What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

FBG Movie Club: We're Getting the Band Back Together: Metallica vs Nina Simone Movie Docs (2 Viewers)

I currently have

  • Netflix

    Votes: 9 90.0%
  • Amazon Prime

    Votes: 9 90.0%
  • HBO Max

    Votes: 8 80.0%
  • Hulu

    Votes: 8 80.0%
  • Disney+

    Votes: 6 60.0%
  • Criterion

    Votes: 1 10.0%
  • TCM Chanel

    Votes: 6 60.0%

  • Total voters
    10
My first thought with Wendy and Lucy was the mindless cruelty of rules, procedures and people just performing their daily jobs.  

 
and conversely, the powerful positive impact when people stop "just doing their job" or "following the rules" and take time to connect and understand with others. I really liked Wendy and Lucy. 

 
Oh i missed the spoiler part
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 politics

 
my capsule review of Wendy & Lucy on 3/27, covered by spoiler hood:

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.

 
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 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.

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.
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.

As for the comparison to Infinity War, yes it had the advantage of a big budget, big stars and most importantly multiple films that drew us in, but the idea of exposition is not expensive and does not need multiple movies nor a big budget to accomplish, and to me that's why Leave No Trace isn't as compelling. It's not a fair comparison, but The Fisher King is a film that deals with PTSD and homelessness in a more compelling way, at least in part because of what we learn about the characters along the way.  I felt almost like I was living right alongside them, as compared to Leave No Trace, where I felt I was simply watching them. I just wanted more storytelling than context.

Bottom line, Leave No Trace does shine a light on a side of our society that deserves better, and while I quibble about how it was presented, I give everyone associated with it kudos.

 
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?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am the first to admit I am a little on the sensitive side and get emotional pretty easily.

Having said that I disagree with Wikid's  capsule saying "nothing especially tragic happens" I thought it was pretty ####### tragic.

I was filled with anxiety when she tied the dog (her best friend) up outside the grocer.  The entire time she was in the store I wanted her to move faster. Those who watched this know it gets worse. I was so filled with so much anxiety as the time ticked away at the police station I almost stopped watching. Hats off to the film makers, they got me hook line and sinker.

I agree with IIov80s regarding meeting people we know nothing about and how a little kindness can go a long way.

I have been homeless as a young man and it's not that much fun. Lots of predators out there but every once in a while you meet someone like that guard and things are better for a bit.

I rated this movie a 3. I loved how they worked the clock and the pace to create the anxiety I was feeling. I also liked the style of filming. I was surprised to see how recent that movie was made (?2009) it had a much older feel to me. Some of the filming style reminded me of Jeremiah Johnson.

 
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. 
 

ETA: I wanted to add that my favorite scene was of the dad taking the test inside a scary artificial construct (to him) with a forest scene on the back wall. To me, that sums up this film. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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. 
Props to @KarmaPolice for picking these 2 as I think the themes paired really well and the movies share a lot in common. 

 
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.
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. 

 
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.
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've decided to try & not go political on these, as originally intended, but concentrate on the raison d'etre the two films have in common - they invite one in to feel what these folks in these sitches are feeling and contrast how oneself might act to how the protagonists did. When successfully done, that is incredibly valuable filmmaking. The difference between Leave No Trace and Infinity War is the same as between a fine art painting and an illustration - i'm glad both exist, but understand a large difference in worth between the two and how differently they will be appreciated by others.

The biggest difference between the two films is the central women. Wendy has already had the stuffing knocked out of her (and no actress does a better job representing that than Michelle Williams) and her expectations are lowered as a result. As one who found himself in many similar jackpots as a runaway, i am frustrated by Wendy's lack of cleverness and investment in answers but that's kind of the point. Though she has a good heart (what is left of it), her life is already writ as a virtual waste of protoplasm and one can only hope she will be reasonably happy, do no harm and bear no children.

But Tom, oh Tom - it is to love & hope, cry good & cry bad to know Tom. Just as Jennifer Lawrence's character in the same director's Winter's Bone rises to the occasion, Tom never leaves others to help herself nor leaves herself to help others. And that's why, though we still may need men more, we need great women most and we need children to develop inwardly as much as outwardly. And Tom's path (and, in a pitiful way, her father's) is far more the trail of a hero than anyone with magic shields or super powers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had mentioned I had seen Leave no Trace in the past ans was disappointed in it. I enjoyed it much more the second go around. I think I had some expectations the first time I saw it and when that was not what I got I was disappointed. I have always had a romantic notion that I could make it on my own out in the wilderness and leave society behind. This feeling was very strong as a child. I forget the name of the movie but it was about a kid who ran away and lived inside of a tree. I was infatuated with that idea as a child. As I grew up those notions while I still have them are not as confident as when I was an 8 year old boy. I kind of saw this movie through that lens. It is not easy to live outside of society despite what I think. It would be even more difficult when responsible for another.

I did my time being homeless and honestly I think I could go back to it and be ok. The one difference now is I have a family I am responsible for so I don't feel I can just check out. If I could it is fairly probable that I would, maybe?

I did like the homeless connection of these films. I liked Wendy realizing Lucy would be better off at the adoptive home than on the road. I liked Tom realizing Will would be better off living in the woods and Will realizing Tom was better off in society. All three made big sacrifices and that is what is sometimes required of real love.

 
Let me comment on Wendy and Lucy now, as I still have to finish Leave no Trace. Might be another day or two. 

Last month, I had said I don't really like people lose their animal movies, but this one was an exception. I wasn't bothered by the lack of backstory. I simply assumed Wendy is one of those people who just can't get her life together. Her conversation with her brother-in-law (and her sister right away saying "we can't help her - we're tapped") prettymuch tells us she left there on semi-bad terms, probably financial or "geez, you screwed up AGAIN?". You can see she makes bad choices - tying up the dog outside, stealing, etc.

I don't think she was mentally ill as simply one of those lost young people who never seem to understand that their experience isn't the only one out there. What I mean is, Wendy kind of does what Wendy feels like doing, with really poor results. She thinks nothing of tying the dog outside, because that's Wendy. She thinks nothing of using the service station bathroom over and over, because that's Wendy. She a little surprised there's no free tow, she stole, etc. She just doesn't see anything from anyone else's point of view.  I did feel bad for her when she got arrested - there was really no need for that, but still, if she doesn't steal, then there's no issue. 

The ending, which I loved, kind of redeems her a bit, and maybe shows some growth. Leaving Lucy because it's the right thing to do was a good way to end it. I probably would have preferred she used some of that $500 or so she had left and bought a bus ticket to Alaska - it would have been the more responsible thing than hopping a train, but one step at a time, I guess.

Nice pick - I enjoyed this. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
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.
Maybe he did call animal control? Lucy did end up at the pound and got adopted out right away.

 
Just finished up Wendy and Lucy.   Will try to post some thoughts before reading the thread and picking up on other's thoughts. 

For me the running theme through the movie was all of the opportunities of small acts of kindness that get missed for Wendy.  I thought it was a great decision to not really give us much back story about how she ended up this way, or what she might have been running from.  (I guess I took it more as running from something and Alaska was about as far as you can get vs. chasing down a dream of working in Alaska).  A lot of my thoughts were just getting increasingly sad and angry that nobody saw her and offered a small act to help - from the ######## who had to call the cops over a couple cans of dog food, to the charge of getting the car across the road, etc.   Yes, the older gentleman did let his guard down after awhile and help in his own way, but even him I was getting crabby with - couldn't offer her a ride or anything?   Battling those thoughts were ones about Wendy and realizing she was pretty beaten down and guarded as well, so how much help would she have taken?  

Overall good movie that got me thinking.  Very good use of minimal movie magic to tell a simple and effective story.   In a way it struck me as the anti-Into the Wild.  

 
Evidently I couldn't see the dollar amounts left on her sheet - I thought she didn't have much left at the end, like a couple hundred.  

 
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.  

 
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.

 
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.  
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. 

 
Leave No Trace:

I know I am a soulless *******, but dog relationships do very little for me in movies (I see my two mostly as destructive cat #### eaters ;) ) , so this movie really stepped up the emotions for me despite dealing with similar themes and circumstances.   interesting that I brought up in the other review that part of what was bothering me was the lack of nice gestures, and that is just about all that Tom and Will encounter.   Difference here is one of them doesn't want it or maybe more like it - because of his background he can't bring himself to accept it.   Just like in W&L, I do love the filmmakers ability to tell the story without beating you over the head with the ideas - specifically what exactly happened to him.  I think a lesser movie would be more likely to show specific flashbacks.   I am guessing the other reviews praise the acting (at least I hope so), and I will do the same.   I was very impressed with Thomasin's acting - her ability to convey feelings without dialogue.   One scene that stuck out was when she was trying to give the lady money at the last trailer park.  You could see the mental battle and hear in her voice how much she wanted it, and she alone, as she lied and said they wanted to stay for awhile.   That was the start of the gut punch, but obviously the last scene with them drove it home.  

Sure, I had some questions about how all this would work:  wasn't there more help he could get - especially with the medic? was it only life in the woods or suicide for him? are they really going to let her live on her own?   but overall the acting and emotion trumped any of those questions that were starting to bubble up.  

 
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 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 :wub: her already?

 
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.
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 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.
Interesting comparison that didn't occur to me while I was watching.  :thumbup:

 
Ok, Leave no Trace

I really enjoyed this. Like @KarmaPolicesaid, where Wendy didn't get any help, that's all that Will and Tom seem to get. Aside from getting arrested (and even that was pretty nice), everyone was nice, helpful, repeatedly gave them places to live, etc. And Will didn't want any of it. I found Tom's gradual acceptance of and then outright wanting a "normal" life well done. She's fully into the living off the land thing at first, but once she gets a taste, she almost can't understand why her father cannot function in it or even accept it. He doesn't even know. After the trucker drops them off, and they almost freeze while he's saying they have to keep going, it's clear he's completely lost mentally - he has no idea where to go or what to do, but just keep moving into freezing weather for some reason.  And yes, the actress who played Tom was fantastic.

Great pairing this month. 

 
I think we are going to get quite a bit lighter for our next pairing.  

:popcorn:
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. 

That’s pretty much the total opposite to what’s about be up for April.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.  
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.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: jwb
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 :wub: her already?
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.  

But to what you said, I agree - I've passed by these folks plenty of times without giving it a second thought. And it's not that I'm mean or cold hearted. I've paid for groceries for people in front of me who came up short. I donate both time and money. But I guess it's a time and place thing. Makes you think, though (good movies do that.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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. 

 
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.  

2.  The bolded is a VERY good point.  

 
@krista4 - since you've seen them, are there any connecting themes between the movies for discussion purposes? 
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).
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.  :)  

 
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 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.  

 
Maybe I missed it - was it ever said how long they were living like that and/or how old Tom was?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.  :thumbup:

 
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. 

 
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.  :thumbup:
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 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. 
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.

 
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. 

 
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 ready :whistle:

 
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.

 
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.
That’s something we are hoping for May. The streaming selections just are a bit limited. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top