MovieChat Forums > Mr. Nobody (2013) Discussion > This movie killed itself

This movie killed itself

posted 8 years ago by stazza
13 replies | jump to latest

Not hating, it is well made, and poorly presetented.

It is a MOVIE. They need to sell it to people that would want to watch it as a movie. 47 million budget, 32 (THIRTY TWO!!!!) production companies... I saw logo after logo after logo at the start, and kinda figured it out: they begged money from everyone and a little bit from a lot of different places got them the budget.
They made a great movie and forgot to include the audience in it.

I "GET" the film: kid's anti-decision and the variety of directions to go leading down different life paths, and how OH SO IMPORTANT AND WORLD CHANGING EVERY TINY DECISION is (even though that is nothing more than psycho-babble nonesesne that SOUNDS important), but in the end, like many here have stated, its all thrown in. Cutting room floors exist for a reason and this one should have used it.

It could have been glorious without the extra speeches that often times don't even add anything to the plots resolution, tacked on scenes from "Everyman's" memories as a child, dawn out all in slow motion... some tighter editing and 90 minutes would have made this glorious. Someone was too close to their story to cut things out.

So, 47 million (or 60 I on here?) with 2 million return... well, that is not because of bad marketing, or it being too deep - which it is not - it is becuase the end result sucked. REally great movies that fail at the Box Office, grow legs and learn to run later on down the line. This one seems handicapped by its self importance, so it sits on the sidelines and seen for pennies on Netflix occasionally by someone who likes pretty colors and the camera angles and coloring.

Sure it is worth the ride as an art piece.... art pieces don't have to go anywhere. But this one wants to go someplace deep. And it drowns instead of swimming to the shores.

Someone here stated: "everything in this movie is connected, explained, important" paraphrasing.... really? I found most of it was not. Just filler. Like the angel touching their lips... some important aspect that explains something deep? Nope. Never goes anywhere, doesn't mean anything, is just something that plods it forward AS IF it was something important.

Really treid to like it, it had ONE interesting concept in it, but they didn't carry it well.
Sure, I'm preaching to the choir here... the fact that it universaly bombed on almost all levels speaks for itself. Of course, there are those who love it, and that is their right, but they can't support it. Niche markets never support their little underground.

I'm only haflway through it and I already read enough to know I shouldn't finish it. And no one can say "But you gotta watch the whole thing" no, there are enough reviews that explain how this one goes down, Im not sure if I have that much life left to bbother watching this, when I could watch something more entertaining as a "MOVIE".

[–] Geovibe 8 years ago

I am glad I watched it all the way through, but I wouldn't consider myself an average movie-goer, I've been a student of film and an amature movie maker for quite some time. After a while, I realized I was watching it more for the cinematography and the cool visuals than the actual story.

I too wish it had been shorter and 'tightened' up with some more cut-throat editing. The director could have made a film for general audiences and then kept a 'Director's Cut' for Blu Ray Sales or something like that.

[–] stazza 8 years ago

I agree it was VERY WELL shot and colored and lit, and I still want to get all the way through it some day. Just very hard to sit down to, knowing the story contains so much random stuff that should be cut.

Artists can make great looking movies, with GREAT stories also. But I think this missed that target.

[–] Midnightsp 8 years ago

I'm a fan of the movie but you've made some very good points. I almost forgot how ridiculous the angel parts was, let's just remember thebgood parts lol.

[–] b_b_pinky 8 years ago

Someone here stated: "everything in this movie is connected, explained, important" paraphrasing.... really? I found most of it was not. Just filler.

You did not "get" this film like you stated above. You think you did, but if you don't see the inter connection, you didn't understand this movie. There's more to this movie than the decision and indecision.

Of course you admitted you didn't finish the movie so there's no way you understand it.

[–] stazza 8 years ago

CAN'T finish it. Too much non-interesting things going on .... bolstered by too many posts saying "it doesn't really work" and "not connected" and "bad script, messy plot" etc etc put it all together tells me I shouldn't waste my time.

I've never "not gotten" a movie, and I am sure this one makes its little statement at the end that "life is neat" or whatever, but the presentation is so disjointed and offputting (and I enjoyed The Fountain, Memento and others like that) there is no desire to sit all the way through the train wreck to hear, "yeah... life is neat".

Glad others enjoy it, everybody has opinions and they are not wrong, but you might think the numbers speak the truth: 47 million to make it, made 3.5 million back? Are you saying this film is SOOO FREAKing DEEP that almost nobody "got it"?

I'd call that a movie failure.

[–] b_b_pinky 8 years ago

I've never "not gotten" a movie, and I am sure this one makes its little statement at the end that "life is neat" or whatever, but the presentation is so disjointed and offputting (and I enjoyed The Fountain, Memento and others like that) there is no desire to sit all the way through the train wreck to hear, "yeah... life is neat".

This movie is so much more than a "life is neat" production since it's a narrative on modern scientific theory and its intersection with philosophy. However, these aspects of the movie are what you find "off putting." The points the movie try to make don't work if the movie isn't "disjointed," especially the parts about string theory and parallel universes.

you might think the numbers speak the truth: 47 million to make it, made 3.5 million back? Are you saying this film is SOOO FREAKing DEEP that almost nobody "got it"?

Here are some all time classics that were box office flops:
The Wizard of Oz
It's a Wonderful Life
The Shawshank Redemption
Citizen Kane

This goes to show that a movies which makes money aren't necessarily good movies. If that were the case, then the Transformers movies are all masterpieces. I doubt you would want to go there. Should we give all the Oscars to Avengers and Stars Wars this year?

The reason this movie was such a massive box office failure is because it got distributed nowhere. And yet it did receive 11 awards, which is impressive for a movie that received no attention. I didn't watch it until ~4 years after its release. I didn't have any opportunity to watch it before then.

[–] tecmosuperbowler 8 years ago

Here are some all time classics that were box office flops:
The Wizard of Oz
It's a Wonderful Life
The Shawshank Redemption
Citizen Kane

Let's just take a few deep breaths before we put Mr. Nobody in the same galaxy as those films, let alone the same post.

[–] b_b_pinky 8 years ago

you <---------- ----------> the point

[–] stonekeeper_ever 8 years ago

Haha!
I'm with you bro.

Excuse my English, I am French-Canadian

[–] perfectpawn 8 years ago

Here are some all time classics that were box office flops:
The Wizard of Oz
It's a Wonderful Life
The Shawshank Redemption
Citizen Kane

Kane was a "flop" because it only played in a handful of theaters thanks to the machinations of William Randolph Hearst, who threatened to pull advertising from his many papers for any theaters that dared to play the film.

Mr. Nobody was a flop because it was an awful move that took a juvenile concept and blew it up into ludicrously pretentious extremes. There is no alternate reality anywhere in which it will someday be considered a classic. In fact it was such a nonentity that it managed to escape the harsh criticism/mockery it so well deserved -- "Mr. Nobody" should be a buzzword for inept pretension, or the benchmark for bad movies. ("Fantastic Four" is the new "Mr. Nobody!" and such).

[–] b_b_pinky 8 years ago

That's funny, because your excuses to why Citizen Kane was a failure are the exact same as to why Mr. Nobody was a failure.

It has a 7.9 rating here (which is very high). 64% from critics and 76% from audiences on rotten tomatoes. Not the best but not totally awful either.

This movie is going to invoke either two reactions: love or hate. There's very little room for indifference. Apparently in your case, it happens to be hate, but there is a wide amount of love for this movie as well.

[–] msdivy-81287 8 years ago

Yes, the movie is nonlinear. That's fine. But it has plenty of unrelated, unnecessary scenes. Like mentioned in other thread, it is mash-up of few other movies.

Ok, the movie is the imagination of the boy at the train station, on his future possible life paths. Considering this, the unexplained, unrelated, unnecessary scenes:
1) Like you have mentioned, the angel scene and subsequent baby scenes
2) Show off that he can predict future (when it is just his imagination)
3) Big crunch in 2092? Really :)
4) Visit to Mars (no information on when it started )

These I can remember top of my head. Some were fun to watch but felt they were not required for the movie.

[–] cthulhulurks 7 years ago

Its not a good flick. The script sucks,its pseudoscientific, looks like a combination of tv commercials. No sophisticated editing could save it

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings