MovieChat Forums > The Moderns Discussion > Mostly dreadfully bad

Mostly dreadfully bad

posted 13 years ago by DazeYaVoo
9 replies | jump to latest

(If you're a stickler, there are spoilers following. But they're not critical to any plotline, like divulging that the butler did it or something.)

I'll admit, I popped the "Moderns" DVD after only half an hour, so maybe it got better. It couldn't have gotten worse.

I saw only two positives in the half hour of my life which I'll never get back.
1) The art direction/production design was very good and a fine representation of Paris in the '20s (not that I'd know from personal experience, mind you). But I've been, and done enough studying of French culture to have a feel for it.
2) It was mild fun trying to pick out the famous personages being portrayed, very much like looking at a Hirschfeld drawing (appropriately) of (his) contemporary notables.

I got as far as the salon scene where we first see Stein. When she starts ragging on people, I immediately wondered if she had been that much of a bitch with no one calling her on it. Then when Carradine slaps Fiorentino and Lone just stands there instead of laying him out flat, I gave up. Perhaps it was to ba a delayed "hit" of one kind or another later. But the dull acting, the blasé, detached responsiveness of everyone, whether true to the historical reality or just deadened acting, I hadn't the patience to find out more.

I do realize that it's a 1988 film of 1926 (?) times, so maybe it just hasn't aged well. Take my critique for what it's worth, just one man's opinion.

[–] jones7418 12 years ago

I would put the blame on director Alan Rudolph. Though I liked the film, I thought it terribly under-acted; like everyone was on Valium.

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

Well I guess it is kind of remarkable that a movie that, as much as can be surmised from its absent minded drift, mainly concerns itself with copying and artifice, is such a piece of ponderous, mannered kitsch itself. The ostensibly dreamy stylistics mainly translate to dullness on screen, never able to quite hide that there really wasn´t much of a story to tell or an artistic vision worth sharing. And don´t even start me about the utterly pointless boxing match in the middle of the film or the hyper pretentious Hemingway caricature strolling through the movie. The ending was the best part of it, but generally, it´s a waste of time.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] PatrickGH91 10 years ago

If this is your attention span, I suggest you give up on cinema and try something less demanding like colouring in.

[–] DazeYaVoo 10 years ago

Thanks for your contribution. It added immensely to an actual discussion about the movie.

You might have said, "Well, I liked the film because of its the varied levels of subtle acting, almost as if they were reading lines at a pre-rehearsal"

Or, "It's one of my favorite films because so many actors crashed and burned in one scene."

Or, "I loved Gertrude Stein. She reminded me of my over-indulgent mother."

Maybe, "When John Lone's character didn't fight back, I just knew it was some pent-up aggressiveness that would come out swinging when, and if, the plot moved any further along."

Perhaps, "It was just my cuppa four o'clock. Sedate, layed-back, quite conducive to my habit of napping."

Instead, you respond with a personal jab. Pithy, not. Pity, yes.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] henrimaine 9 years ago

But the dull acting, the blasé, detached responsiveness of everyone, whether true to the historical reality or just deadened acting, I hadn't the patience to find out more.

We often find this kind of commentary on IMDB: the acting was too dull, the actors didn't "act" they just said their lines. To your credit I say that you at least seem to realize that the "dull acting" might be true to reality. But you still find it boring, even if it is real. Why is that? Are you another victim of virtual reality who expects movies to give you some improved version of real life.

[–] DazeYaVoo 9 years ago

[Uh, I read you the first time. You're repeating yourself.]

We often find this kind of commentary on IMDB: the acting was too dull, the actors didn't "act" they just said their lines.

Well, that may be because movies often have dull acting with actors just saying their lines. Media critics often term this as "sleep-walking through their roles." The fact that those comments happen often doesn't make them untrue.

To your credit I say that you at least seem to realize that the "dull acting" might be true to reality. But you still find it boring, even if it is real. Why is that?

Thank you for the [possibly grudging?] credit, but if the acting is true to reality, then my criticism stands. Doubly so, because then the film not only was slow and ponderous, but apparently the real people led life in a dull, ponderous manner. (If true, these wouldn't be the first writers et. al. who were good at their craft, but dull in person.) It doesn't get un-boring just because it's accurate. Even documentaries of historical events have story arcs to move us along and keep us interested in the subject matter. That's why film is meant to be entertaining.

Are you another victim of virtual reality who expects movies to give you some improved version of real life.

Oh, there's the snark. And probably the point of the message, yes?

It seems you're not on record for anything about this film. You haven't stated your own views or arguments. Why are you commenting on me instead of on the film? This board is about the film, not us. Have you seen it? Did you like it? Why? What good stuff did I miss by bailing early on the movie? What award-worthy film craft did I miss out on? Why did you like it?

Go on the record. Anyone can comment, "You're wrong." But I'll actually respect the person who comments, "[I believe] You're wrong and here's why ...."

[–] marudd50 8 years ago

Haven't seen this in yonks, but my memory is that I loved this movie. Yes, there was a sleepwalking feel to it, but that was intentional. I especially loved Oiseau and the scenes mocking Hemingway specifically. Of course, the whole thing was a send-up of A Movable Feast. Being a lit major helps in liking this film!

Beauty is truth, truth beauty.

[–] jdforyou1983 (1469) 3 years ago

I also found it pretty bad