 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| Notice that I deleted all refs to other movies. by Fussbett 01/14/2005, 9:29pm PST | ||||
 |
 |
|||
Senor Barborito wrote: I couldn't agree LESS with the moral wasteland stance. I think you were prepared to hate on the morality based on the hipsterness, which I understand. If I could change things in Life Aquatic I'd start with the Zissou model Adidas shoes. That's pure hipster fan service, and besides, it would've been better if they were some shitty brand. Or 80's deck shoes. You see the Ned/Steve relationship as a failure to detach from one's parents? That's way harsh, when clearly Ned is a fully formed adult at the point of him seeking out his father -- and only does so when his mother dies. A son seeking to meet his birth father is a common occurance from my limited understanding. You know that dry dry dry super dryly sarcastic guy that Life Aquatic is supposed to be that you're feeling, yo? I hate that guy's nihilism and cheap veneer of worldliness. I hate the way he does shit without any reason, because he thinks doing purposeless, incongruous shit is funny, instead of sad and hollow. I'm trying to think up different ways to say I disagree. I need clear examples of purposeless and incongruous shit in Life Aquatic. One of my items of praise for the movie that the surreal universe in which the movie is set provides a very real backdrop for the character to embark upon a very straightforward quest. A quest! I love that they have a quest, with bumps in the road and detours, and tragedies, and finally an ending. Are you citing things like the balloon ride? Leeches? I actually can't even guess where the beef is. Nihilism? I couldn't think of a worse word to decribe a POSITIVE movie like Zissou. I'm more equipped to deal with someone saying that Life Aquatic is too light and cheery for them and that they see through the wacky veil and detest the life-affirming positive Disney message that lies beneath (like so much Amber Valletta). To them I'd say "I hear you, but I found that really refreshing". To the charge of nihilism, I can only say "Kumquat, cherub tho stance", because I'm confused. Surrealism can reflect a warped world, or speak more clearly about difficult subjects using what are at first nonsensical props, but some surrealism - like the surrealism of Life Aquatic - seems to think that, noh-like, meaning will emerge from the nonsensical props themselves. Non sono d'accordo. Never is Life Aquatic nonsensically surreal. Everything happens for a reason, and there is logic to every action. There are rules that the movie world follows, and it never betrays the audience with an "or whatever" moment, beyond the rules that have been established prior. Life Aquatic's oceanographers aren't a metaphor for anything. They're just oceanographers, pursuing nonsensical oceanographer business, reflecting no absurdity, symbolic of nothing whatsoever. Ok, this complaint I can get with, that you'd like an extra layer of meaning behind some of the story choices. Meanwhile I love a movie about a job, even if it's an outlandish job, because jobs contribute much to shaping a person's identity. Ebert once pointed out, back when he wasn't such a killjoy, that a sloppy writing technique is to make a character be an architect or ad executive or in finance. That way, they have enough money and can take time off work to have a movie happen to them. You may see them occasionally walk out of a tower with a briefcase, or blueprint tube, and that's enough to flesh out the character. Mr. Brady was an architect, for example. Anyway, that's just a tangent. |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
