KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I actually did my homework for this
Felt like junk the last couple days, so I didn't. About to fire one up now.
Last edited by a moderator:
I actually did my homework for this
i gotta do more?! i did my spoiler capsule on W&L when i did recon on whether a dog dies and gave LNT the highest tribute there is.....I eagerly anticipate your insight on this one
Oh i missed the spoiler parti gotta do more?! i did my spoiler capsule on W&L when i did recon on whether a dog dies and gave LNT the highest tribute there is.....
i'll work up sumn later today -
Oh no. Hate to hear that more than ever now.
Felt like junk the last couple days, so I didn't. About to fire one up now.
i'll make an arc between them later, but i have to make points about females & children which i have actually thought more about than most females & children but in many ways sound cavemanish, which i'd gladly do if there were more women & youngfolk in here to discuss it with, same way there arent enuff people of color here for me to wanna discuss racial politicsOh i missed the spoiler part
pretty faithful representation of a lost day on the road for a broke girl beyond tears. nothing especially tragic occurs. those who've been stuck before wont be informed, only reminded how a little can mean a lot and a lot mean nothing in those circumstances.
I didn't like it, either. It was hard for me to find any connection to Wendy; no real reason given why she left, and not enough was revealed about her history, other than she had a healthy enough stack of cash left to get her to Alaska before her car broke down. Maybe it was just me, but I felt like she was a little more mentally off-kilter than we got to see. For example, there was something 'off' about her conversation with her brother and sister-in-law, and we missed on much-needed exposition; instead we got more ambiguity that muddied up the character. I'm not asking for what Michael Douglas went through in "Falling Down", but there should be some kind of mental/spiritual processing of things by her and I didn't see that happen. To me, the movie was like a song with just one note I couldn't define and it just carried on that way with one or two little changes that just came back to the same note.Mrs. O did not like Wendy and Lucy very much. She generally doesn’t like open ended stories. I thought it was interesting, but forgettable imo.
I don't know where the fault for this resides Is it with the viewer, who by and large aren't directly affected by these issue in real life? Is it with the filmmaker for delivering a fictionalized documentary with not much real meat on the bone? Or, is it our society, which doesn't put much of a priority on taking care of issues like this, that don't yield a financial return on investment? Everything of significance we may have learned about the world Will and Mike live in was given after the fact, or cut short before further development and it just ended up as scene dressing to me in the end. I feel like we were supposed to presume too much in order to give the story its gravitas, that having PTSD, being homeless and living that 'lifestyle' were the story and the characters were just pieces of that story instead of the other way around.wikkidpissah said:I wish to live in a world which finds Leave No Trace as compelling as Infinity War. There's really not much more to say.
Props to @KarmaPolice for picking these 2 as I think the themes paired really well and the movies share a lot in common.Didn’t think I was going to like Leave No Trace, but I did. A great pairing to Wendy and Lucy imo. I remember hearing about this film when it came out, but wasn’t expecting much. Interesting ending that while bittersweet, made sense for the dad and daughter.
Good observation. I would have to assume that the POV of the film maker here is the cop is representative of a system. Store calls police on shoplifter, police arrest shoplifter. The cops are just doing their job, following rules that they are given without really thinking about it. The one officer has to use a computer to take finger prints and doesn't really understand how to use it. Isn't even paying attention to the person in front of them.While I'm thinking about it... the entire plot hinges on a single decision made by a character that is only spoken to off-camera, never seen, and never heard from. And it didn't seem like an intentional choice, it wasn't framed like he's some man behind the curtain, some character secretly pulling the strings from behind the scenes, some macguffin only ever hidden in shadow... they just didn't have a shot of the guy and then he isn't in the movie at all anyway. That's quite unusual, and I'm not sure it's to the film's benefit. We spend a lot more time on the Jack's Grocery manager... several shots of him not talking, just pondering the situation, and his decisions at least carry some weight and are equally central to the plot. But the officer... is he ignoring her on purpose? Does he not want to call animal control for some reason? Does he not believe her and think she's just trying to stall?... is the crux of the plot and completely unknown to the audience. I feel we at least saw the decision making process on the face of the grocery manager, and I find his character's impact on the film valid, but with the officer, I have no idea and that detracts for me.
My only assumption is that he’s not listening to her at all. It might be unlikely but certainly not unrealistic that a jaded cop might pick up a homeless person for shoplifting and not really give them any respect or opportunity to even explain anything. Though being a young attractive woman makes it a little harder to believe.I considered that, but, at least in my mind, a cop's standard-operating-procedure would be to call animal control for the dog. So I'm left wondering why, if he represents "the system", he went outside of it here... and why that decision isn't in the movie.
Maybe he did call animal control? Lucy did end up at the pound and got adopted out right away.My only assumption is that he’s not listening to her at all. It might be unlikely but certainly not unrealistic that a jaded cop might pick up a homeless person for shoplifting and not really give them any respect or opportunity to even explain anything. Though being a young attractive woman makes it a little harder to believe.I considered that, but, at least in my mind, a cop's standard-operating-procedure would be to call animal control for the dog. So I'm left wondering why, if he represents "the system", he went outside of it here... and why that decision isn't in the movie.
Thomasin McKenzie is likely going to be a star. She was outstanding in JoJo Rabbit as well.I don't want to short Leave No Trace. Tom was excellent. She was a hell of a find. That was a stellar, amazing performance.
Yeah I don’t want to get political but looking at things happening in Wisconsin now and decisions made people of both parties there, it seems decided there that it’s more important to follow the rules than to account for the will and health of the people.Also, just like other movies we have come across, I could totally see that your outlook on this movie and the character of Wendy could be different based on our political leanings. No need to expand much more than that though.
This is right along the lines of my second wave of thoughts last night after I posted. I posted about my frustration of the people around Wendy, but really - how many times I have walked by somebody like her character without a second thought or how many times have I had a similar interaction and not taken an extra step to help out? Would I have acted differently? How much of my reaction towards her in that post because it's Michelle Williams, and I basically her already?What I liked about Wendy and Lucy was the message I walked away with. I can't relate to Wendy, I have no experience with homelessness or any mental connection to any desire to be trying to get away from society. I saw it from the end of the people in society. When we go about our daily lives doing our normal routines, working, shopping, etc we will run into people who we know nothing about- just a nameless random person one likely will never see again. We can treat them with kindness and humanity or we can stick to the protocols and follow our administrative procedures without regard. Are we there to serve people or to serve the rules?
This is why I love this club and the discussion - there's no right or wrong, I just find this post interesting because it seems like the lack of background and exposition was what kept you at arms length with the movies and characters, but it's usually something I appreciate when I am watching.I didn't like it, either. It was hard for me to find any connection to Wendy; no real reason given why she left, and not enough was revealed about her history, other than she had a healthy enough stack of cash left to get her to Alaska before her car broke down. Maybe it was just me, but I felt like she was a little more mentally off-kilter than we got to see. For example, there was something 'off' about her conversation with her brother and sister-in-law, and we missed on much-needed exposition; instead we got more ambiguity that muddied up the character. I'm not asking for what Michael Douglas went through in "Falling Down", but there should be some kind of mental/spiritual processing of things by her and I didn't see that happen. To me, the movie was like a song with just one note I couldn't define and it just carried on that way with one or two little changes that just came back to the same note.
As for Leave No Trace, again, I wanted to be more drawn into the characters but there was no real exposition, nothing that made me feel for them any more than anyone else in their situation. Don't take that as unfeeling towards the homeless and/or veterans suffering from PTSD, but rather the opposite; I believe that every single one of them has a compelling story and if one is going to tell those stories, it should be done in a way that grabs and draws in the audience. I'm not a writer, but I believe there needs to be some sort of tension/conflict against which to tell any story, and in this case, I guess there were supposed to be two: Will's internal conflict of dealing with his PTSD, and the growing conflict between Will and Mike about settling down in one place. To me, that's where the meat of any of these stories is going to be, but in Leave No Trace, any tension present in the story was blunted, either by lack of exposition or lack of meaningful action. This is where wikkid's quote below really cuts.
Interesting comparison that didn't occur to me while I was watching.I only watched Leave No Trace and alas most of the discussion seems to be about the other film. It took me about three goes to make it through the movie, my attention span for watching TV is really shot right now.
I liked the documentary feel and the warmth of the supporting players in Leave No Trace. Its unadorned nature worked better in the first half where the audience was dropped into the lives of Will and Tom. What little exposition there was happened naturally. I thought the second half dealing with Tom's evolution lagged a bit but by then I was invested in the film. It was a beautifully shot film that reminded me a bit of Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven with how glimpses of nature reflected the state of the characters. Both stories involved a girl trying to maintain family relationships while on the run. Where Days of Heaven leaned heavily on voiceover narration to explain and build the myth, Debra Granik's approach in Leave No Trace is grittier and more realistic.
It was an easy film to admire but a harder one to love. I felt its uncompromising vision intentionally kept me at arm's length. I was still able to connect with the characters although I'd never truly understand them.
Thanks KP for nominating this one. I'd never heard of it before but it was a good watch.
My overall reaction to those month was I liked them and they made think and feel but I probably wouldn’t watch either again because they are so heavy.I think we are going to get quite a bit lighter for our next pairing.
1. Thanks for making me feel better about being the outlier in the overall consensus. It's films like this that remind me I'm definitely on the autism spectrum, as there are nuances that can sort of see but they ultimately wash over me and don't hit me the way they hit most others. I really did get the concept the director was going for; not getting close to the characters as a way to reinforce their condition, but in this case it didn't work for me, and I accept that as my own shortcoming. Again, thanks for reminding me that there is no right or wrong.This is why I love this club and the discussion - there's no right or wrong, I just find this post interesting because it seems like the lack of background and exposition was what kept you at arms length with the movies and characters, but it's usually something I appreciate when I am watching.
As to your bolded, I thought that was a perfect example. I like that we have to fill in a little bit, but I think the framework of knowing what is going on with that relationship is there. You hear the exasperation on her sister's part and her going right into "we don't have anything". Seemed to me Wendy probably pushed that relationship, maybe borrowed what she couldn't repay, and there is a wedge between the sisters. The BIL was friendlier to her, which I did find interesting as well. Maybe this time she really wasn't calling for money, but that relationship is currently broken past the point of them being able to trust that is the case.
I almost said this to you last night when you posted it. It's easy to feel that way in the movie - I agree, I was hoping the guard would help her a little more, etc. But I also think that town was pretty destitute - when the guard gave her money, he was all "don't let her see it", and it was only $7.KarmaPolice said:This is right along the lines of my second wave of thoughts last night after I posted. I posted about my frustration of the people around Wendy, but really - how many times I have walked by somebody like her character without a second thought or how many times have I had a similar interaction and not taken an extra step to help out? Would I have acted differently? How much of my reaction towards her in that post because it's Michelle Williams, and I basically her already?
Give yourself some more credit. These are great (and very valid) points.1. Thanks for making me feel better about being the outlier in the overall consensus. It's films like this that remind me I'm definitely on the autism spectrum, as there are nuances that can sort of see but they ultimately wash over me and don't hit me the way they hit most others. I really did get the concept the director was going for; not getting close to the characters as a way to reinforce their condition, but in this case it didn't work for me, and I accept that as my own shortcoming. Again, thanks for reminding me that there is no right or wrong.
2. Part of the problem I have with ambiguity is that ultimately it reveals nothing other than our own biases. I specifically picked that exchange because for me it felt like Wendy was more in denial about her relationship with her family and it was her own irrationality that prompted her to leave home. Most people would presume the opposite, that her family was being unbearable and they just didn't understand, while to me, I couldn't shake the idea that maybe she had been spoiled at home and something happened that set her off on a kind of narcissistic spiral that convinced her that her life was so bad that she had to flee to Alaska. She had a dog, a car and an ample amount of cash, plus at some point, another mechanic had taken some sort of pity on her and got her car going again before it broke down in this story. The worst thing she faced was a young boy who was trying to do his job, and when she faced him later, he didn't react much. Again, as much of a #### move as it was, he wasn't really much of a villain, either. She faced cooperation at every turn (even the police were pretty mild on her, other than leaving the dog behind, which they had to do to give us a plot), so this bad situation was going about as well as one could hope, yet she remained unfazed by it all.
Anyway, on one hand I can appreciate what everyone is saying about what appealed to them about these movies, they're just not my style I guess.
1. I honestly don't know if who is the outlier, and it's not important. I am more just saying I love the discussion, especially if there is a viewpoint that I don't come at a movie from. It's not a shortcoming, it just is. We all bring our individual thoughts and backgrounds to a movie, and for me the most interesting part of it for me is talking about those and seeing all those thoughts materialize into different interpretations of the same movie.1. Thanks for making me feel better about being the outlier in the overall consensus. It's films like this that remind me I'm definitely on the autism spectrum, as there are nuances that can sort of see but they ultimately wash over me and don't hit me the way they hit most others. I really did get the concept the director was going for; not getting close to the characters as a way to reinforce their condition, but in this case it didn't work for me, and I accept that as my own shortcoming. Again, thanks for reminding me that there is no right or wrong.
2. Part of the problem I have with ambiguity is that ultimately it reveals nothing other than our own biases. I specifically picked that exchange because for me it felt like Wendy was more in denial about her relationship with her family and it was her own irrationality that prompted her to leave home. Most people would presume the opposite, that her family was being unbearable and they just didn't understand, while to me, I couldn't shake the idea that maybe she had been spoiled at home and something happened that set her off on a kind of narcissistic spiral that convinced her that her life was so bad that she had to flee to Alaska. She had a dog, a car and an ample amount of cash, plus at some point, another mechanic had taken some sort of pity on her and got her car going again before it broke down in this story. The worst thing she faced was a young boy who was trying to do his job, and when she faced him later, he didn't react much. Again, as much of a #### move as it was, he wasn't really much of a villain, either. She faced cooperation at every turn (even the police were pretty mild on her, other than leaving the dog behind, which they had to do to give us a plot), so this bad situation was going about as well as one could hope, yet she remained unfazed by it all.
Anyway, on one hand I can appreciate what everyone is saying about what appealed to them about these movies, they're just not my style I guess.
Give yourself some more credit. These are great (and very valid) points.
You guys did a good job on this.I saw them both in the theater, which means it’s been a while since W&L. The most obvious theme is they both involve people living on the fringes of society, though in LNT it is more by choice. Also people trying to maintain their dignity while facing poverty. And in both movies there are significant and important interactions with “authority”; it could be interesting to discuss our feelings on those interactions. LNT left me with mixed feelings on that topic while W&L was more one-sided in my mind (IIRC).@krista4 - since you've seen them, are there any connecting themes between the movies for discussion purposes?
I was "gut" crying if that makes any sense. Just the look on her face when she stopped as they were walking started it for me. My son was playing video games in the same room this afternoon while I was watching, and he was giving me the side look wondering WTF was going on.You guys did a good job on this.
KP just mentioned the gut punch of Leave No Trace, and I believe I mentioned earlier that in the last scene of the movie, I burst into tears in the theater. How embarrassing! (And very much not in character for me.) I was taken in by the characters immediately, which I believe was in large part due to the amazing performances by both lead actors. I might have felt a more natural inclination toward them than some due to knowing some self-proclaimed "dirtbags" who live out of their cars and spend most of their time in the woods, and being a frequent visitor to these forests as well.
Also, some of you will understand this because you are dads, too, but there is just something particularly special about a girl's relationship to her father, which I think this captured well even though their circumstances weren't typical. I loved this unusual perspective on a female "coming of age" story.
You guys have said all the good stuff better than I could have, though.
I think the 'coming of age' angle could have been explored more without taking over the story; in fact, I think that would have heightened both of the main struggles of the story. Maybe that's why I was so frustrated by this one; there was so much there that they could have gotten mileage out of but didn't, and probably in the name of feeling the same kind of distance the characters felt. I agree the leads did great in their parts, I just wanted them to be put through their paces more. I think that's why I brought up The Fisher King before. Every actor really got to act and display multiple shades of their character in that movie, whereas the actors here to me just struck one continuous note, which I can now chalk up to not being as 'close' to the setting in real life as others, given a take like this. And that's one of the things I get to take away from these discussions.You guys did a good job on this.
KP just mentioned the gut punch of Leave No Trace, and I believe I mentioned earlier that in the last scene of the movie, I burst into tears in the theater. How embarrassing! (And very much not in character for me.) I was taken in by the characters immediately, which I believe was in large part due to the amazing performances by both lead actors. I might have felt a more natural inclination toward them than some due to knowing some self-proclaimed "dirtbags" who live out of their cars and spend most of their time in the woods, and being a frequent visitor to these forests as well.
Also, some of you will understand this because you are dads, too, but there is just something particularly special about a girl's relationship to her father, which I think this captured well even though their circumstances weren't typical. I loved this unusual perspective on a female "coming of age" story.
You guys have said all the good stuff better than I could have, though.
I'll have to go back to find your Fisher King reference as somehow I missed it, though your posts are always some of my favorites. What's funny (to me only, probably) is that I hated The Fisher King, in large part as I couldn't relate to any of the characters in the slightest. They irritated the hell out of me! And what's her name, who I think won the Oscar for it (obviously I'm too lazy to look anything up right now) gave what I thought was a one-note performance. I know I'm in the minority in my feelings on that movie, though.I think the 'coming of age' angle could have been explored more without taking over the story; in fact, I think that would have heightened both of the main struggles of the story. Maybe that's why I was so frustrated by this one; there was so much there that they could have gotten mileage out of but didn't, and probably in the name of feeling the same kind of distance the characters felt. I agree the leads did great in their parts, I just wanted them to be put through their paces more. I think that's why I brought up The Fisher King before. Every actor really got to act and display multiple shades of their character in that movie, whereas the actors here to me just struck one continuous note, which I can now chalk up to not being as 'close' to the setting in real life as others, given a take like this. And that's one of the things I get to take away from these discussions.
Agreed; I deeply felt her turmoil and don't think the ending would have been nearly the same for the beginning-of-the-film version of her. I watched her become independent, with her own thoughts and desires, through the course of the film.I thought she developed quite a bit: found some hobbies and people she liked it, realized she was interested in being part of society. I really liked her brief arc.
13Maybe I missed it - was it ever said how long they were living like that and/or how old Tom was?
Heads up that I will probably post the April movies today. Given the lockdown and the nature of these 2 movies being ones everyone except Krista has probably seen, we will reduce the viewing window from the usual 3 weeks to 2 weeks.
I am readyHeads up that I will probably post the April movies today. Given the lockdown and the nature of these 2 movies being ones everyone except Krista has probably seen, we will reduce the viewing window from the usual 3 weeks to 2 weeks.
That’s something we are hoping for May. The streaming selections just are a bit limited.A pairing of sports movies may be cool. I am a little surprised how much I miss sports. I was not a huge viewer of sports but I liked knowing it was there and I could watch whenever I wanted. I especially miss baseball.