MovieChat Forums > Mr. Nobody (2013) Discussion > Before you watch this

Before you watch this

posted 9 years ago by Mister-Sir
34 replies | jump to latest

If you're anything like me, you will get excited to see this because of the high rating, accessibility via netflix, and of course Jared Leto. Here are all the reasons why you SHOULDNT waste your time:

1) The story is awful and not original in the sense that it takes many ideas from other movies and meshes them into some sort of plot about love/time/consequences/fantasy. Its the melting pot of all movies and will leave you wondering why its rated so high
2) God awful soundtrack. The music is repetitive and stupid. Doesn't set any mood to any scenes. You'll enjoy this more on mute with subtitles.
3) Terrible cinematography. The director/producers/blame whoever, tried and fail miserably to be unique/creative/artistic and you'll just get dizzy and aggravated.
4) The acting in general is not good. Jared Leto actually has a very limited roll and his character is nothing to get excited about.

There's better options on Netflix and I certainly would not waste money to see this.

[–] grantluksetich 9 years ago

While I can understand how a few people might feel that way, the majority of people seem to like this film for a reason. Not quite sure why you are telling everyone not to watch this film when every piece of criticism you had was completely subjective.

Or you could be trolling.

Either way, I think everyone SHOULD spend their time watching this (at least once.)

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

Is this trolling?

Every criticism is wrong. Not a single point is valid. And to say that Jared Leto has a "limited role" is an outright lie. He is the lead actor and easily gets the most screen time in this movie.

People who don't like this movie don't like it because they think it's boring. I will admit that this movie isn't for everyone. Anyone who doesn't like Terrence Malick stylized movies won't like this.

I hate to post on such stupidity, and bump this thread up to the top of the forum; but people need to be warned about such falsehoods. It's not just the OPs opinions. Some of his facts are outright misleading.

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

Ok, I'm going to address every criticism so that people will have an accurate sense of what this movie is.

*********PLEASE NOTE LOTS OF SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON*************

1) The story is awful and not original in the sense that it takes many ideas from other movies and meshes them into some sort of plot about love/time/consequences/fantasy. Its the melting pot of all movies and will leave you wondering why its rated so high

The OP is correct in that the movie is mash up of a bunch of different story lines. There are multiple timelines going on which the viewer has to follow. This can be difficult and frustrating. The movie does this in connection to the ideas that are presented within the movie. The movie explores many scientific theories and philosophical ideas showing how they mix with life.

It is original in that the stories a moving both backwards and forwards at the same time. The movie starts with the main character's death sequences in several of the timelines and ages backwards. The movie then ages forwards up to his death sequences and eventually reverses itself and ages backwards again. This is based on scientific theory specifically relativity, the big bang, and the big crunch intertwined with the concept of time.

2) God awful soundtrack. The music is repetitive and stupid. Doesn't set any mood to any scenes. You'll enjoy this more on mute with subtitles.

The soundtrack to this movie in my opinion is exceptional. It features lots old fashioned songs such as "Mr. Sandman" and "For Your Precious Love," which are time pieces that match time period and setting the movie takes place in. It also features somewhat more modern songs such as "Where Is My Mind," which also matches the setting and angst in which the story takes place. Parts of the movie revolve around the characters "coming of age," and the songs chosen represent this nicely.

Finally, the soundtrack has an original score, which features melodic pieces that match the mood of the movie. Personally, I find the melodic pieces to be rather beautiful. The soundtrack has a wide mixture, which most people should be able to appreciate.

3) Terrible cinematography. The director/producers/blame whoever, tried and fail miserably to be unique/creative/artistic and you'll just get dizzy and aggravated.

The cinematography for this movie is absolutely exceptional. The director, Jaco Van Dormael, captures his inner Terrence Malick with his visuals. The scene transitions are artistic and seamless. There's an organizational structure with the coloring as well. The story features three different love interests for the main character, and the movie associates a different color for each interest. Cinematography for this movie is very intentional and artistic. It is quite a beautiful display in every aspect.

4) The acting in general is not good. Jared Leto actually has a very limited roll and his character is nothing to get excited about.

The acting in this movies features several well renowned actors such as Jerad Leto, Diane Kruger, and Sarah Polley who deliver great performances. For Kruger and Leto, this movie was made before they were well-known so you can see them in roles before they were well-renowned.

There are other lesser known actors who are generally well received in this movie as well such as Juno Temple and Rhys Ifans. They deliver great performances as well. The statement that Jerad Leto has a limited role in this movie is downright false. He's the main actor the movie features and gets the majority of the screen time. I don't know where the OP gets off saying this.

My Conclusion:

I will say that this movie isn't for everyone. The average viewer who wants to escape, looking for mindless entertainment, probably won't enjoy this movie. This movie requires you to think and engage to appreciate its greatness. The first time you watch this movie, you probably won't understand it. It takes about 45 minutes to understand what's going on. On repeat viewings, things become more clear and you can appreciate this movie for what it is.

I recommend this movie to those who like to think and love movies as a work of art.

10/10

[–] duanereilly74 9 years ago

well said, +1

[–] EyeInSky 9 years ago

This movie is an amazing masterpiece! One of the rare 10/10's for me. +1

[–] Totemkauf 9 years ago

I'm one of the 'stopped after 20 or so minutes' group and will probably never try it again. I personally don't like unclear-plot/ could-end-at-anytime movies and rarely end up liking them. It should say 'Before you watch this - know that this is a film and not a movie. There isn't a clear linear story with a budding conflict that leads up to a resolution(based on what I've ready here) But it is instead a thought-provoking artsy film. It had great special effects and visuals from what I saw, I just couldn't take 'channel-surfing' structure.

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

Actually, that's not true. The main character is left with a choice at the end, and he makes his choice based on the results that lead up to the climax. I can't say anything else without giving the story away. However, many people actually miss this because they fail to understand the story.

[–] Mister-Sir 9 years ago

I wouldn't call this trolling. I don't think the message boards are limited only to praising movies. I posted because no other movie has ever let me down nearly as much as this film and in every aspect.

Now most of you seem to want to take shots and assume I don't understand, or appreciate or blah blah and that's fine. I could care less, and I'm not about to argue my opinion vs yours.

But this

The director, Jaco Van Dormael, captures his inner Terrence Malick with his visuals.

is the saddest thing I've ever read on any message board. I think you lost all credibility by saying this. You like movies as a work of art but that comparison is insulting to Malick's brilliance. I would say Dormael is to Malick as Mr. Brainwash is to Banksy.

"Need, that's a bigger word than love"

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

I wouldn't call this trolling. I don't think the message boards are limited only to praising movies. I posted because no other movie has ever let me down nearly as much as this film and in every aspect.

I said trolling cautiously with a question mark because I couldn't tell. You're OP had aspects of trolling in it, but you didn't really have a previous history of trolling, which is unusual.

You're entitled to your opinion. Many people have posted on this forum that they hated this movie in which I haven't responded to. I understand and respect people's dislike for this movie. What made your situation different and required a response was the blatantly false information you spewed. I definitely disagree with your opinion the photography of this movie, and I think most people who value cinematography would agree with me on this movie's accomplishment in that regard instead of you. That is however an opinion and not a matter of fact. What really got to me was the statement Jerad Leto had a limited role. This is blatantly false. You're basically accusing the movie of false advertisement, and it couldn't be further from the truth. Leto is the star in this movie and he gets the most amount of screen time.

I don't care whether you like this movie or not. However, what I won't stand for is you preventing someone else from potentially enjoying/watching this movie based on false information. There are people out there who watch movies based on actors alone, and if they read that Leto's role is small in this film, they might decide not to watch it.

[–] Mister-Sir 9 years ago

The goal of my post was not to make blatantly false lies about the movie in efforts to keep people from watching it. So for you, I'll rephrase: Jared Leto's presence is not felt and it was a poor performance. Of course he was the star, but having the most amount of screen time (which i still disagree with) doesnt make his role more than limited. More than half of his scenes he's mumbling garbage on his deathbed. It's clear we disagree, and others do as well but I never intended on lying about the film if thats what your accusing me of. I could really care less if people go to see it, but I cannot even put into words the disappoint I felt after watching this movie and I will not concede that he had a limited and *beep* role. If you want me to say he had a lot of screen time thats fine but it doesnt mean much.

"Need, that's a bigger word than love"

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

But this

The director, Jaco Van Dormael, captures his inner Terrence Malick with his visuals.
is the saddest thing I've ever read on any message board. I think you lost all credibility by saying this. You like movies as a work of art but that comparison is insulting to Malick's brilliance. I would say Dormael is to Malick as Mr. Brainwash is to Banksy.

You never had any credibility to begin with. You lost all credibility you had based on the lies you stated that I have already addressed.

Jaco Van Dormael does capture his inner Terrence Malick with his visuals, and he does something that Malick has proven to be incapable of: tell a story. Malick gets so caught up in his visuals and photography that he doesn't tells a coherent story. Malick is incapable of sacrificing shots in his editing, if it has an appeal to him, even if it doesn't serve the greater purpose of the story that he is telling. This is his greatest flaw.

Mr. Nobody, on the other hand, is different. It is a visually stunning movie in the way Terrence Malick movies are, but that doesn't come at the expense of the plot of the movie. The visuals enhance the plot both working together to tell a compelling story. I bet Terrence Malick wishes he could make a movie as good as Mr. Nobody.

Movies like The Thin Red Line and Tree of Life are visual just masturbation. They are beautiful but also hollow and meaningless. I'll take this over Malick's work any day.

Note: I actually really like Terrence Malick and his movies, but Mr. Nobody is significantly better than anything Malick has made. Comparing Mr. Nobody to most movies is unfair because this movie is better than most movies.

[–] eliz_danza 9 years ago

This movie is not for everyone because not everyone can understand it lol😁

[–] petercacic 9 years ago

Or we have better taste than wasting a few hours of our lives for trash when there are better movies . You would have to be teen or child to not grasp such a boring plain story . I bet nearly all the people getting mad because some of us found it horrible are those hipster types , the clowns of society that have no backbone of there own they just jump on the hipster bandwagon as all sheep do and cant fathom this world is huge and made up of different types of people with likes and dislikes. Only a immature thinker would think if some one does not like something they must not understand it , maybe they get it more than you thats why they don't like it because we can grasp it at its fullest not just skim it like you. This is my opinion it is no more correct then yours as all reviews or responses are that persons bias opinion so stop acting like yours is right when its totally wrong for 50% of the people

[–] b_b_pinky 9 years ago

^ Spoken like someone who didn't understand it. This movie is by nature a paradox, and therefore, it can't be simple. If you're calling this plain, then you clearly missed the point.

Eliz is right. Most people don't understand, and that's fine. Lots of people don't like this movie because they don't get it. It's not for them, and that's ok.

It is a precious gem for many of us who do actually understand this movie.

[–] peachesNcream97 8 years ago

You know, people are allowed to not like a movie. You really don't need to respond obsessively to every post that disagrees with your opinion.

[–] rootieboy 9 years ago

Hmmm. I thought the music was very appropriate. Listen to the music of "Mr. Sandman" and "Everyday". You do listen to lyrics of music don't you? I thought it was very appropriate and did set the right mood. I don't know what made you dizzy and aggravated. Did you accidentally put on the Blair Witch project? The cinematography in this movie was very clean. For someone who is complaining about the story not being original, what is the most recent original story you have seen in a movie and I could probably give you something that is on par with that story. Go complain about a third reboot of spiderman or the remake of every 80's movie that is being done.
As far as the acting goes, Leto's acting is what pulled me into this movie because I got to see him react to what was happening around him. I don't know why I never remember him in my top list of actors but this movie reminded me to put him there.

[–] kaunte 9 years ago

I could maybe understand a few of those critisisms, but come on the soundtrack was awesome!

Be it a grain of sand or rock, in water they sink as the same.

[–] luvie2003 9 years ago

You clearly did not pay any attention to the film. Your comments and points are completely invalid. I think you should just resort to watching popcorn films where everything is completely explained to a T and you will not have to do any thinking.

Always look for the positive in every situation.

[–] eliz_danza 9 years ago

Agreed!

[–] crashdummy35 8 years ago

I barely watched it last night...

So glad I did : it can get a bit crazy but, it is very powerful. Made me think back to my teen years on more than one ocassion.

I'd recommend it.

[–] Midnightsp 8 years ago

No.
The plot is quite enjoyable and I think the twist at the end is quite hard to guess because given the artsy nature of the film one would guess something lot more complicated.
Diane Kruger and also Leto are both very good and remember Leto played a kid so all the Mr Nobody personalities were essentially 9 years old of course they weren't as diverse as a grown up would be.
The cinematography and the score are amazing and they add a lot to the quality. While I agree the film is sometimes pretentious and overdone (the angel part is horrendous) but what I've noticed is that it holds up quite well to multiple viewings because the film itsself is veeery pretty and the atmosphere has that European dreamy touch to it.
I guess it all comes down to taste but despite the fact that it was a flop at its time it still has 7.9 here, which does not make it good, but it is universally loved.