I CANNOT TELL YOU WITH WORDS HOW AWESOME THIS MOVIE IS. IT IS SO INCREDIBLY BRILLIANT. ALBERT FINNEY'S PERFORMANCE IS SHEER GENIUS! HE DESERVES AN OSCAR! IF YOU DON'T GO SEE THIS MOVIE TONIGHT, YOU ARE CHEATING YOURSELF OUT OF A WONDERFUL EXPERIENCE.
THIS MOVIE IS WHY OSCARS WERE INVENTED!!!!!!!!!
could we be overreacting just a little bit?? it is a good film, a really good film, but it's not the end-all be-all of movies...it's just top 10 for this year.
I liked Big Fish. I think on some level I actually loved it. But that level is like a bad radio signal and thus my conviction of that love is unclear and unsubstantiated. Tim Burton films have a way of doing that. In a way Edward Scissorhands also had all the content of an emotionally centered character study but still something was fuzzy, unclear. I can't put my finger on it but I have a halfassed guess its due to Burton being so..particular.
Amadeus was a reason oscar was invented.
The Godfather was a reason oscar was invented.
I dont think Big Fish fits in that category. I cant even quite tell if its really truly better than his other best movies, none of which are in that category either. As for Finney's performance, any actor who gets to play a terminally ill or aged character better produce an oscar worthy turn. Those roles are aerodynamically designed to send the character straight to soul searching heaven.
But I cant be positive about the general things that movies are acclaimed for with this one because theres nothing general about it. One thing I can be positive of is the ideas. The ideas from the biggest to the smallest of them in the movie such as the main characters' "truthfully skewed" vision of life, the significance of storytelling, even the subsidiary storyline of the little girl turned witch, etc were flawless. If there was an oscar for best ideas in a film, THAT it would deserve.
On a lighter if irrelevant note, I thought the part where Ewan McGregor encounters the North Korean soldiers was hilarious. Theres something about the way Burton shoots/choreographs Asian male combatants being physical thats so over the top ridiculous (remember the Joker's chinese hitman with the shades and two swords in Batman?) that it looks like it belongs in an episode of that fictitious porn series from Boogie Nights; "Angels dont live in my town" with Brach Landers and Chest Rockwell.
sounds like a chick flick to me. still suspicious that it:s going to be forest gump with better visuals. and im going to flog a dead horse here but burton:s batman films suck because of michael keaton. especially the first one. how did we ever get conned into thinking that it was okay to have someone like keaton as the physically intimidating DARK KNIGHT. IT:s not the slighty off kilter bug eyed knight...sigh... but ed wood was brilliant. probably because of depp...pee wee was fun but it wasn:t a great movie.
I'm not a big K Smith fan, but a friend talked me into watching An Evening With... and he has the funniest story about Tim Burton.
He (Kevin Smith) saw Planet of the Apes (the worst movie ever), and the ending matched an ending he had put in a Jay & Silent Bob comic book story. Kevin Smith joked with a reporter about sueing Burton.
Well, word got back to Burton and he issued a press release stating something to the effect of, "I never read comic books, and I certainly wouldn't read anything by Kevin Smith."
Smith responded with, "You never read comic books? Well, that explains the first two Batman movies."
I thought that summed it up perfectly.
Tim Burton is okay, but pretty much everything he's done that wasn't claymation has sucked in a huge way. Except for Edward Scissorhands, and I think Johnny Depp saved that one.
the more i think about it, the author of this thread (SEETHIS) has to be either a cast/crew member of big fish (best boy grip, maybe?) or a flunkee at Columbia...
Well, Big Fish certainly was great, but I don't think I'd go so far as to attach my whole being to this one movie. But different strokes for different folks…I think.
You are on the right track. The more you learn and know, the easier it is to be a smartass. I'd recommend a healthy dose of stand-up to go w/the books you read. Dennis Miller is the king of witty comebacks (although some would say his comebacks are obscure).
Anyways, your a smart person. Just keep bucking the system and watching comedians and you will eventually develop into a wiseass. It worked for me.
Wait a minute....
Are you people saying that the last 2 (or was it three?) Batman movies are better than the two with Keaton? Never mind the not really having anything to do with the comic books, but the ones without Keaton were unwatchable (and I'm not saying it was because of Keaton--I'm not a huge fan of his). Val Kilmer, yeah, he could have pulled it off in a better movie, but George Clooney? Come on!
i've never understood why people had a problem with keaton. i'll admit, when it was first announced, i imagine most of us all shouted a collective "wtf??," but i think he nailed it. he was dark, moody, funny, smart. besides, what you rather have, some meathead like stallone in there? i could give a rat's ass if he didn't "fill out" the uniform.
J, pretty much the only channel I ever watch is Comedy Central (well, Adult Swim too). I love the Comedy Central Presents programs, and while all of them are surely proffesional smarta$$es, I know enough about comedy to know that it takes a good deal of preparation to come up with a solid act (Comedian is an accurate portayal of this). But I have developed somewhat of a sharp wit from watching those things (not to mention Family Guy and the Simpsons).
It's been a while since I've seen the Batman movies, but I still have trouble seeing Keaton as Batman. I mean, Keaton is all about those weird facial expressions or whatever, and I don't think I could take him seriously enough to be scared of him. I mean, I'd just be waiting for him to do that thing with his eyebrows.
Ok, I'm not. But neither was Clooney or Kilmer. I thought Keaton gave us the best version so far. I also think Keaton should have been given first choice on all future Batman roles.
He can make the goofy expression and all. But I was able to overlook it and he sold me the character. I was never impressed with Kilmer or Clooney's attempts. Maybe it's time for a new Dark Knight.
there already is one....christian bale. it was announced a few months back. considering the guy from memento/insomnia is directing, it may actually be worthwhile.
Sorry, I was drunk. No actually, I have been changing a lot of diapers and getting barfed on.
Christian Bale is the next Batman. I'm thinking he's not really the right guy for that. I only liked him in American Psycho. That movie rocked so much I got the wacky soundtrack. It's got little blurbs from the movie plus an additional ~50 blank tracks on the disc.
Anyway, back to Batman. Somehow, I see Batman a bit older, like around 40, but still in great shape. I see him being a distant guy (can't form meaningful relationships), but not all brooding, that just seems so forced. And above all Batman has to be mean. I'm talkin' downright mean and nasty. When Batman wins a fight, someone needs a plastic surgeon to fix him up. The whole thing about Batman is aggression, vengeance, and retaliation.
Isnt the Christian Bale movie supposed to be the "early years" story of young Bruce Wayne? If so it doesnt count because its a totally different age and thus a different character study.
The first Batman was great. The second not so good. Same reason as the Matrix I think; the mystery vanished by part 2. PArt one is all about this mysterious black figure of the night appearing and disappearing, secluded in a cave deep in the woods, who is so reclusive that he needs a signal as visible as the full moon at night to be informed without informing others. Its about discovering this "man dressed up as a bat". Notice how many times a scene ends in that movie with the taut words "who IS this guy?...." cue mysterious tremolo string music.
In part II on the other hand batman cajoles around with commissioner Gordon on plain sight of the public. He seems more of a people person and not so anti-p.r. anymore. Basically he's just another guy on the "police payroll", doing his job in the city by responding to a searchlight rather than a 911 call and suiting in a fancier uniform.
I think it is this loss of mysteriousness that was also the loss of Batman's charm by the second film(I can say the same thing for Neo in the Matrix) and it has nothing to do with Michael Keaton. He was just as good in both films but wasnt given as sufficient a character to play in part II. The main character in part II was catwoman. It was about HER psychosis, HER tramatic experience, HER emergence to power and mysterious agenda towards vengeance while adding a side of romance with Bat-bachelor on the side. Basically Burton stole Michael Keaton's part and gave it too michelle Pfeiffer while keeping the same names.
The other thing about Batman (1) is that its a huge predecessor for every comic book movie out since, that deals with dark toned adult themes. It was the first comic book movie to take itself truly seriously. Who gives a shit if Burton never read a comic in his life? His fantasy imagination combined with his gothic sensitivities provided a more dynamic portrait of Batman then any of the dorks at D.C. Comics. Without Burton, Batman would have been just another geek in spandex/ zorro wannabe looking ridiculous instead of intimidating(remember the Travola-ish Batdance from the old tv series?). Burton's batman on the other hand is dark, brooding, his mask looks like something out of "Eyes Wide Shut" or the phantom apparition from Don Giovanni(in other words, "scary"). And most importantly, he's psychotic. In Part I Vicki Vale observes that Batman is "not exactly normal are you?" and is actually as dangerous as the Joker and in a way shes right. He's basically a millionaire version of Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver with a single tramautic experience to justify acts of veangence.
The look of the first batman made audiences and filmmakers aware that comic book/fantasy films could be most successfully painted in one solid color: Dark. Every "comic book" hero in every movie of late who has a penchant for dressing in black, shrouds himself in capelike clothes and carries an arsenal in his pockets, has Burton to thank for ever being let on the screen. The use of dark urban landscape also became a staple of stylishness in films thanks to Burton. Consider the set designs of films like The Crow, Matrix 1, Equilibrium. Metrophobia is a great gritty backdrop that because of its naturally dark shade adds the reality component needed to balance the fantasy aspect of such comic book movies; sunlight can be easily emulated and forged by endless other light generating sources but darkness has a singular, unmistakeable, depressing real-ness to it; there is no other kind.
The opening scene of The Matrix is a great example. Trinity could very well be running along the rooftops of Gotham city judging from the way that scene was filmed.
Anyways, Michael Keaton took Batman as seriously as Burton. He was convincing as a scary, motivationally questionable hero. He didnt have to act much really to carry out his job for this role(same goes for Keanu in Matrix). The writing does the job for him. He did what Bruce Wayne is supposed to do: keep his mouth shut, always shift eyes towards the floor while the eyebrows stretch up, brood, meditate on loss of parents while calmly, softspokenly, nursing a lifelong, patholigical vow of just revenge minute by quiet minute, methodically dispatch his enemies, never let his feet get ahead of his cape and even sleep upside down for good measure. Keaton was perfect. If Keaton lacked a certain healthy amount of personality, all the better for the role which doesnt call for such a healthy amount; the purposeful warrior with revenge on his mind tends to be single-minded even amidst a dualistic nature of superhero alternate identities.
Nothing to do with the movie really, but I never really liked Batman as a superhero. He didn't have any superpowers or enhanced abilities, just a costume and a really, REALLY useful toolbelt. Take away the gadgets and the car, and he's just a buff guy who knows how to fight. Anyone could be Batman! But no one, and I mean NO ONE could ever duplicate Super-Man or any X-Men.
Well, could I just get up and say "I wanna be Wolverine" and then I would get my wish? Anyone can be Batman, but not everyone is a mutant, regardless of the government interference.
Well, I have to say I was letdown. Certainly less disappointing than Planet of the Apes, Mars Attacks disappointing, but disappointing nonetheless. I can't even say I'd marginally recommend it. One mixed feeling too many leaps up.
If Big Fish is to be taken as a deliberate plunge for Tim Burton into justifying his image as a wunderkind for the tearjerker crowd and the Academy, it disappoints. I never thought I'd be forced to concede that a Burton movie's comprehension of maturity seems to mean having to make EXCUSES for his flights of fancy and weirdness instead of the opposite. Granted, there are two or three mildly amusing instances of this. Like how young Edward takes out a duo of Korean soldiers, or the cat falling from the high wire, or when son Will notices how the Korean twins have literally 'separated' towards the close. But even as a purely visceral experience, it comes up short, like Burton forgot to let his images breathe, or lend them any vitality. The rest don't inspire much reaction beyond an "Oh, that's nice" - pick an underwater sequence - or a "Huh?" - both hospital sequences (slippery baby, old Ed's 'escape') - sustain a wildly uneven movie they do not.
There's a reason a movie can feel like it's split into two halves based on tone - because it IS. Case in point with Big Fish - peel away the extremely surface-thin layer of dark zaniness from the first half (Carl the giant, nude skinny-dipping, Amos the ringmaster werewolf, etc.), and what you have left is so Southern lackadaisical, cheery, flighty it's practically condescending, nauseating, and flat-out unrealistic. No mistaking the clunkiness of the delivery either, feels even more offputting than say, Batman's (I single out the part where McGregor meets Carl). The second half has such a curious flair for the lifelessly melodramatic and unnecessarily convoluted you'd swear you were watching a completely different movie after about the first hour.
On the acting spectrum of things, Crudup, Cotillard, Bonham Carter, Lange, Lohman - all feel wasted, insignificant, the last two in particular questionably overtaken by bit turns like Robert Guillaume as the Bloom family doctor, and given little personality as two ages to exhibit other than a bland, timid niceness. McGregor and Buscemi play it too one-dimensional happy-go-lucky to register as anything beyond that. Finney comes off the worst, in a sadly unpleasant, bug-eyed, grotesque, broadside performance, trumpeting all his lines like he was being directed by the likes of the Farrelly Bros., not the guy who made Ed Wood. Only DeVito does okay for his part (if you ignore the unnervingly embarrassing execution of his nightlife reveal).
Man, the number of hype-driven movie-going disappointments I've had to endure this season (except RotK, and to a decidedly lesser extent, Shattered Glass)......make it STOP!
I thought Big Fish was a good movie but not fantastic. I think Ewan McGregor was a great choice for the lead but I had a bit of trouble trying to decipher fact from fiction... until the end. It would be one to watch again to catch all the "truth" behind the stories.
I think one of the goals of the movie was to blend fact and fiction together, that way the audience is left deciding for themselves what is real and what is fake. That's not a problem the movie has, it's a quality.
Just Saw Big Fish - small to medium sized spoilers
January 22 2004, 9:02 AM
Okay so I just saw Big Fish and let me tell ya, it's pretty fun. It was definitely full of eye-candy and visual gags, and kooky side characters and all, but it was sweet and wacky.
I'm reminded of the ending of Life of Pi (the book, not Pi the movie, or American Pie the movie) where the shipwreck survivor says something to the effect of "would you rather believe the exciting fantasy or the horrifying reality?" In the end, Billy chisel-chin Crudup goes with the flow and gives his dad a fairly decent eulogy/story incorporating all the stories he (Crudup) hated throughout his life.
Also, the part where Helena Bonham Carter talks about being the witch and how it doesn't make any chronological sense but it doesn't really have to is fine with me. It's fantasy (or is it?).
All in all, i enjoyed it, I laughed, I got a little teary, and I thought that Jessica Lange is still seriously sexy. Not bad for 8.75.
D_A
PS - lots of people with bad long weird fuzzy eyebrows in this one (Carter, the young Carter girl in Spectre, the young Lange girl at the circus, DeVito)
.