Continuity, please.

[raybear]

I feel I haven't written a significant journal entry in awhile. I'm not sure it's going to change right now, but maybe later. In the meantime, I watched the movie Frailty last night. I put off watching it in case MelRo came home early from her dinner, but then decided around 10 pm I'd watch it by myself because it probably wouldn't be that scary.

Well, it freaked me out a little bit, partly because it wasn't really the movie I expected -- more psychological and weird and lots of evangelical and moral violence. And I liked it and got into (sacring myself at times, especially when Sophie started pacing around and crouching in the corner), but then the movie's conclusion began. And I got very very angry. I guess I shouldn't ruin it for anyone who hasn't seen it, so I'll give a warning of spoilers.

I'm so over lying narrators. And gratuitous twists and suprises, and inconsistency in storytelling and narrative, and unexplained plotlines. Okay, at first when he's all like "I'm Adam Meeks" I was uber-upset because there's no way he'd know the details of Fenton's life to that extent because he WASNT there every time. Also, I immediately thought of a few mistakes, such as the beginning phone call to the sheriff's office that identified him as Fenton. As the conclusion played out, it came out that he told the story deliberately in that way to set the agent up for being slayed. Hello? So elaborate and pointless. And the agent being a murderer? What? And why so overly gory and violent? And why should I believe it's true anyway if Adam was tricking us the whole time? Why is his version of the truth correct? And if we are supposed to believe it, than does that mean I'm down with Christian vigilantes who have visions from angels? Jesus Christ on a fucking raft, I hope not. Also, was Fenton a demon because they knew he would be a serial killer in the future? Or was he a serial killer maybe because he WITNESSES HIS DAD COMMITTING MURDER AND THEN MURDERED HIM AS A TWELVE YEAR OLD? What? I hate movies that are supposed to be 'psychological' but then don't stick to one school of logic or psychological analysis. And the beginning, was Fenton faking suicide for his brother or did Adam lie about that to the agent? Too many fcking loose ends.

I've only seen The Usual Suspects once. I thought it was pretty good. At the end I was like "okay, you got me, good job." But I've never seen that movie again because what's the point? It's a big lying story and the gimmick is over. Sort of like watching Blair Witch project twice. The first time is fun. The second time is better spent napping.

Gimmicky movies are only okay if I enjoy them once and then don't bother to see them again. I get so mad if I regret the first 90 minutes which I had previously enjoyed because they got fcked up by their stupid "let's throw in extra twists because we can't explain our way out of a paper bag" ending.
Don't get me wrong -- I like my movies complex at times. But contradictory does not mean complicated. And I even love surprise "gotcha!" endings, but only if they're consistent throughout the movie and there's good continuity.

So in the end, I'd rate the first 80 minutes of Fraility as 3 1/2 stars and the last 15 minutes as half a star.

Comments

[cruelnails.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was really let down by the ending too. It seemed like the writer just had no idea what to do and went for the easiest and cheapest way out - regardless what it might do to the rest of the film.

It's a shame, beacause I was really enjoying it up to that point, which is amazing considering that I normally dislike Bill Paxton, Matthew M. and Powers Booth, it was like on of those over-the-top seventies horror films that are scary and funny even while being absolutely rediculous.

I enjoyed the first half enough to see again someday, but prolly not more than one more time - and again, up until the final 15 minutes - I was considering buying the damn thing.

[sharkysmachine.livejournal.com]

HAHAH. how could anyone hate powers booth!!! hahaha.

[virtex23.livejournal.com]

i agree....i too was disappointed. i hate when a twist happens but it doesn't add up right. at least with the usual suspects it did add up right.

have you seen mulholland drive yet? im curious what you thought about that if you did. im still bitterly angry and irritated that i sat through 2h 27min. to see an end which i *thought* would bring everything together......

i should have saw that coming being a david lynch film. im seriously disturbed that i have no idea. and im also disturbed that anyone (well, david lynch, anyways) could put together a movie that makes no sense however you look at it and still get recognition for it. wtf?

[raybear.livejournal.com]

Okay, this may seem contradictory (which I just railed about) but I LOVED Mulholland Drive. Here's the thing about David Lynch -- he creates his own universe in a movie which doesn't necessarily follow the paths of the regular universe. So when watching his movies, one has to sort of sit back and allow his world to unfold, not getting to hung up on what is supposed to happen according to general expectations. It's like dream logic versus waking logic, which is apropos since the movie mostly a dream-like state.

Also, the movie DOES make sense, it just takes more than 30 seconds to figure it out (most movies use 'surprise endings' that capitalize on us being able to fit the puzzle together in our heads in less than a minute so that the plot can continue nearly uninterrupted). I think I wrote about this movie when I saw it...but I can't seem to find it from last fall.....but here's the short version:

The first half of the movie is a fantasy of the blond character, a was of re-imagining the past relationship with the brunette which recently failed. It's a quasi-dream, quasi-daydream, quasi-masturbatory fantasy. In the end, reality breaks through and takes over her fantasy and she kills herself.

Re:

[virtex23.livejournal.com]

hmmm...thank you for explaining it. i must sit with this and try to piece together a puzzle that was never intended to be put together.

i've heard good and bad about the movie, but i never heard why the good was good, i only knew why i thought it was bad!!!

i shall look for you when i am in movie distress again!! i was seriously aggravated!

[uncensoredqueer.livejournal.com]

anyway i didnt see fraility and probably wont. it didnt look that good to me. BUT did you see SIGNS? I absolutely love that movie. And Vanilla Sky...I love them both.
Any suggestions for some movies to see?
Alex

[raybear.livejournal.com]

Fuck Vanilla Sky -- you should see Waking Life!! Love it. I haven't seen Signs yet, but I actually was getting it mixed up with Frailty. I started watching watching the movie and 30 minutes into I thought "where's Joaquin Phoenix?"

Re:

[uncensoredqueer.livejournal.com]

I liked Waking Life. I have the dvd (bootleg ass copy it rawks).

[raybear.livejournal.com]

Did you see A.I.? I liked that movie even though lots of folks didn't. I also loved Requiem for a Dream. I recently saw Lovely & Amazing which I really really liked.

[uncensoredqueer.livejournal.com]

I did see AI but i saw it at the drive-in so i rented it and i liked it better the second time around. I did not see the other two movies you mentioned.

[raybear.livejournal.com]

People told me that Vanilla Sky suffers from the same problems Frailty has -- a cheap twist of an ending that doesn't make sense. What's your take on it?

Re:

[uncensoredqueer.livejournal.com]

Ill rewatch it tonight and give you my review on it tomorrow :)

[cruelnails.livejournal.com]

The ending of Vanilla Sky makes sense to me, but I can easily see how it would look contrite (at least) if someone was of the mind not to buy into it.