MovieChat Forums > Borgman (2013) Discussion > Don't talk about some *beep* metaphors; ...

Don't talk about some *beep* metaphors; Shortly garbage.


I am tired of useless filmmakers selling us *beep* like this as a movie full of deep meanings that could be understood by only very few.

reply

I can understand that.

But what did you think of 'Borgman'?

reply

That's your interpretation though. Just because you think that was the filmmaker's goal doesn't make it so. Then again it could be, but this here? It's your opinion, that's all it is.
So what's a "useful" filmmaker to you, someone who makes documentaries?

You basically wrote that anything with a deep meaning/metaphor cannot be understood by you. Well then, watch something different.

We've met before, haven't we?

reply

LOL... I disagree with the OP, but your thumbnail and signature quote make you almost a caricature of someone who watches artsy films.

reply

You sound like a sensitive Nancy boy that loves garbage movies

reply

So basically, symbolism in film is now out?

"Citizen Kane" is out?

"The Wizard of Oz" is out?

"M*A*S*H" is out?

Okay then. erol-mehmet-a has spoken.


reply

it is garbage indeed, even Eraserhead made more sense

reply

[deleted]

The prime defending point of garbage producers : you don't understand me. The same argument is used by the director of Sırpski Film's as well. Using this argument, You could even sell your *beep* ( literally ) as a post-modern art object.

Just be smarter and come with better arguments that is actually ABOUT THE MOVIE itself.

reply

[deleted]

Don't be a pretentious twat. The movie is garbage.

reply

[deleted]

It's a problem with many Dutch movie makers, they want to be artsy, and they love metaphors and cramming in their own personal bias and views about the world in their movies. The Dutch (and Belgian) intellectual elite is extremely pompous and snobby compared to those in other countries

This movie was about nothing, nothing!


It's why I on the one hand want to see Michiel de Ruyter since he did some heroic and epic things in his life, but on the other hand I fear I'm going to end up watching some Dutch art project that rapes history for the sake of telling "the director's own story with political bias"

reply

DId you read any interview with the director? From what I can tell, there is only one. There, he says the whole idea started with the beginning of the film. He just wanted to have a movie where a group of 3 (preacher and 2 others) go out, where Borgman and his two guys escape and Borgman rings the door of the house. He didn't know where to go after that and said that the great thing about doing this is inventing it all:

" I start with the first scene and the one you see in the film is exactly what I had written. Then Camiel rings the doorbell of the first house and at that stage, I did not know how I was going to advance. Fom then on, the pleasure comes from inventing it all."

Hitchcock said that too once. The script writing is the greatest and finally only creative thing, the rest is technical, is execution, even the acting, in a way.

Anyway, as for Borgman, regarding the director's interview, is like a David Lynch movie from NL. He doesn't refer to Lynch, but if you read Lynch, it's the same. Both say that they are not the ones who come up with allegories and metaphors, they just invent scenes, situations, dialogues, mostly too much of all so that they have to figure out which ones suit together for a story that is much more like an experience than some Hitchcock movie with a resolution. Borgman-Director says: "I always try not to give a specific meaning to my films, so that spectators can be free to find their own interpretations. At one point, the character Marina, who is very disturbed, says: “We are so lucky and fortunate people have to pay at some point in life”. It may be a sort of critique of our western society with people like Camiel who come to punish us for our happiness."

Just like with Lynch, it's a panopticon of strange, funny, dark, interesting, original and pretty daring ideas and characters all stuffed together into film. With Lynch, many people (incl. me) thought he's doing all his movies on the basis of dream logic. When asked, he'd say "No... well maybe. Don't know."

So there you go.

"D-E-S-T-R-O-Y : E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G"

reply

i'm just here to thank you for the word panopticon.

reply

Please don't talk about "Garbage". Never get tired. If tired get plenty of rest. Try filmmaking, not just filmviewing. The film stands on its own and the performances of its actors, stands on the script and the direction. It just stands. It could be just poetry and never need explaining itself to you, me, any one of us. I never saw a metaphor during my vieving of it but I understand when one all that sees is metaphors. I do not understand garbage. I thought of it in highly cooler and cleaner terms. The film gripped my attention, promised me absolutely nothing and expected nothing. Still there I sat through it till the end and I do not use to sit through garbage unlike you. This film played (for) us both but I never cried to the skies, called the police or parents. Filmakers do not warrant for anything unless they're Hollywood comissioned. Chill out.

reply