MovieChat Forums > Japón (2003) Discussion > overexposed

overexposed

posted 19 years ago by NoHofSands
25 replies | jump to latest

i saw this film and found that it reaches a level of crapiness just equivalent to its level of pretention

the guy who shot that doesn t even know how to use a camera, he should buy hiself a digital one, and forget about complicated stuff : all the film is overexposed, making it look like a family holyday movie of the 70's (got some of these at home, should release them...)

apart from this, the filming is a kind of parody of tarkowsky's filmmaking, with long landscape shots, bach's music, but it makes no sense

tarkovsy was a true artist, an knew where the on/off button of the camera was, i m not interrested in seeing his fanclub movies.

even if you forget the technical void of the filmmakers, the story is even uninterresting. ok, t s about a sexual relationship between a man who is 40 years old with a woman over 70, we fell ill at ease with such matters, but then ? there is no dialogue, the characters are not interresting. It is very easy to pretend to be genius when you say nothing. At last you don t take risks of being criticised.

Oh, well... I like all kind of cinemas, I saw really good things from south america these lasts years, but plaese, not this, open your eyes, it s a fake thing.

[–] bluesy 18 years ago

The movie got 15 wins & 8 nominations at 13 different movie festivals worldwide!! (mostly the most important and credible ones) which makes your opinion pretty much inferior. So many people, movie critics/viewers around the world can't be wrong. You are the one that is wrong, sorry :))

[–] mariomichel-1 18 years ago

bluesy,

Tell me in your words why this movie was so great. Don't refer to or quote snobish, elitist critics and film festivals no one has ever heard of.

Just tell us exactly why this movie did it for your. Let's break down the plot, the pacing, the character development, setups and ending.

Let's dicuss it. Why was it good? Can you do that?

Why are you indoctrinated by annoying critics who have obviously no idea what they're talking about. And who are these critics? What makes them so valid on these matters. How influential are they in convincing an audience why something is good. Can they answer my questions above about what makes this movie so great?

The only convenient answer you, or they, can come up with is this: IT'S AN ART MOVIE. Well, I'm glad there are so many of you out there that delude yourselves into thinking this is good, and you're gullible enough to think other people may actually like this. The reason I'm glad is because I'm in the movie business, and you people will NEVER succeed in the film world because you lack a basic understanding of what good filmmaking is all about. You will be filtered out early on, which is great for me. Less competition.

Mario

[–] bluesy 18 years ago

Let me guess: good film making is about making money. And to hell with artistic quality and everything else that matters. Michael Bay style right? LOOOL, right.

And who are "you people"? So because you're from the "movie business" you're supposed to be something special or above me? You really are amazing since you know nothing about me.

I won't be ever filtered out cause I'm not part of it. I'm simply a movie lover. The only thing filtered out will be idiotic and cliched HW movies that I will ignore (not see, buy on DVD etc) and I would rather see Japon a 100 times then any Michael Bay, Uwe Boll, Van Damme, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Michael Dudikoff kind of movie. Even the latest Spielberg flicks come to mind in the same category sadly. Get it? Thank you and goodbye and good luck with your successful and outstanding movie business that makes so much $$$ (regardless how crappy thay actually are and what I think of mass taste in art in general). You rule!!!!

EOS

[–] mariomichel-1 18 years ago

bluesy,

First, tell me why JAPON is a good movie. You haven't given me your valid points on that. Don't attack me. Enlighten me.

Second, why are you resorting to generalizations? Why do you see the filmworld in black and white? Did I mention anything about loving action/big budget adventure films? Some are good, some are horrible. I completely understand that. The only issue I take is with storytelling conventions, which ALL films share and follow, and which this movie seems to ignore completey. This fact alone renders it just crap which people confuse for one man's "artistic vision".

Here's a lesson for you. Go out and rent movies by Billy Wilder, Francois Truffaut, Luis Bunuel, The Coen Brothers' early movies, Afred Hitchcock, Luc Besson, Robert Altman, Guillermo Del Toro, Pedro Almodovar, Claude Chabrol, Otto Preminger, Fank Capra, Francis Ford Coppola, Akira Kurosawa, and the list may go on. You will notice some classic movies that kept millions of people engrossed for 2 hours per viewing (some even 3 hours!!).

Then, tell me in your own words how Japon compares to any of the above filmmaker's work.

I'll wait for your explanation.

Mario

[–] kavboj 18 years ago

Whoa, you know some important directors. You must be really cool. Can I be your friend and watch good movies with you?

[–] kpjf 18 years ago

@ mariomichel-1
I personally enjoyed this film. You say "why JAPON is a good movie" whatever anyone says you're still going to dislike this movie right ? so why ask?cos whatever he's going to say you're counter by arguing his reasons, or saying they're not valid. And no im not going to quote some film critics' comments or say "its an art film".

Okay first things first, why did I like it? I like these slow-paced films, where not much happens, just nice tranquil films, which nice scenery and little dialogue and just those kind of films that slowly go by, whats wrong with that.

I do feel that your comments regarding the "here's a lesson for you" is extremely patronising. People like different films, its not like its a maths question, whereby there is only one answer. There are no wrong answers, each to their own. I mean it did get a lot of awards, therefore this implies that many people do in fact think this is a good film. It is so patronising saying that he should go out rent movies by the above directors and then see how it compares. I personally have seen many kurosawa, bunuel, hitchcock, almodovar films (and loved them). But this film isn't meant to be a kurosawa samurai film, a hitchcock thriller, or a bunuel surreal film and think it holds up quite well.

I don't see how if this person goes out and rents a film by one of the mentioned directors, he's going to go, damn im so stupid japon is crap how didn't i realise.

The movie got 15 wins & 8 nominations at 13 different movie festivals worldwide!! (mostly the most important and credible ones) which makes your opinion pretty much inferior. So many people, movie critics/viewers around the world can't be wrong. You are the one that is wrong, sorry :))

How can someone's opinion be wrong? You're saying it like its some fact, and he's therefore wrong, so you're saying just cos movie festivals give it awards, someone is wrong for disliking it. An opinion can't be incorrect

Oh yes and NoHofSands part of the shaky camera work was due to the fact the main guy had a walking stick therefore when the camera was from his eye point it obviously was shaky to represent him. Doesn't it say something that it got "camera d'or special mention" at cannes 2002?

Why are you indoctrinated by annoying critics who have obviously no idea what they're talking about. And who are these critics? What makes them so valid on these matters. How influential are they in convincing an audience why something is good. Can they answer my questions above about what makes this movie so great?

personally i dont care what critics say, i like films cos i like films, i don't see how someone should be attacked just cos he really liked the film and you don't and you seem to think he only likes it cos some film critic praises it. the only thing i think this does is highlight that the movie is out there. For example i read a review of UZAK in the guardian and made me want to see it, okay i did like it but at the same time i could've watched it and hated it all the same. Simply imo critics make you aware that films exist in the sense that if you didn't read one particular review you mightn;t have been aware that the film actually existed.

Well, I'm glad there are so many of you out there that delude yourselves into thinking this is good, and you're gullible enough to think other people may actually like this. The reason I'm glad is because I'm in the movie business, and you people will NEVER succeed in the film world because you lack a basic understanding of what good filmmaking is all about. You will be filtered out early on, which is great for me. Less competition.

Why do you have to attack someone for liking it. What does being gullible have to do with it. Simply i enjoyed this movie, so how does that make me gullible. Im a movie watcher not maker, so im not going to succeed in the movie business cos i don't make movies. By making this statement you're implying that you will be successful; so what have you actually done? ive never heard of you. what is your actual role in the movie business ??

I just don't understand why people have to attack other people here on this forum just cos someone likes a film and someone doesn't!

[–] typemynamehere 17 years ago

Lol!! Ok...i have all day watching all kind of Posts comments, but this guy is IDIOT #1...special award, everybody should watch this movie called "Dinner d cons" (Dinner for *beep* or somethin like that, and remember mr.PIGNON this guy(mari0) i just that stupid!

[–] PabloMM 17 years ago

what a way to NOT answer a question.

[–] kaguth27 18 years ago

The overexposed look of the film was my favorite thing about it. It made everything look very hot and grimey, which I'm sure it was.

[–] movie-rat 18 years ago

You guys are making me laugh. This movie sucked eggs! It was so bad it's laughable.

[–] PTA-fan 18 years ago

If you think this is overexposed, you should check out Julien Donkey-Boy

My top 20:
http://www.ymdb.com/tyler-l/l28735_ukuk.html

[–] racinemovies 18 years ago

The 'overexposed look' of the film was achieved via a bleach by-pass process on the 16mm camera negative with the combination of a x2 anamorphic lens compression factor (The camera was a Arriflex SR2). It is not actual 'over exposure', but the bleach by-pass processing leaves more silver on the 16mm negative and in-turn makes the image denser with less gamma curve, increased grain, more muted colours with saturated contrast(it is actually a hard processing effect to control & requires a knowledgeable director of photography to do careful tests before principle photography). This exact same x2 anamorphic lens (not the bleach by-pass process) was used originally on Gaspar Noe's 'I STAND ALONE / SEUL CONTRE TOUS' (1998) movie - which can be seen via the 2.66:1 widescreen framing ratio. The director of 'JAPON', Carlos Reygadas also greatly admires Noe's work.

[–] Tchoutoye 14 years ago

I Stand Alone/Seul contre tous is 2.35:1
Reygadas used a matte to change the ratio to 2.66:1

[–] billygf 18 years ago

I got to say I watched this movie 'cause the hype around it, and also because Reygadas is from the city I'm from (pachuca)... well the movie was for me very weird, I really didn't get it (not even the title), and it may be 'cause I don't know much about film, but I guess it must have something great in it in order to have been recognized in Cannes, Venice, Sundance, etc...

for everything I've read everyone everywhere cites tarkowsky, sounds to me like nobody got it and cited the same movie reviewer... so for me it's the crude description of a troubled soul in it's journey to suicide, so all the ambient in the film expresses that... the fascination of this man with the old lady shows his repulsion to all the modern civilization (and so does his journey to the that corner of the world, and his dreams do the same)... other than that he creates a very bizarre atmosphere with the shots, the lack of dialogues, the non professional actors, the improvisation...

I really can't say I liked it, it left me very intigued, in lack of better words I don't understand the conceptualism of these film... but like I said I really know little about films...

*pardon my horrible grammar*

[–] fanhorn_vlad 18 years ago

I've been awarded by these festivals too, I won't say who I am, but I personally have met this director and found him to be completely ignorant on the issue.

KUDOS TO US BLUESSY, who put some effort into filmmaking and respect the audience that wants to be respected. Maybe I'll put up the link to my IMDB enlisted movies someday. But for now, I'm still waiting for this directors career to crash and burn by itself.

[–] jhseeker 18 years ago

You are waiting for his career to crash and burn before you put up a link to your movies?

Well you really know something about the art of suspense!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] gracielacervantes 17 years ago

I dissagree with your comments the films is nt overexposed and if you know photography you know something named PUSHING and PULLING they are doing agreat use of photography here but they are loosing a step doring the film tranfer to 35mm (the film waht shot on anamorphic 16mm and then transfer to 35 mm, analog) HAVE YOU SEE THE PRINT TO make such an ignorant comment?

Atentamente,

Carlos Reynagas

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] arturo-ramirez 17 years ago

Well, I don't know much about the technical aspects of filmmaking, nor do I know about the art of cinema, but I do know what I like and this movie was the worst movie I've seen in a long time.

It was a pointless exercise in futility. Paraphrasing Mr. Goldwyn -from Metro Goldwyn fame-: "Messages should be sent through Federal Express, movies are to be entertaining".

Why should I have to pay to see this trite? Whatever artsy crap this director was trying to do, he left me utterly confused. He should try his movies on friends and family first and then release them to an unsuspecting public.

The fact that this movie won so many awards just confirms what a bunch of idiots film critics are.

There are better mexican movies.

[–] ccrow-2 17 years ago

Seriously, learn a few basic rules of writing before posting...
Thousands of online English classes are available if you can't or just don't want to leave the house.
Yes, Japon might have taken a while to deveolp, but that's what made the final sequence so devastatingly redemptive.
Was the relationship between the man and Ascen just about sex for you? Don't you think it could represent something bigger than just the two people?

[–] fanhorn_vlad 17 years ago

I know what anamorphic is, and sizes too, and please don't start with the Pushing and pulling, YOU SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED LIGHTING CONDITIONS, that's why so many films are grainy and overexposed, the "filmmakers" don't foresee these things.

Stop throwing your weight around and making excuses, I've converted NTSC video to FLAT 35mm with Dolby SR audio, plus I added a digital matte to make up for the 1.78:1 ratio, (because you'd know that NTSC is 1.33:1 right?) People think the source came from Super8mm Film, so don't come telling me I don't know about film. Step up to the challenge and make an honorable picture. Not another remix of your old attempts.

[–] Fartbag 17 years ago

I think this movie was way over hyped. The thing flows so slowly I finally found a way to counter it. It sped up the dvd player to 2x speed. It helped a lot. I fail so see why it won so many rewards.

[–] fanhorn_vlad 17 years ago

France needs to stick it to the U.S. so they're in their Ethnic Exploitation phase. They rarely select U.S. films for competition. And all they select is films with no screenplay, bad photography and grainy overexposed images. No Hollywood production will stoop down to that level, and that's why the French are trying to stick it to the U.S. using their 100 years of cinema and having the most important film festival in the world (Cannes), in order to award any sh_t that INSULTS the very foundation of what good filmmaking is.

It's just a phase... you'll see.

But during this phase, many young directors get confused about the ethics of filmmaking, and if you don't want to get into moral issues of what's right and what's wrong, just think about the viewer that pays good money to see a film for delight, inspiration, intelectual input, and just plain good ol'fashion going to the theater to get to know another reality.

So... I think it's very pathetic what the french are doing with their name and giving indigents with no acting experience awards for best actor, when other people that work hard at their craft get criticized for not winning such awards and their offers are affected. And the other untalented winners, don't even get offers afterwards because they're not actors in the first place, and are toooooo typecast, that no other film in history would ever accomodate their limited performance.