Wow, what a letdown - Paris, Texas (1984) Discussion

[–] krpc7 15 years ago

****SPOILERS****

I agree.

The saddest part of this long, miserable little movie to me was seeing how self-indulgent the main character was. So what if he's a child of a mean-spirited, obsessive father. That is no excuse to become a jerk in his own life and act idiotically toward his own family and his brother's. By the time the movie credits rolled, I had ended up with about zero empathy with this pretty bizarrely behaving character.

The one big gesture in the movie that supposedly redeems him is reuniting his wife and son, while concurrently repeating his disappearing trick of 4 years earlier. So he dumps more problems on them both, while he (and supposedly the audience) are expected to get some solace for his big "unselfish" act. He sounds like a very, very sick and dangerous puppy to me.

The pace of the movie dragged terribly, was full of story line holes, and the acting at times looked pretty thin and forced to me, probably because the writer and director didn't give them much to work with. I suggest the writer head back for more writing courses, and this time don't play hookey so much.

reply

[–] CinemaBuff84 15 years ago

Can I ask what "story line holes" you refer to? I hate one a reviewer or IMDB-er talks about plot holes. What plot holes? I liked the movie didn't love it so I'm curious what you're referring to.

reply

[–] Antonio_G 15 years ago

Hmm... I just saw it and loved every second of it.
The acting, the feelings, the music, the photography.
And at the end, I was cying like a baby.
Not many movies move me like that.
But there is definitely something beautiful and haunting about this film.

You... are... my... lucky lucky lucky star...

reply

[–] Defenseman13 10 years ago

"So what if he's a child of a mean-spirited, obsessive father. That is no excuse to become a jerk in his own life and act idiotically toward his own family and his brother's."

Actually, that is every reason to do so. Any shrink will tell you that. Abuse and trauma from parents is guaranteed to make you act out. Get a clue.

reply

[–] TanteWaileka 8 years ago

Guess what? 99.99999% of people grow up within a dysfunctional family, in one way or the other. I'd tell off my dad, but he's long dead. I'd tell off my mom... oh wait! I DID tell her off in 2008 when she told me she 'liked' Obama. Never spoke to that idiot woman again.
Yes, yes, I DO breath easier too.
Oh we still visit, I just don't talk to her beyond 'hows the weather looks fine today huh').
:)

Eventually people grow up to become adults, and they shake off their upbringing. Using your 'daddy was mean to me' or 'mommie loved my brothers more than me' doesn't work past the age of, say, twenty-five. One gets an excuse up till 25-27, because it is a known fact that the human brain is still 'forming' until about that age frame. After all, kiddo, you're on your own, like every other adult in the first world. People in the third world, don't have time to worry about whether or not they were 'raised right'.

I was watching Watership Down, fell asleep, woke up in the middle of Paris, Texas and just let it wash over me. It was okay through heavy-lidded eyes, but certainly NOT worth more than a 3.8, NOT the 8.1 it seems to be rated here.

Life is a journey not a destination. Fear nothing.

reply

[–] kenny-164 8 years ago

"I was watching Watership Down, fell asleep, woke up in the middle of Paris, Texas and just let it wash over me. It was okay through heavy-lidded eyes, but certainly NOT worth more than a 3.8, NOT the 8.1 it seems to be rated here. "

So you started watching a film halfway through it, and thought on such basis it was okay. Gee, thanks for the contribution. Call me crazy but I have to wonder if you might have felt differently about the film if you saw it from the beginning, but that's just me.

This is a great film, if not for everyone. Probably not for people who only want to watch the second half.

reply

[–] dbrockskk1 8 years ago

You must do something else besides watch movies. And don't watch Watership Down. Read it. As Metallica says nothing else matters!

suzycreamcheese RIP Heath Ledger 1979-2008

reply

[–] pepetoony (1536) 5 years ago

@TanteWaileka What would you do if I told you I 'LOVED' Obama!? You better geet 'er dunn!

reply

[–] Razzbar 9 years ago

I didn't see any real plot holes, but it seemed to go down several blind alleys, by foreshadowing events, which never develop. Especially when Travis and Hunter arrive at mom's place of employment. Travis walks into the bar, and a guy tells him to leave, and begins to follow him. Meanwhile, Hunter disobeys instructions to stay locked in the car, and we see him wandering the street in a dangerous neighborhood. Again, I was expecting this to go somewhere, but no... that was that.

There were other episodes like this, where there is a suggestion that something is about to happen, and then instead of resolving the situation, it just is left hanging, while the story moves on.

When you watch a classic horror movie, and the bass fiddles play, it creates tension and anxiety in the viewer, to increase the effect when the zombie appears. In this movie, the bass fiddle music plays, but nothing happens. Several times.

I just kept wondering, why lead the viewer down the primrose path, only to abandon it?

reply

[–] Kroyall1962 13 years ago

First of all, it is irritating when someone who doesn't like a film is later told by admirers of the film they "didn't get it". It is perfectly feasible to "get it" and not like it. To like a film is not a right to claim some intellectual high ground over those who disliked it.

I liked aspects of this film. The cinematography and locations were striking, sometimes even in their bleakness. It works as a time capsule in capturing 1980's America, a time when the vestiges of mid-century America were still visible in some areas, mainly rural.

The protagonist of the film left me flat. He was clearly a self-indulgent, immature, mess of a man who was also an unfit father. For the good of the child it would have been best if this misfit died in the fire. Even during their travels later in the film, he does things that put the child in potential jeopardy that wouldn't fly, even in the 80's. For him to re-abandon his son in the end after rebuilding a relationship with him is deserving of a severe beating. I was hoping he would have done the right thing and killed himself.

The mother was no prize either. I guess we are supposed to believe in the end her psychosis has healed sufficiently enough to raise a young son, even though she had no intention of doing so only hours earlier. Somehow a visit from her over the hill burnout ex husband transforms her into a responsible mother and she can leave the strip club behind. That is pure nonsense.

As for the brother and his wife, they were basically good people and would have provided a loving, stable home for the child. Although Dean Stockwell's character was naive to think his creepy mental case of a brother would be a positive influence in his son's life.

The film could have been shortened by 40 minutes easily and still have gotten the point across. Listening to Stanton stumble through his lines (seems he plays the same half wit character in every film) for 2 1/2 hours is trying on the patience. I had no empathy for him whatsoever. Most damning is his apparent realization of what a pathetic fool he had been but in the end it appears he still intends to follow a meaningless path and once again leave his son behind. Having grown up without a father myself (he passed away when I was a young child) this made me hate him all the more. I could NEVER abandon my children.

reply

[–] KS-Agency 12 years ago

I appreciate everyone has their own opinions.

Those who didn't like the film, in my view, misunderstand the characters. Travis is - in your words - a "self-indulgent, immature, mess of a man", but this is because he has gone through an irreversible amount of chaos and disorder in his life. He is not trying to be an *beep* - he is a victim; he has been shaped and defined by anxieties, depression etc. When you are that troubled, you can't be the Mr. Hollywood nice-guy; you can't be the loving father who goes to work and rakes in the cash to send Hunter off to the best colleges and universities; you can't become the type of person who meets up with Jane and resolves the situation with typical Hollywood-romantic-sex, followed by marriage; you can't just live 'happily ever after'. When you're in that state of mind, one can't help but appearing like a 'mess-of-a-man', or a 'pathetic fool'; one cannot help being selfish (hence suicide is arguably the most selfish act). The mother, Jane, is somewhat the same, but less extreme.

I think that, what you perceive to be problems with the film, are (at least, in the most part) in fact intentional, unique and clever (and un-Hollywood) ways of conveying Travis' state of mind, which is a central theme running throughout the film.

reply

[–] Replicant-88 12 years ago

شكرا لك على المشاركة

my favorite films://www.imdb.com/list/iFa7p7uwsr8/

reply

[–] chas437 12 years ago

Great Points KS! The haters of this film really do seem foolish in their blanket condemnations of the characters. The "bad-parenting" crowd is the worst, so trite. Critics of an unrivaled masterpiece such as "Paris Texas" usually come off as fools.

reply

[–] Razzbar 9 years ago

I actually found all of the characters at least sympathetic, if not likeable. Even Travis. He's definitely got some real mental problems, but he's also trying to be a good father.

The character development is probably what I liked most about the movie, in addition to the mystery of what it's all about. The people seemed real, and mostly decent. Even Travis, in a very damaged sort of way.

reply

[–] Morbius_Fitzgerald 10 years ago

Yes but, as someone that liked this film, I can see why people would not like these characters. The movie opens with Travis being dug back up by his family after 4 years, leaving a wife and kid behind and at the start he's constantly trying to run away from his brother who just wants to know what he's being doing all this time and why he left in the first place. I mean, okay, in my opinion he did have enough psychological scarring that it seemed excusable but thats my opinion and I know for a fact not everyone will see it the same way and we, as an audience, aren't even given a reason until the last quarter of the film. So on those merits, I can definately see why people wouldn't like this character but in my opinion, Paris Texas is easily one of the best of its genre, to the point where if I extended my Top 20 Favourite films to Top 30, it would definitely be on the list.

"I have always valued my lifelessness."

reply

[–] mitzibishi (1617) 4 years ago

>Those who didn't like the film, in my view, misunderstand the characters.

It was overlong and had a weak narrative with poor acting from the majority of players barring Harry Dean Stanton who had to work with what he had.

reply

[–] chas437 12 years ago

WOW, couldn't disagree more. If you view the film on this level, then you really did miss the point of the film. This film could have been lengthened by 40 minutes and it wouldonly be more beautiful.

reply

[–] bluesky84 10 years ago

I think it is normal for the viewer to not have sympathy for Travis throughout the film, except at the very end (he couldn't reunite with Jane and Hunter because it is him that is broken, and he has to fix it himself). Especially when he started opening up and telling Jane what he did to the family four years ago, I understand. But remember he did say that he tried to fix the family in the years after Hunter was born.

I feel sorry for Jane, as it wasn't her fault the relationship ended that way. She did really care for Hunter when he was at Walt and Anne's, because remember Anne told Travis (the night conversation) that she used to call about him. Also near the end of the film Jane tells Travis that Anne used to send pictures of Hunter until it became too much for her to handle. Even though she told Anne to stop sending pictures of her son, she still cares about him and his well being (example: she puts money aside for him in the future).

While I understand that most viewers will not have any sympathy for Travis, I feel sorry for him because he knows he can't be reunited with his family. The real thing that's broken is him, and he has to fix himself or else he will repeat the same mistakes in the past.

The dust has come to stay. You may stay or pass on through or whatever.

reply

[–] sgraf_x 15 years ago

I agree with you. A very long, very boring story. Barely a story to be told really but ole Wim manages to drag it out for 2 1/2 hours. Ill sum it up for you ok?

Jealous old husband gets possesive, ties wife to stove with belt. Young attractive wife gets free, sets him on fire and runs away. Husband puts fire out then goes all Forrest Gump and runs to Mexico.

The first hour was completely pointless. I didnt find the photography or locations to be anything special. Stanton sounded like he was reading lines he was unfamiliar with when delivering his "famous monolog." Kinskis southern accent was horrible. I didnt care about any of these characters or their ultra-thin backstories.

Sometimes someone says a movie is great and then all the lemmings and sheep fall right in line, including critics, cause they dont want to seem like they dont get it. And Paris, Texas is exactly that.

So dont feel like you dont get "it" or the problem is with your artistic sensibilities because these bafoons wouldnt know a good film if you beat them over the head with a 35mm canister. A turd is a turd and just because someone says it is a brick of gold doesnt make it so. Can you tell I absolutely hated this film.

I give 2/10

And the 2 goes to the kid who turned in an impressive performance.

There is NO Gene for the Human Spirit.

reply

[–] mcmaster_flash 15 years ago

You know what I think is awesome? Is that there are movies in this world where if one person doesn't like it then anybody else who says they like it is just saying it cause they don't want to seem like "they don't get it." Never mind the fact that they may actually like it.
I happen to love Paris, Texas but I'm well aware and have been that it's not a movie everybody is going to like. Guess what? Not everyone is going to like EVERY movie in the world. It's called variety and different tastes.
Agreed, just because someone says it's a brick of gold doesn't make it so but neither does saying a turd is a turd.
Then again, I don't know what's worse: The fact that a bunch of people posted on a thread of why they think a movie is stupid just cause they didn't like it or that I was bored enough to post on it myself.

reply

[–] sgraf_x 15 years ago

To respond to your rumination as to why people would post about a movie they didnt like is because when I commit 2 and a half hours to watching a film that has been said to be incredible, amazing etc. I want to warn others that it may not be worth it. But you wouldnt find me posting the same on a film like say Stepbrothers where its widely known to be garbage.

There is NO Gene for the Human Spirit.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] alex-2929 15 years ago

Some of you people are just complete morons, I feel sad that you couldn't enjoy this amazing powerful film like I have..

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chas437 13 years ago

Agree. This was an incredible film. I think of it as a pioneer Independent Film. This was really the first Indie film to when critical acclaim in mainstream USA, and really stood out among other films of the day. I was blown away with when I first saw it 27 years ago as a kid. I just watched it again, and 27 years later it is still powerful for me but in a different way. Harry Dean Stanton was amazing in the role of Travis. The role of the 8 year old kid was very well played.

Way too many stupid people posting on this board. "Paris Texas" won the Grande Prize an Cannes as I remember.

reply

[–] bluesky84 10 years ago

I wish I viewed Paris, Texas as an incredible film immediately after viewing it for the first time. To be honest, after seeing it for the first time, I thought it was great, as in 8-8.5/10. You really have to see it multiple times in order to truly appreciate it, especially the first half (I really, really liked the shots of the American west).

I also liked the production process of the film, and Wenders' passion of photography (as seen in Written in the West). It's too bad he didn't use some of the locations that were in the book, but at least he gave them some attention. The rural shots are much more interesting to look at.

The dust has come to stay. You may stay or pass on through or whatever.

reply

[–] CocksureBurns 10 years ago

I want to warn others that it may not be worth it. But you wouldnt find me posting the same on a film like say Stepbrothers where its widely known to be garbage.

Hey!
I cried at the end of Stepbrothers.

reply

[–] tadeu-br 15 years ago

I hate narrow minded people who keep focusing on 'a story' or 'a message'. A movie is such more than telling a story.

You sound just like the kind of people who shoud stick to GI Joe, Transformers and such. Lave complex movies for people who care to use their minds.

reply

[–] creaturefeeture 14 years ago

I couldn't even finish Paris, Texas I was so bored to tears. That being said, the cinematography was incredible! I'm sure that's largely what landed it high critical praise. I kept popping the film back into my dvd player, hoping something would snag me in and keep me interested, but sadly that never happened and I just gave up on it. As a result, I wont rate it, I never saw the whole film, but I just wanted to point out how incredibly beautiful the cinematography was because I don't think that's receiving enough mention. Nearly every shot was a masterpiece. Unfortunately, if I wanted to see a bunch of beautiful shots with no substance in my eyes I'd simply go to a photography gallery. As many have stated, I too felt no sympathy for the characters nor did I really relate to them, and found nothing interesting or redeeming about them. But again I didn't see the whole thing. Just my two cents.

Voting History: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=26598711

reply

[–] kenny-164 14 years ago

jebikka suffers from ADD.

reply

[–] creaturefeeture 14 years ago

No, sadly I don't. The film was just that boring. And I hardly ever call a film boring.

Voting History: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=26598711

reply

[–] kenny-164 14 years ago

Not boring. YOu have ADD and can't even pay attention long enough to understand that you do.

Boring is the most overused and improperly applied term on IMDb right after pretentious.

reply

[–] creaturefeeture 14 years ago

My God, you're right!

Voting History: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=26598711

reply

[–] DriftingAlong 14 years ago

Your voting history reveals a lot.

reply

[–] creaturefeeture 14 years ago

As does your attitude.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mjlangenbru 13 years ago

Your voting history reveals a lot. The Pianist, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction all receive 1/10? Its one thing not to like a film but to find nothing redeeming in a film of that ilk is incredulous. Babel and Frost/Nixon 2/10 followed by Little Miss Sunshine 3/10 or Lord of the Rings 5/10. It seems like you arent being realistic when analyzing these films. You are one of the individuals that give imdb ratings a bad name by blindly going radical on all your votes. I mean you gave 85 of your 500 voted items 10/10 but then gave highly regarded films as the ones listed above obscenely lowered ratings? Come on is Cube, Eyes Wide Shut, and Marie Antoinette truly 10/10 masterpieces? Or are you being a little ridiculous in your total skewing of your ratings? I mean a prime example is your voting of The Soup which you gave a 10/10 but a very similar show with jokes and ideas of the same nature in Tosh.0 is a 1/10. You are an idiot.

reply

[–] shortyrags 11 years ago

Try and make it to the last scenes. Those are the best in the film imo. I liked the film but I don't think it was fantastic or incredible in the way that others see it. I respect how others feel though and I definitely even understand why someone would absolutely love this film or on the other end of the spectrum absolutely detest it.

To each his own I say. All in all, I do believe the film is very well crafted (especially the cinematography as you mentioned; I'm a sucker for great camera work) but it just didn't connect with me the same way it did with others.

reply

[–] chas437 12 years ago

And I give you a 1/10, you haven't a clue about the human condition.

reply

[–] modianos 14 years ago

i agree! blah blah blah. i only watched it because some of it was supposedly shot near my hometown. i watched the second half on FF hoping to get a glimpse of something familiar. depressing, dull and boring...not traits i like too much in a movie.

************************************
call me snake...

reply

[–] mariavega23 14 years ago

Well, this is one of my favourite movies. I think the story is amazing. I worry about Travis since the first time we saw him there in the middle of the desert, alone and lost. How can a man be in such a hopeless situation??
The evolution of the relation between Travis and Hunter is wonderfully done, and in the part of the Super 8 film you just can feel what Travis is feeling, remembering all that good times. Harry Dean makes a wonderful performance there, and in the whole movie. And I'm interested all the time about what's gonna happen next, if they will find Jane or not, what's gonna happen with Anne, Walt and Hunter...
And the scene between Jane and Travis with the telephone is a master-piece for me. It makes me feel so sad, and cry a lot everytime I see it, like in the end. How can someone say the story/script is no good?? They had put the climax of the story in the end, which is just an amazing and great idea. And I think that this part is just breathtakingly beautiful and moving:

"I used to make long speeches to you after you left. I used to talk to you all the time, even though I was alone. I walked around for months talking to you. Now I don't know what to say. It was easier when I just imagined you. I even imagined you talking back to me. We'd have long conversations, the two of us. It was almost like you were there. I could hear you, I could see you, smell you. I could hear your voice. Sometimes your voice would wake me up. It would wake me up in the middle of the night, just like you were in the room with me. Then... it slowly faded. I couldn't picture you anymore. I tried to talk out loud to you like I used to, but there was nothing there. I couldn't hear you. Then... I just gave it up. Everything stopped. You just... disappeared. And now I'm working here. I hear your voice all the time. Every man has your voice."

Apart from that example of the genius of the script, the photography, styling, and music are really great ;)
Anyway, some people can dislike this movie, I guess it's just a matter of taste, but I think that the people who don't like it is because they haven't connect to the characters and the story. Maybe you've never felt like Travis, but I can understand his feelings, and the way that Jane reacted, leaving Hunter behind.

sorry for my bad english, I'm spanish ;)

reply

[–] zwot 14 years ago

"I used to make long speeches to you after you left. I used to talk to you all the time, even though I was alone. I walked around for months talking to you. Now I don't know what to say. It was easier when I just imagined you. I even imagined you talking back to me. We'd have long conversations, the two of us. It was almost like you were there. I could hear you, I could see you, smell you. I could hear your voice. Sometimes your voice would wake me up. It would wake me up in the middle of the night, just like you were in the room with me. Then... it slowly faded. I couldn't picture you anymore. I tried to talk out loud to you like I used to, but there was nothing there. I couldn't hear you. Then... I just gave it up. Everything stopped. You just... disappeared. And now I'm working here. I hear your voice all the time. Every man has your voice."

I really connected with that scene because I remember doing exactly the same thing years ago after a failed relationship. The dialogue in my head was so intense for awhile. Then it became rote. Then... it slowly faded. What a wonderful film to get lost in.

BTW, your english needs no apologies, it's excellent. :)

reply

[–] kingcarcas 14 years ago

I thought step brothers was actually ok, to the dude who mentioned it :P

If you don't believe in Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it, put this in your sig.

reply

[–] Burleigh7 14 years ago

Paris, Texas is a beautiful film because it dealt with a main character that is deeply troubled, yet refuses to either judge or glorify him, and simply document his attempts to reconcile from the family he departed from. Harry Dean Stanton was excellent, and all the actors were perfect for their roles. It was 2 and a half hours but for me always interesting.

reply

[–] chas437 12 years ago

Bravo mariavega, your english is fine and the sentiments you express about this brilliant film are exactly the same as mine. This is one of the greatest films of all time, and the haters on these boards are only making themselves look like fools. This isn't a matter of taste, this is a brilliant film, end of story.

reply

[–] bluesky84 10 years ago

I liked the Super 8 scene, I guess the home movie was the turning point where Hunter started to trust Travis (remember, he calls him dad for the first time, to the surprise of Walt). While I agree that that moment was a positive time for Travis' family, I could tell it was a bit unbearable for him to watch because of the images of Jane.

The dust has come to stay. You may stay or pass on through or whatever.

reply

[–] Mod1911 14 years ago

I love Paris, Texas. The OP talked about Lynch's "The Straight Story" and I find these two films similar in some ways. (DL is my favorite director)

WW's tale of the myth of the american family is told against a beautiful south western backdrop. The music reaches into your soul, the photography is breathtaking, and the screenplay and direction are top notch. I don't know what more a film fan could ask for really?

"Give up a dollar for Jesus!" Esa Hawks

reply

[–] jamesericmcgee 14 years ago

You had it right the first time. If you can't seem to sort it out, keep trying all the same. Travis is in a long-term relationship with addiction, for which he has self-medicated his loss of confidence. He is insecure about being too old for the wife and son, and the energy required to hold these destructive impulses in check is exhausting. Travis finally dropped the phony pretense of control...and Wow, what a letdown!

We meet Travis on his way to find his own balance-beam again, which he doesn't, so he can't get back up yet, if ever. Travis never brings up the subject of Jane and Hunter, Walt does. This largest section of the story is a detour from Travis' journey and point of view. He may well be completely ruining things by trying to force Jane to find her love for Hunter again. Travis is merely waking up to his own guilt. The ending is only the dream of hope.

"The only reason I'm paranoid is because everyone's against me." - Frank Burns of M*A*S*H*

reply

[–] dsanchez-2 14 years ago

One of the most boring movies I've ever seen. 139 minutes of my time wasted.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] maawer89 13 years ago

it's a great movie. if you don't like it: boo-hoo.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] moineau-1 13 years ago

art really is so subjective, isn't it? i watched this film today with my 74-yr old mother, and she wept and told me it was one of the best films she'd ever seen. this was probably about the 10th time i've watched this film over the last 17 yrs, and today was the first time i found the booth exchanges unconvincing. first of all, she would have recognized his voice, as voices are so distinct. that irritated me a lot. and second, i lost empathy for him. i think his jealousy was the true culprit in the destruction of their relationship. he even attacks her in the booth on the very first visit, accusing her of getting together with the clients for sex afterhours. in the end, he's a pretty smug guy, not the humble guy i thought he was during previous screenings.

overall, i still think it's a good movie, especially when you are watching it for the first time like my mother was today; it can move you, especially if you've ever had to separate from your children. i do get the idea that she and hunter are going to make it... "i'll be there." and i think she'll stay there (even if she continues to work in that club).

as for wim wenders, i prefer "wings of desire" for an actual experience of empathy. perhaps its easier for wenders to keep things together when he's writing and directing short scenes. just a thought by a writer that has the same problem. :>>)) ~laura t.

reply