of how to live. Rather, it's a standout moment of character honesty in the Spielberg canon - so known for its incredulous sentimental gestures. Without it, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS wouldn't be worth returning to. It would have no bite.

    I only saw the film when I was in my twenties. And I marvelled at what I'd been missing. I couldn't help but wonder how the guy who told Neary's story ended up diminishing nearly every film he makes with third act cutesiness.


    Well said, and again I just want to repeat that the bizarre behavior didn't bother me. It's just the way he handled his family that rubbed me the wrong way. However, in saying that I do want to revisit the film because there could be something that I missed.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  3. That's very interesting what you say, also because Close Encounters is the VERY rare example of a case when Spielberg is the sole writer of the project and it was his original idea (as opposed to the other written by Spielberg movie, E.T., I leave Poltergeist out here)
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009
    PawelStroinski wrote
    That's very interesting what you say, also because Close Encounters is the VERY rare example of a case when Spielberg is the sole writer of the project and it was his original idea (as opposed to the other written by Spielberg movie, E.T., I leave Poltergeist out here)


    E.T. was written by Melissa Mathison.

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  4. Who also wrote KUNDUN, one of my favourite films.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorTalos
    • CommentTimeAug 20th 2009
    Thor wrote
    Erik Woods wrote

    And I high doubt that's what Spielberg was going for.

    -Erik-


    I don't think he really knew WHAT he was going for at the time, as a child-free eternal optimist. It is only in later years that he has expressed regret in that ending, much due to his own parenthood (as with the whole walkie talkie thing from E.T., which is another stupid thing, IMO).

    The film still stands as it does, though, and speaks for itself. Morally wrong or not, I think it is FAR, FAR more powerful than if he did a 180 and returned to his family as a "better man" or something.


    Yeah, that stupid politically correct walkie talkie thing from E.T. really bugs me too. Its so lame. With the gun E.T. really had a motive to fly.

    A few days ago I was watching an old Disney Cartoon. One of those Mickey Mouse / Pluto adventures. A mean bad dogcatcher screamed to Pluto... (while holding a shotgun) "I am going to blow your head off"... haha its funny... for a Disney movie. (albeit an old one) I like that better... I hate the ubercute/correct modern Mickey Mouse... very irritating. Give me the old one instead. Just plain old dumb fun.
    www.budgethotels-hongkong.com LOWEST Hong Kong hotel rates
  5. Thor wrote
    But you guys are missing one crucial narrative component, namely his "transitional family", as I like to call it, i.e. Jillian and Barry, his temporary wife and kid (especially Jillian). He finds in them what he can't find in his own family, namely the mutual dedication for the "project". They become the natural stepping stone away from his own family; away from society; away from any earthly obligations. That doesn't make it any more right or wrong, but - in addition to his increased obsession - makes for a proper narrative justification for the act.

    As he enters the spaceship, the audience is probably torn between an envy and curiousity for what he might experience ("a new step for mankind", in a way) and a bittersweet sensation of "but will he ever return?". That's the only way the film can go out with a bang and not a whimper. It's what the film has been building towards.


    Dude, you couldn't have expressed my feelings about the matter any better than that. beer

    Jillian and her little boy become his new family in a way, albeit for a short time, because he ends up having more in common with them than his own wife and kids. That's a clear result of his obsession with the mystery that is motiving all three to end up at Devil's Tower. What each of them does after the ship lands is their own decision. Neary wanting to go, and Gillian not is a clear indication of what each character is searching for in life. Neary clearly wants adventure and doesn't think twice to abandon his family, Gillian is obviously too scared of such a life-changing endeavour, besides she has a small boy to think of.

    Trying to explain why one character does this or that is ultimately pointless. It's the writer who decides what happens.
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
  6. Erik Woods wrote
    PawelStroinski wrote
    That's very interesting what you say, also because Close Encounters is the VERY rare example of a case when Spielberg is the sole writer of the project and it was his original idea (as opposed to the other written by Spielberg movie, E.T., I leave Poltergeist out here)


    E.T. was written by Melissa Mathison.

    -Erik-


    shame

    I meant AI
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
  7. AI's script was written by Spielberg alone, however there were years of work behind it involving Kubrick, Brian Aldiss and a UK-based children's author whose name escapes me. Spielberg was filling out a plan left by someone else.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
  8. Yes, that's what I meant by saying that it wasn't his original idea.
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
  9. The one thing in the plot that we can say for sure was Spielberg's idea was the fact that David makes a 'cup of coffee' for his mother. What cutesy rubbish. In Kubrick's treatment, it was a Bloody Mary. That actually meant something. wink
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
  10. What did Bloody Mary mean?
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
  11. It's an alcoholic cocktail that you need a certain amount of skill to make well. The idea of the robot child making an alcoholic cocktail for his 'mother' just added that necessary bitter tang to the story. Particularly since it's one of the last things he does for her in the film. The audience is aware of an irony that the robot child isn't.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeAug 21st 2009
    I agree with that.
    I am extremely serious.
  12. I think it's the only thing I would change about the film. Although maybe a slightly more credible flesh fair crowd, and a slightly more ambiguous score for the final third wouldn't have hurt.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeAug 21st 2009
    franz_conrad wrote
    I think it's the only thing I would change about the film. Although maybe a slightly more credible flesh fair crowd, and a slightly more ambiguous score for the final third wouldn't have hurt.


    Ambigous? In what sense?
    I am extremely serious.
  13. Maybe I meant a little less sweet. To veer a little more towards not tinging the final moments of the film with a warm glow.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorsdtom
    • CommentTimeAug 21st 2009
    Agree Micheal
    listen to more classical music!
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeAug 21st 2009
    franz_conrad wrote
    Maybe I meant a little less sweet. To veer a little more towards not tinging the final moments of the film with a warm glow.


    Oh. Yes, I understand what you mean, although his "For Always" is one of the most beautiful things he's ever done. When the melody descends and reaches that final, deep note, it's absolutely heartbreaking. It's one of the few melodies that ALMOST create fluids in my eyes regardless of how it was used in the movie. And yet the theme isn't overbearing. It doesn't underestimate its audience. I believe this tune was used over the final scenes with David and her mother, if memory serves, and it was very effective. It was certainly the right note to go out on, literally speaking.
    I am extremely serious.
  14. True. Perhaps it's the combination of it with Ben Kingsley's narration that I'm reacting to?
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
  15. I never realised that the voice in A.I. was Ben Kingsley's. Thanks for making me aware of that. wink
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeAug 23rd 2009 edited
    I don't care about any character from A.I except for Teddy.

    I almost cried when the stupid robot goes to sleep with his cloned mother and leaves this loyal friend alone in the bed. angry angry angry angry
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeAug 23rd 2009 edited
    The most gut-wrenching moment in the film is - to me - the forest separation scene. Unquestionably. That is the FIRST time Haley Joel Osment even HINTS at some sort of emotional reaction, which makes it all the more powerful.
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeAug 23rd 2009
    Definitely agree with that. And I do like the 'emotional resolution' of the end scene where he spends the last day with his mother. Regardless of what critics think, I absolutely love it.

    And I want one of those superteddies. Except I'd have a black man 'gangsta' voice installed, "Yo, where David at bitch?"
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeAug 24th 2009
    'feel me' tagged on at the end wink
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeAug 24th 2009
    Thor wrote
    The most gut-wrenching moment in the film is - to me - the forest separation scene. Unquestionably. That is the FIRST time Haley Joel Osment even HINTS at some sort of emotional reaction, which makes it all the more powerful.


    I don't feel a damn thing because he is a ROBOT!

    -Erik-
    host and producer of CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!