The whole film felt like it was pulling teeth.
It felt like the director put "James" in a chrysalis, then spent the entire film trying to pull the butterfly from the cocoon. Only... we were left with this utterly one note piece that just never came together into something interesting.
For a movie about Life, it felt more like watching a very slow, painful death. And not in a way that represented the man, the myth, or the rebel.
Too bad.
I don't think the movie was about representing all those aspects about Dean. At least it's what Corbjin says. I do understand the confusion, because there's a lot about Dean and what he was going throught in this movie but not enough of Dennis Stock to make him interesting. The movie felt like just a series of episodes sewn together, a pity because the few times it did touch emotional moments it really worked.
All the performances were good, but Dehaan was ut of place. He was good at times but in no way I ever believed him as Dean, & I don't know why he thought it was a good idea to put on weight or let his voice get so high pitched at times. I looked at him and only saw boredom, sickness and pain.
He was good at times but in no way I ever believed him as Dean, & I don't know why he thought it was a good idea to put on weight or let his voice get so high pitched at times.
I looked at him and only saw boredom, sickness and pain.
At least there was still some energy in Dean.
I understand your stance about Stock, he seemed all talk because there was very, very little in the movie to show (and not just tell) his passion and talent for photography.
Just watched the film and have to say it was one of the most boring films I have seen in a long time.
The film was so slow I started to play games on my phone. They guy playing James Dean failed to deliver. Rob who I like has really made poor film choices of late.
All I can say is pleased this film was not showing in a cinema by me when it came out so I did not waste petrol, parking etc to see it.
Will I rush to see Robs next film, well the Jury is out on that one, which is a shame as he used to be my favourite actor for a long time.
I'm sure the movie looked more than fine on paper and it did land on many "most anticipated" movie lists, so I don't understand the criticism about Pattinson's choices. I don't understand what possessed DeHaan and his team to accept the role though. You can never really predict how a movie turns out based solely on the script and director attached, there're too many factors to consider.
Not that Stock didn't have an amazing career, maybe he did, it's just that the end seemed strangely disparate from what we saw in the film (frankly, Stock seemed a bit of a loser to me).
And all the pieces matter (The Wire)share
That's ... terrible to me. Here Stock spent all that time behind the camera. He had hundreds of pictures to show for all that time he _wasted_, when he could have been a father to a child. A kid who needed him.
I don't care what a person leaves for a legacy. If you leave behind someone you've caused so much pain in, someone that was yours to take care of (in whatever way, be they your child, your spouse, your siblings, whatever), you've utterly failed in my eyes. You can be "sorry" all you want, but that never makes up for the kind of sucking chest wound that sorrow brings. =/
I don't care what a person leaves for a legacy. If you leave behind someone you've caused so much pain in, someone that was yours to take care of (in whatever way, be they your child, your spouse, your siblings, whatever), you've utterly failed in my eyes. You can be "sorry" all you want, but that never makes up for the kind of sucking chest wound that sorrow brings. =/