"First off, you're a self-admitted porn aficionado." Ok, so going from this qoute I guess you are female. Let me be clear: I am not an aficionado. I'm just a regular guy and I am honest. Studies prove that all men with access to it watch porn. And how would that effect my intelligence??? Only if I were masterbating 24/7 would that be an issue.
"your assumption that TWENTYNINE PALMS 'could only be done by spoiled people who came up in a more than safe environment' has no justification and is a generalization that could only have made by a genuine dolt." Once again perfect argumentative structure.
I suggested that because of the example of the Tunesian director, a man living in a truly harsh world, who could never indulge himself in such a pseudo-deep pile of schmidt like this movie, you could think that upbringing and your surroundings do have an considerable impact on theway you create art. I may have generalized to make it sound more bitter but with the aforementioned you can't say it has no justification.
On the other end, the justification for your statement was that I was a dolt.
You continue: "This movie made plenty of 'worthy point(s)'" - where? what are they? I mean it; tell me, enlighten me. "and conformed to no 'arthouse cliches'". Oh, it so does. I stated which cliches I meant and there are plenty examples of those in the movie. I'll mention some, just off the top of my head.
Screaming: When they rolled over that dog or when they had arguments.
Silence: A lot especialy when they were driving.
Fierce Sex: Outside on the rocks, in some hotel or motel.
The "intent of the film" as most garbage arthouse (notice I'm saying garbage arthouse, I know there to be good arthouse as well) is to push boundaries/be edgy by showing explicit sex, trying to get the audience to go through all kinds of emotions with the most contrived scenarios (they even used animals for that! wow) and have a "shocking" ending, that no one sees coming. I mean sure I didn't see it coming so he succeeded in that respect, but did it make sense? only if you overanalyze it.
Now tell me I'm wrong, and this time make points that are connected to the subject matter, not with what you think is my personality.
reply
share
14 years ago
[deleted]
14 years ago
[deleted]
14 years ago
[deleted]
14 years ago
[deleted]
14 years ago
[deleted]
14 years ago
[deleted]
uljoge
14 years ago
come on, give us your interpretation of this deeply complex film which strays from the hollywood norm by including sex and violence
What is the big baffling truth that lies beneath the surface of this masterpiece? Up until now all you said is that it departs from the normal narrative structure, which is something pulp fiction did 14 years ago, and which isn't regarded as high-art.
Your reinterpretation of the ending is higly doubtful, the scenes you point out do not indicate this... This interpretation is made out of thin air (and some bad directing) and such vague interpretations could be made about every movie, even transformers.
So what did the director want to tell us, the audience? That he can make a different narrative structure? Why did he kill her in the end? Is there a sense to all this mess? What did he want to tell us with the scene where the dogs were running next to the car, then they got under the wheels but then it was OK again? What did the sex scenes mean? Or when she blew him? Surely those scenes weren't just filmed to create some shock and repulsion?
reply
share
PoppyTransfusion
11 years ago
So what did the director want to tell us, the audience? That he can make a different narrative structure? Why did he kill her in the end? Is there a sense to all this mess? What did he want to tell us with the scene where the dogs were running next to the car, then they got under the wheels but then it was OK again? What did the sex scenes mean? Or when she blew him? Surely those scenes weren't just filmed to create some shock and repulsion?
Well, my twopenceworth ... The film is set in nature and some of the scenery is fantastic. Early on Katia and David get out of their vehicle to admire some hills only for the view to be interrupted by a freight train and the skyline dotted with wind turbines (which looked quite pretty, but of course aren't 'natural'). Humans seek to impose themselves on the natural world whilst wanting some sense of themselves as part of nature. Katia and David seem to live this contradictory response as they travel around Twnetynine Palms. They have a fractured relationship. He alludes to her being unwell and she is annoyed at his remoteness. Their sex is violent and their orgasms more like paroxysms of pain. Amidst all this there are moments of tenderness that feel genuine. This is the context to a moment of trauma that ends tragically for both. David's behaviour, affected by his rape and head trauma, leads him to shave his head like the marines they discuss earlier in the film. At that time Katia told him that if he ever did shave his head then she would leave him so he stabs her repeatedly to prevent her leaving him and his frenzied stabbing recalls the violence of their sex and his rape.
The scenes of sex, violence, rape and their relationship are purposeful. If they shock and repulse it is because at some deeper level, I think, Dumont is communicating the cruelty and primitivism of humans that contrasts with the world of nature we 'rape' whilst yearning for simultaneously.
Keep silent unless what you are going to say is more important than silence.
reply
share