Really well-made movie. My biggest gripe with it is that the movie completely fails to examine either Christianity or Islam as motivations and instead makes religion the true villain of the story. I think this article describes the phenomenon well.
I don’t agree with the article writer that the film had to take this approach to gain an audience. If the film had been able to convey the reasoning behind both factions in an accurate and relatable way I think it would have elevated the film. I do think the article accurately describes how the story was molded to modern Hollywood sensibilities.
Bottom line though, the film looks incredible and plays well as the story of Balian (at least the Director’s cut does, haven’t seen the theatrical).
I get your point of view. And many movies that end up with polarized opinions tend to struggle with how a movie has ended. Some people are fine with a very wide loose end, while others want closure.
The thing is, I’ve seen movies with loose ends, where you’re left to make your own presumption as to what would happen next. But it’s usually done with some sort of new plateau or new character phased in. You know how a movie is nothing but a string of scenes weaved together, each with their own intensity levels and positional characteristics. Opening, middle, and ending scenes of acts. When a movie ends, it can be at the beginning of a new act, and provided with a plot device or two woven in appropriately can make for reasonable presumptions. Or it can be at the end of an act, which is a tidy wrap-up. Not much left to the imagination, because for the writer, the story is over. Nothing more to see. “Happily ever after,” etc.
In Blue Jasmine, it ends in the middle of an act. We really don’t know if she’s heading for a breakdown that’ll lead to suicide, or if she’ll masterfully find a way to bounce back and begin another false pretense sham to fool the next man she entices. So, it leaves you hanging pretty far off the story. I would’ve preferred if we’d gotten a cue of where she was going:
1) Her mumbling to herself incoherently meant she’d lost it, and without a psychologist to guide her, she was going to end up a basket case and left to homelessness on the street
2) Her incoherency was a reflection of her total fear of having no plan, no way out of this mess, and knowing she’d end up destitute with no one to turn to, she would make plans to end her life
3) Her quick thinking has her contact another friend or distant family member who could take her in and give her yet one more chance to rewrite her story, and possibly rescue her life from doom once more
thanks for reminding me of this. Blue Jasmine was on my watch list for a while and I just never felt compelled to watch it even though it ticks the boxes of something I may really enjoy. Will revisit.
nydude: if you like that one, you might also like this one directed by Paolo Sorrentino, starring Michael Caine, Harvey Keitel, Paul Dano, Jane Fonda, and Rachel Weisz:
Rewatched this classic sci-fi action movie. Those future scenes still look great aesthetically imo. On the other hand, it’s a shame Arnold’s makeup was so bad in certain shots.
Anyone ever notice that while executing Sarah Connor’s roommate, Arnold blinks when firing his gun? That’s something that even an experienced human shooter would not do. Woops!
And in contrast, in T2, in the mall scene, Robert Patrick empties a whole clip, drops it, slaps in another, and empties the second clip, all without breaking his gaze or blinking.
I guess he trained for that specifically. Which makes sense since Arnold has stated that he regretted the blinking in the first movie. I just looked it up and learned that Arnold was supposed to be Kyle Reese but he had put so much thought into how the terminator should act that he ended up switching roles. Very cool!
Thanks for mentioning this. Looks like a great movie! Michael Caine and Harvey Keitel are some of my favorite actors.
I appreciate the heads up on this one. I read the book a long, long time ago back in college. Then I saw the movie… the 1984 one. It was slow, kind of weird, but masterful in production. I grew to like it. The TV series remake was alright, but nah—lost the wonderful steampunk feel of the original. Sad to hear this new one fell flat. I will skip it until sometime in the future to view on the free in passing curiosity.
I haven’t read the book yet. Was there much humor in it? Could that “beat around the bush” remark be applied to the book? Were the sand worms very significant in the book?
That’s disappointing. Did you like the first one? My wife and I really did, and have been really looking forward to this one, but just havent had the time to sit down together and watch it…
I haven’t read the book yet. Was there much humor in it? Could that “beat around the bush” remark be applied to the book? Were the sand worms very significant in the book?
[/quote]
No humor to speak of, really. It was a very slow and convoluted book. You really have to let it “sink in.” I stopped and started over about 3 times until it finally “clicked.” But it was worth it. Sand worms are definitely mentioned and feature prominently at times, but they don’t consume the book. It’s mostly about Paul Atreides, Muad’dib.
