दो दोस्त अपने सभी खाली समय को ज्वाला-फेंकने वालों और सामूहिक विनाश के हथियारों की उम्मीद में खर्च करते हैं कि एक वैश्विक सर्वनाश होगा और अपने काल्पनिक गिरोह "मदर मेडुसा" के लिए रनवे को खाली ... सभी पढ़ेंदो दोस्त अपने सभी खाली समय को ज्वाला-फेंकने वालों और सामूहिक विनाश के हथियारों की उम्मीद में खर्च करते हैं कि एक वैश्विक सर्वनाश होगा और अपने काल्पनिक गिरोह "मदर मेडुसा" के लिए रनवे को खाली कर देगा.दो दोस्त अपने सभी खाली समय को ज्वाला-फेंकने वालों और सामूहिक विनाश के हथियारों की उम्मीद में खर्च करते हैं कि एक वैश्विक सर्वनाश होगा और अपने काल्पनिक गिरोह "मदर मेडुसा" के लिए रनवे को खाली कर देगा.
- पुरस्कार
- 6 जीत और कुल 10 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
It's amazing how the bad reviews are incredibly long and detailed. And if i put that in parallel with some pretty popular movies for that same generation, the conclusion i come to is that you aren't capable of watching a movie in his "fullness", you just watch a succession of "scenes".
I know, i know, I'm not really talking about the movie, just go read other good reviews if you want to know why it's a f*ck*ng pretty good movie.
I wrote this review only to give you an advice if you decide to watch it: JUST DO IT, it's a real journey. Don't judge it, appreciate it, and do that until the very last moment. At the end, maybe that you will have liked it, maybe not, but at least you won't have lost 2 hours of your life, because it's unique and mesmerizing. Something you won't be able to appreciate if you analyze every seconds of it.
I had heard the buzz of BELLFLOWER at Sundance, and I missed it, and my trip to SXSW was too brief to catch, so, I waited patiently for the theatrical. Up until then, I had read many things about the movie, plenty of positive reviews, and was pretty enthralled by the trailer. I should have been a little more cautious on the get go, seeing that even the trailer was a little fishy. You know, it was extremely light on substance, but full of those great pull quotes from the likes of Peter Travers, the king of whoring a few positive lines for maximum effect. And, of course, the reviews themselves were mostly copies of one another, with a great chunk of prose spent on context based stuff like, "the film cost 17,000", or "they made there own camera's", and even, "he wrote about his own break-up". This stuff is mostly about justification and the press angle, so, I'm not going fault the work on that.
But, lets get to the actual film itself, and how this particular film outright compelled me to come on the web and give my two cents. Basically, the film is in essence, a break up movie. The lead character Woodrow, played here by the director himself is a typical "disaffected" young man, who, along with his best friend spends his days drinking, smoking and with the country boy craftsmanship of building "cool" stuff. They are seen spending time blowing stuff up at the beginning. Soon, they go out to what I assume is a dive bar, and low and behold, a cricket eating contest (in LA mind you), when we meet our lead female, the narrative conflict of the movie. We see Woodrow and soon to be lady friend Milly engage in eating crickets in slow mo, while a "cool" music track plays in the background. This is the essence of the movie. These bits of music video montage scenes are in my mind, the only respectable albeit very thin moments of the film, especially the final moments. They come and go in-between some of the most banal, and base scenes I have seen in years.
After this, Woodrow picks up Milly for a first date, and she proposes they go and eat at the most disgusting restaurant around, and guess what, Woodrow has a suggestion, but its located in Texas. So, what happens next, shoot, they go to Texas. The film carries on in this vein. I can go on, but even writing about it gets tiresome.
Anyways, to shorten this up, the relationship heads south, but for no reason other then the fact that Milly tells Woodrow that she is going to hurt him. And then she hurts him. Yup, thats it, because things go bad in relationships, but the audience is left to just assume things happen. The problem is, we are not lead to care any bit about them. All this heartbreak stuff doesn't add up, when you don't buy any of it. The film then continues to jump ahead and behind after an accident. And then things get violent, but in a pretty safe way. The film basically alludes to everything, and always in an extremely swallow, hey look at me mom kind of way. But heck, they built a "totally sweet ride brah" . With the finale going straight into film school cope out mode. I won't say anymore, so that I don't spoil the twist.
As you can tell, I did not like this movie. It felt as cliché as could be. I did not like the characters, all of whom became increasingly annoying. I did not like the writing. I did not like the acting, which goes into B level and below many, many times. And the visual style gets pretty dang boring after awhile. Note to some reviewers; spend some time on Vimeo, or Tumblr, and yeah, you got the visual aesthetic this strives for. Basically, everybody is doing that anyway, and really, swallow depth of field and especially tilt shift is boring when used for no reason other then, "to look cool". Which apply describes the hipster culture itself. It yells to be looked at, but on closer inspection, you realize that all its desires are superficial. Thats all it knows.
And that sums up the film for me. Everything done for effect, and nothing done to strive for a deeper reading. And thats the issue, because its not even entertaining. In fact, its altogether boring, but in the American style of boring, and not in the European, sophisticated, by design way boring.
I guess maybe its utility is best served as a sort of Hollywood calling card for the troupe, and for that, maybe it succeeds. But for something that I have to pay money to watch, no. And truth be told, if this was for free, I would probably pass as well.
In the old days of radio, college stations would play what were known as "deep cuts". These songs were treats for the biggest fans of that artist and allowed everyone else to get a taste of a song that wasn't created to be a hit single. Bellflower is the movie equivalent of a deep cut ... filmed on a (broken) shoestring budget with driving force Evan Glodell as writer, director and lead actor. Glodell has a real feel for visual statements but I so hope his outlook on life is much brighter than the film projects.
Woodrow (Glodell) and Aiden (Tyler Dawson) are best friends and transplants to L.A. from Wisconsin. They come across as having ceased psychologically maturing at about age 15, though they are in their 20's now. Their whole world is tied to this poor neighborhood where they waste each day by boozing incessantly and planning their next flame thrower or souped-up muscle car. This is done with the intention of protecting them should the world turn into the deserted landscape seen in the Mad Max movies, which they admit to having seen way too many times.
As destructive plans are apt to do, theirs hits a speed bump when Woodrow meets Milly (Jessie Wiseman) during a cricket eating contest. What a great story to tell your grandkids! Anyway, Milly and Woodrow seem to be soul mates initially, but then things get complicated. Aiden is a very loyal friend and quite charming when he sets his mind to it. He stands by his friend through some staggeringly bad luck.
This isn't a movie that necessarily follows a traditional story arc. Heck, it begins by showing a scattershot montage of things to come (we assume) and none of it is particularly cheery. The ending is such that it's a web of "maybe" endings that allow us to determine just where the visions end and reality takes over.
It's no mystery why critics were so enamored with this one at Sundance. At times it plays like a student film project for a young Tarantino. Or maybe an early Kevin Smith movie, if he were ever addicted to explosions. That is meant as a compliment. Continuity is lacking on purpose and the rawness of the production comes across quite clearly and with power. Mr. Glodell will undoubtedly be given a budget larger than a credit card next time to see just what he is capable of. I for one, will be rooting for him ... just keep him away from me please!
It's hard to describe my hate for this movie. It's like listening to a relatively good band that has an extremely pretentious and untalented singer. It's not so bad that it's laughable, it's just bad.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाNo functionality of the Medusa car was faked during filming. The real-life car is equipped with two flamethrowers, smoke screen, a bleach drift-kit, adjustable rear suspension, and 3 surveillance cameras; all controlled from the dashboard. It also has a roll cage and stow-able, fold-down back seat.
- गूफ़At the bar, Woodrow and Milly enter a cricket-eating contest and live crickets are shown. Yet later, characters keep talking about eating grasshoppers. This could be a slip of the tongue by the characters who do regard crickets and grasshoppers as the same type of bug.
- भाव
Aiden: Dude you are fucking Lord Humongous. The master of fire, the king of the wasteland. Lord Humongous doesn't get cheated on by some stupid bitch. Lord Humongous doesn't say was it good for you, he doesn't say who called or where were you last night. He doesn't leave the fucking gang when he falls in love. Nobody fucking tells Lord Humongous what to do. Lord Humongous fights when he wants to fights and fucks when he wants to fuck and when all else fails he drives straight into the fucking tanker. The thing is though, Lord Humongous dominates his women and they fucking love him for it.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटIn the credit for "MEDUSA CAR RESSURECTION AND SUPERCHARGING," "resurrection" is misspelled.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Ebert Presents: At the Movies: एपिसोड #2.13 (2011)
टॉप पसंद
- How long is Bellflower?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $17,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $1,68,226
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $22,279
- 7 अग॰ 2011
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $1,72,935
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 43 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1