|
|
Post by husbandwifeheroin on Feb 23, 2010 13:46:31 GMT
I can't put it any more eloquently than Florence. I agree with every word.
Especially The PS and the PPS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Feb 23, 2010 21:46:34 GMT
Oh Florence, you're so clever. I think the scenes where Louise looks after Johnny post his beating are very touching. Specifically the bit in the bathroom where he pretends to scan her with the toliet duck. It's kinda sad he legs it at the end rather than go back to Manchester with her, but it's entirely in character (which I guess makes it all the sadder) though obviously giving Johnny a "happy ending" would probably be a bit ethically iffy and undermine what the film is trying to do. It took a few watches to register how much I like Louise as a character. In simplistic terms you could almost call her the "hero" of the film, she's certainly the most likeable and admirable. She's kinda beautiful as well, in a way that is not intially apparent. Big blue eyes. She'd be just the down to earth contrast to Johnny, man.  OTPs! |
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Feb 23, 2010 23:17:23 GMT
I dunno if his goal is to help like somesort of cruel guru breaking a student or if he just speaks the truth as he sees it unfiltered and doesn't care about the consequances. it's definitely a fine line between piercing brilliance and blinkered madness that he walks with a strained, gimpy gait. regarding jeremy: i think you guys sum him up pretty well. it's interesting... he's basically a caricature, whose addition kinda...sells him up for the benefit of the story/johnny. i could see people finding his presence offensive if thinking he's only there to provide someone more unsympathetic than johnny, thus shining johnny in the less dim light. or simply that he's the only middle class character in the film and it turns out he's a psychopath [irrelevant but i don't think i can handle reading 'scathing' and 'bourgeoisie' in another film synopsis without losing it]. neither opinion i feel very strongly about myself though. what i'm getting at is, i'm not sure if the movie would be better or worse if they went in a different direction with jeremy's character and actually gave him a bit more depth and a shred of humanity. are ya wiv me? also, does anyone have any thoughts on what triggered the cafe girl's freakout? i know i wouldn't want my bean-making prowess put into question any more than the next guy but that was a bit cruel. |
|
|
|
Post by idreamofcherrypies on Feb 24, 2010 1:05:44 GMT
I still haven't finished it yet but I thought of some stuff and wanted to post before I forgot even though it's dead stupid I expect. But first of all Spud and Allison from Trainspotting, loved seeing them in this as well!
OK, I've been keeping up with reading the thread, and it's made it a lot more interesting to remember all the really clever eloquent ideas whilst watching. And it's true imo that we are pushed into liking the character Johnny. And I wonder if it isn't too idiotic to propose that maybe it's a sort of id subconscious thing. Or is that too cliched? But yeah we just did it in Lit the other week, about the id being purely driven by pleasure but extremely subconscious at the same time, and also Freud's theory that creative writing is actually just an acceptable form of daydreaming and wish-fulfillment and secret-sharing that you couldn't actually do 'in real life', but when you dress it up as fiction with pretty words or enticing characters or whatever, people end up empathising and sharing the same sort of feelings, and it's fine. And so this character comes along that seems to be some sort of thriving realised fully-conscious id doing what he wants (driven by sex and death, naturally) and maybe what we subconsciously want, with the added benefit of being aesthetically pleasing (I meant characterwise but looks too I suppose) which makes it all acceptable for us, and so we like him. He seems to have no subconscious life ether, doing what he wants and coming out with all these 'insightful' things, as if there's no tussles between the external world and his various inner conflicts. (Freud made it seem like you had the external world, and then this vast ocean of unconscious (id) and then this little island of awareness and 'reality' in the middle that's the ego trying to balance and reconcile them all)
Tbh that's probably a heap of badly-explained rubbish, I only thought of it because I'm just at the bit where the security guard's said to him 'You've just contradicted yourself', and I remember in the lecture a talk about the aesthetics and the id being full of contradictions that live alongside each other fine. So yeah, sorry if that's ^ a load of balls. (It'd be better if I had my notes here and wasn't typing from memory)
Edit: On a slightly lighter note I wonder which area he based his accent on. It sounds very specific.
|
|
|
|
Post by izzyplastic on Feb 24, 2010 14:46:57 GMT
arrgh. i shall get round to watching it. i've been internetless for a while. and soon to be in china so not sure if i'll be able to get to certain sites over there and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by vultures on Feb 24, 2010 15:04:50 GMT
I have never seen this but the title is making me excited
|
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Feb 24, 2010 15:05:04 GMT
also, does anyone have any thoughts on what triggered the cafe girl's freakout? i know i wouldn't want my bean-making prowess put into question any more than the next guy but that was a bit cruel. Haha! Hmm, I'm not sure... She's the girl from Notting Hill. But that's not relevent. I think maybe she was reluctant to let him into her house to begin with, because she's a quiet and reserved type of person who nothing particularly interesting ever happened to, but his interest took her by suprise and she let him come round. Then when it came to him asking to stay the night (I think that's what happened) she got freaked out and her defences kicked in, and she was crying because the thought she had been stupid and reckless to let him in in the first place. It wasn't actually her house, was it? Was she squatting or did she know the people it belonged to? I don't remember that bit of the film really really well (maybe I shouldn't be commenting on it, then  ) |
|
|
|
Post by dot on Feb 24, 2010 16:00:53 GMT
Am I the only person that didn't like Johnny? He's clearly intelligent and has interesting outlook on life, the world etc. but I can't stand his selfishness and the way he purposely tries to hurt and belittle people. Although I probably dislike Jeremy more than Johnny, I felt with Jeremy that at least he was more simple, he was clearly a bastard through and through. Whereas Johnny had a few moments where he seemed nice, which I find worse in a way as he clearly is able to act reasonable but often doesn't. I think the main problem I had with this film was that I didn't like any of the characters (well maybe sandra but she was barely in it). also, does anyone have any thoughts on what triggered the cafe girl's freakout? i know i wouldn't want my bean-making prowess put into question any more than the next guy but that was a bit cruel. I didn't feel it was at all cruel. I think it was perfectly reasonable to not want him to stay any more and I'm surprised she even let him in her house at all (though I guess I'm biased by already being aware of his past). Also, it's not her fault he has no where to stay for the night, she gave him food, drinks, let him shower and stay there for much of the evening which is a lot more than most people would do for someone they barely knew. In terms of what made her suddenly freak out, I thought it was to do with missing her family, realising she's very alone with no friends or family nearby she can see and that she will spend christmas alone. And combined with that suddenly thinking 'what am I doing here with a strange man in my house who I barely know, this isn't what I want from life' etc. I need to watch bits of it again to try to remember all the things I wanted to say because it's been a week since I watched it and I've forgotten lots. Also, sorry if not everything I said made sense, I'm not very eloquent. |
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Feb 24, 2010 16:31:33 GMT
I'm really suprised people actually like Sandra (as in.. as a person, rather than "she's a good/funny character") while obviously justified in being shocked/upset about what's been going on in her home she's majorly snobbishly condescending to Louise and Sophie "I don't understand the way.. you girls choose to live" yeah.. cos they obviously choose the chaos Jeremy and Johnny brought to their door. "I'm not a social worker!" etc.
I dunno, I just thought of her as one of the scathing caricatures of awful stereotypically middle class people that is a Mike Leigh trademark (he's from a comfortable background himself, and on the other side of the coin is often accused of exploiting and having a laugh at the expense of the working classes/underclass).
To be honest.. the purpose of the bit with cafe girl always alluded me a bit. Though "I'm not Homer-phobic I like the Odyssey AND the Illiad" is Johnny's funniest quip for me. I feel I am not worthy of saying this about a work of genius/my favourite film but I don't think the film would lose much for cutting those scenes. Unless someone is going to enlighten me about what they add to the narrative/symbolise etc and make me feel very stupid. It's not bad, but it's THE only part of the film I'm not raptureous about.
|
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Feb 24, 2010 17:48:35 GMT
I wouldn't say I liked Sandra as a person, but I did think her character was very funny.
edit: Dot, I wasn't really thinking in terms of "do I like this character?" while I was watching the film, but afterwards, I thought about it and realised I don't like Johnny. But I felt sorry for him. Kinda like Josh said, there is a happy life there for him with Louise, but it's just beyond his reach somehow.
And I think the cafe girl was perfectly reasonable in her freakout, too. She was clearly venerable, and he shouldn't have taken advantage of her.
|
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Feb 24, 2010 22:29:35 GMT
I didn't feel it was at all cruel. I think it was perfectly reasonable to not want him to stay any more and I'm surprised she even let him in her house at all well, i agree it's certainly within her rights to make that call if she wasn't comfortable, but i don't think you can deny that he was being led on a bit into thinking he'd have a warm place to stay for the night, and lost it through no direct, visible fault of his own. making it equally reasonable for his bewildered and consequently angry reaction. I feel I am not worthy of saying this about a work of genius/my favourite film but I don't think the film would lose much for cutting those scenes. Unless someone is going to enlighten me about what they add to the narrative/symbolise etc and make me feel very stupid. It's not bad, but it's THE only part of the film I'm not raptureous about. too right, chap. the way the scene plays out...it almost feels like it's nothing more than a vehicle for some good zingers without actually learning anything of the cafe girl. thinking about this scene made me attempt to muster something clever about any concrete differences in outcomes between the interactions of people he seeks out, and those who stumble upon him to no avail. i guess it's just to further cement him as a tragic character, where even his best behavior in the whole film [if i remember correctly.. yet he was still pretty cheeky about what she wore  ] still sends him down the path of getting roughed up. |
|
|
|
Post by dot on Feb 25, 2010 0:15:09 GMT
I'm really suprised people actually like Sandra (as in.. as a person, rather than "she's a good/funny character") while obviously justified in being shocked/upset about what's been going on in her home she's majorly snobbishly condescending to Louise and Sophie "I don't understand the way.. you girls choose to live" yeah.. cos they obviously choose the chaos Jeremy and Johnny brought to their door. "I'm not a social worker!" etc. The reason I liked her, apart from adding some light relief to the film, was that she seemed the only sensible one who actually tried to get Jeremy out and generally sort everything out. Yes, they may not have chosen to have Jeremy and Johnny arrive but there was plenty more they could have done to get rid of them. That was part of the reason they annoyed me so much, it's like a man you haven't met before walks in your house, rapes you/your friend and has no intention of leaving, yet you do nothing to properly get rid of him. I know Sophie didn't want to call the police but I think Louise should have done so anyway. Overall, it left me with the feeling they were both a bit pathetic and it seemed ridiculous that they almost didn't want to stand up for themselves and just put up with so much shit. It was this that made me like Sandra because she seemed to be the only one to realise what a stupid situation they were in (even if she was a bit over the top). edit: Dot, I wasn't really thinking in terms of "do I like this character?" while I was watching the film, but afterwards, I thought about it and realised I don't like Johnny. But I felt sorry for him. Kinda like Josh said, there is a happy life there for him with Louise, but it's just beyond his reach somehow. The difference is that I didn't feel at all sorry for him, as I felt he was able to switch out of this destructive life if he wanted to but instead chose to carry it on. Like when Sophie was saying about how she loved him etc. he could have just left her or just accepted whatever she was saying as one of those things she says even if he didn't think it was true, but instead he had to rape her violently to prove a point that she doesn't know him. well, i agree it's certainly within her rights to make that call if she wasn't comfortable, but i don't think you can deny that he was being led on a bit into thinking he'd have a warm place to stay for the night, and lost it through no direct, visible fault of his own. making it equally reasonable for his bewildered and consequently angry reaction. I mostly agree though it was obvious she was uncomfortable through most of the time he was there and for me, though maybe not for him, it seemed obvious at some point it would be too much for her and she would chuck him out. I think the scene as a whole is just trying to show you more about his character and his interactions with different people, but I don't think it was done as well as it could have been, perhaps a bit more insight to her character would have helped. I also think it showed a conscious choice by Johnny not to do something 'bad' but just walk away. There was that point while they were arguing when he pushed her against the wall and then your expecting him to rape her or be violent in some way, yet he isn't. I felt it showed that he can be more decent and is able to think about other people to some extent. |
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Feb 25, 2010 15:03:26 GMT
I don't think the intention of the creators is for the viewer to "like" Johnny.. to have a degree of symapthy with him, perhaps. I'm loathe to use my comic book addled mind to describe an ambiguous film like this.. but he's undoubtedly a "villain" an anti-hero, but he's a fascinating charismatic villian you can feel a degree of sympathy for.. and understand some of the motivation behind the more inexcusable actions. Jeremy on the other hand is just an out and out textbook villain.
I think it's natural somewhat to have more sympathy for Johnny, because you know.. he's poor, you assume he's had a rough life, "society did it to him" etc.. less so with Jeremy cos he's well off. But you know, who knows whats happened to Jeremy in his life? He shows signs of being sociopathic, a facet of mental illness that was either triggered by something, or something he's born with that he can't help. If that were true you COULD argue that Johnny is more responsible for his actions and worse.. almost.
|
|
|
|
Post by wanderer on Feb 25, 2010 15:39:05 GMT
I didn’t exactly enjoy that. It was good in the way of strong characters and small occurrences but although they were well written it didn’t build well into a plotline as a whole. It was easy to just watch a chunk first, go off and come back to it and still make as much sense. It also has a very open ending which (personally) I don’t like, a film without closure is not as satisfying as one with, but it works as a piece of entertainment media anyway.
Johnny is quite frightening, in a sexual predator/ annoying twat kinda way, and looks too much like my friend’s father, who I will never look at in the same way again. There’ll always be a shadow of doubt that his already clever/sarcastic comments are hiding the cruel streak as in Johnny.
Sebastian/Jeremy scared me too, he is every young woman’s worst nightmare. They were practically powerless against him, summed up in the ‘well, we can’t call the police. Who are they gonna trust; upper-class ’landlord’ or young, edge-of-society girls?
Is Sandra the mother from ‘Outnumbered’? Is she actually, or just resembles her, in character mannerisms?
As for the actor; Johnny/Remus Lupin: he also play’s Verlaine in ‘Total Eclipse’ and I have figured he naturally laughs in that nasasl, annoying way, as he does in all three films…
Louise’s shorts were epic. Film wouldn’t be the same without them. =D
|
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Feb 25, 2010 15:43:53 GMT
I think Sandra is the mum from Outnumbered, yes  I was going to mention it, but I didn't think anyone would care/get it. I shall check. edit: wiki says it's her. |
|
|
|
Post by Rhiflect on Feb 26, 2010 17:39:58 GMT
I have failed at watching this, I am so very sorry  |
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Feb 27, 2010 16:48:15 GMT
God, Rhi, your loss! Ps. you'd better watch it when it's my one. |
|
|
|
Post by Rhiflect on Feb 27, 2010 19:54:16 GMT
Yes, of course! I just haven't had time, so sorry Josh!
|
|
|
|
Post by idreamofcherrypies on Feb 27, 2010 21:22:19 GMT
I don't actually think I watched the trailer before the film, I was sure I had... Anyway just watched it now, and you're right it's completely misleading! I wonder though if they were going for a sort of A Clockwork Orange reference/effect, like 'Yeah it looks funny but it's actually really dark', cos I know that bit of music is in ACO, I think it's the bit at the start when they catch Billy and his gang raping that girl. Sorry, that was probably obvious anyway. Edit: I think I like Johnny despite others not, because I have this weird sort of underdog-sympathy/empathy with characters like that, I remember I cried like a baby and moped for weeks afterwards when Richard Hillman killed himself in Corrie all those years ago |
|
|
|
Post by wakefromthysleep on Mar 1, 2010 2:08:58 GMT
I know I'm late with this but regarding the characters I’ve got to add something: the distinguishing/characteristic naming.
This came to my mind when I read Jeremy’s surname ’Smart’. I think he’s not that smart as he thinks he is but I found another translation too. Smart can also mean to hurt somebody and that’s what he does. He adds mental and physical damages. The name Jeremy means from it’s derivation someting like ’the one that god exalts’. Actually it’s not god but the money that elevates Jeremy to a higher social milieu. His reason for acting is to exercise power (Machtmotiv – can’t find a translation for this term). He plays god himself(suicide with 40) and wants to have have control about everything. So, Jeremy is quite a funny name for this guy.. Contradiction.
Johnny: from John(Johannes) or Jonathan, meaning by it’s derivation ’the lord is gracious’. This means the lord was so generous to mankind that we should take Johnny’s birth as a gift. Johnny is not the messiah but I think he’s a missionary of his own (book-)religion. Everywhere he apperars he spreads his weltanschauung (a loanword, no tanslation necessary:)). Sometimes he acts like a prophet and he’s a fan of the prophecy of the end of the world. So, who is the prophet known for his reference to apocalypse? …It’s John the Baptist. Here you are. John – Johnny.
Sandra: meaning: the sunny or sunshine. That fits quite well. She’s blonde and wears light clothes. When sandra comes back home the music is more friendly than in the whole film before. She starts to clear up the house, takes care of Johnny’s injury and resolves the terrifying situation with Jeremy being in the next room. Seems as if the sun would begin to shine again.
Sophia: The name obviously derives from Sophie and means virtue/wisdom. Wisdom in a way that Plato describes as knowledge of the real world that only philosophers can have. Of course he refers to the Allegory of the Cave/Plato’s Cave. I think in this case the shadow would be kissing+sex Johnny him. For her was sex=love. Sophia leaves her cave(the house) at the end of the film when she realised that Johnny doesn’t love her.
Louise: one page says it means wisdom by it’s celtic derivation. Others say it means warrior. I’m not sure what is right.. any ideas?
Do you think it is all over-interpreted? I think it makes sense.
And have you noticed the headline in Brian’s newspaper when he has breakfast with Johnny while asking “did you have to go and beat her up?“. It says something with ’I must free sex abuser’. I think it’s intened. Good film.
|
|
