Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
oscarthewilde
May 16, 2012


I would often go there
To the tiny church there
Well, apparently, Call Me By Your Name, is entering wide release in a few days. And I couldn't find a thread so I figured I might as well create one myself. I just saw yesterday and I don't know why but, but it really kinda hit me where it hurt. Part of it definitely was some jealousy, I mean, who wouldn't love to spend 6 weeks in a beautiful villa in the Italian countryside, and the amazing music and general atmosphere, but I think it's more than that, it definitely felt like more than the sum of its parts. I felt that the characters were a bit underdeveloped and even caricature-like, every now and then, (I still don't really know what Oliver is like as a person, I mean, philology as a field is more-or-less extinct, and no archaeologist would write about Heidegger's interpretation of the pre-Socratic philosophers), but I guess I grew to accept that.

Also, I went into the movie expecting to dislike the Sufjan Stevens soundtrack, but somehow it really worked. Honestly, I can't stop listening to Mystery of Love.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQT32vW61eI

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cacator
Aug 6, 2005

You're quite good at turning me on.

Saw this at a film festival back in September. Michael Stuhlbarg's monologue at the end blew me away and I think he deserves nominations for that scene alone.

oscarthewilde
May 16, 2012


I would often go there
To the tiny church there
Th

Cacator posted:

Saw this at a film festival back in September. Michael Stuhlbarg's monologue at the end blew me away and I think he deserves nominations for that scene alone.

That was an stand-out moment alright, and Stuhlbarg is such an amazing actor anyway. I did feel he was a bit underutilized, most people besides Hammer and Chalamet were, if you ask me, but he still did a terrific job.

Moon Atari
Dec 26, 2010

This movie was absolutely amazing on every level. Chalamet's performance is incredible, with the end credits alone being enough to earn him nominations for all the awards. My favourite part of his performance is that after his "I wanted you to know" confession to Oliver he physically gains confidence and starts doing little jive step dance moves throughout the rest of the movie.

Stuhlbarg's speech was a complete surprise. Even though everything else had been delivered so well up to that point I was still somehow expecting it to be a trite and awkward parental "it's okay to be gay" talk. Instead it turns out to be this poetic statement on the beauty of surrendering to experience, followed by deep personal regret.

It has some amazing direction and cinematography too. Everything looks so iddylic and beautiful. There is this very brief bit after their drunken night out where everything is presented through a gold filter that is unlike anything I've seen before. Amazing that they had the restraint to use such a unique effect in moderation rather than overdoing it.

TychoCelchuuu
Jan 2, 2012

This space for Rent.
I liked everything about this movie except for most of the words they were saying in the dialogue scenes. Stuhlbarg at the end was fine but a lot of the earlier stuff felt like it was telling more than showing. It sort of felt ripped from the book. I'm not sure if it was or not but I feel like the movie would've done better had some of that been excised. Apart from that it was excellent. You could practically touch and smell the setting and all the actors are great.

Moon Atari
Dec 26, 2010

TychoCelchuuu posted:

You could practically touch and smell the setting and all the actors are great.

I too could not help but worry about the effect eating and drinking that much apricot would have on their digestive system.

Coffee And Pie
Nov 4, 2010

"Blah-sum"?
More like "Blawesome"
I want to wear all the shorts featured in this motion picture

Edit: on my legs not my face

Coffee And Pie fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jan 21, 2018

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene
I think this was the best film of 2017. Absolutely great adaptation of an already great book. The final 20 minutes had me bawling.

Re: Oliver's characterization: The book fleshes out how much of Oliver is an act to impress/please others. Much of the persona he gives off is a facade meant to hide who he is, and since the book is from Elio's point of view, we really only see Oliver through Elio's eyes. Not necessarily a fault of the book, though, as the culmination of Oliver's falsehoods delivers in the last few pages of the epilogue.

Given the nature of the book, I can see why it's hard to gauge who Oliver is in the film. I will say that the film goes for a much more dramatic route when it comes to the phone call scene (it was a physical visit in the book).

Ubiquitous_ fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Jan 21, 2018

Escobarbarian
Jun 18, 2004


Grimey Drawer
Shoulda called this movie “Italian Peach”. It’s good though

Coffee And Pie
Nov 4, 2010

"Blah-sum"?
More like "Blawesome"

Escobarbarian posted:

Shoulda called this movie “Italian Peach”. It’s good though

Might as well just recast Oscar as Nicolas Cage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3S0QZeDGdE

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene
The release schedule for this movie probably killed its Oscar chances.

OhAreThey
Oct 12, 2012

I like your nurse's uniform, guy.
I was really happy to see Chalamet nominated for Best Actor. His performance was one of the best of the year.

He can making loving a peach look artistic, for god's sake.

Jean Eric Burn
Nov 10, 2007

Solid film and my expectations were real low, I remember really not liking the book at all when it came out, was probably the wrong demographic for it but I thought it was one of the most poorly written books I've ever bothered to finish reading and didn't understand why anyone would make it into a movie.

Don't know how the adapted screenplay award is meant to work, the dialogue pulled from the book was almost like robotic sounding but the original stuff was dope as hell and Stuhlbarg elevated the whole thing.

Chalamet's performance was the best of the nominees (haven't seen the DDL film yet though), stronger than Oldman's, but the latter was more consistent so it might go that way. I would give it to Chalamet though.

Nihonniboku
Aug 11, 2004

YOU CAN FLY!!!

OhAreThey posted:

I was really happy to see Chalamet nominated for Best Actor. His performance was one of the best of the year.

He can making loving a peach look artistic, for god's sake.

He's apparently the youngest ever nominated for Best Actor.

Also, totally rooting for Sufjan to win Best Song.

wizardofloneliness
Dec 30, 2008

The youngest nominee for Best Actor was actually for a 9-year old apparently, although that was for a movie in 1931. Although it looks like the youngest winner is Adrien Brody who was 29 at the time, which is sort of surprising. So Chalamet would be the youngest if he actually wins, but I don’t know how likely that is with DDL and Oldman in the running. I think it would be kind of cool if he won though, everyone already knows DDL rules.

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene

Jean Eric Burn posted:

Solid film and my expectations were real low, I remember really not liking the book at all when it came out, was probably the wrong demographic for it but I thought it was one of the most poorly written books I've ever bothered to finish reading and didn't understand why anyone would make it into a movie.

Don't know how the adapted screenplay award is meant to work, the dialogue pulled from the book was almost like robotic sounding but the original stuff was dope as hell and Stuhlbarg elevated the whole thing.

Chalamet's performance was the best of the nominees (haven't seen the DDL film yet though), stronger than Oldman's, but the latter was more consistent so it might go that way. I would give it to Chalamet though.
Despite some of the more robotic dialogue of the novel, that whole last speech was ripped straight from the book. Stuhlbarg nailed it.

Egbert Souse
Nov 6, 2008

edit: wrong thread wtf

Kart Barfunkel
Nov 10, 2009


https://youtu.be/fMKDE3lTirs

The clothes, the countryside, and the chemistry between the two leads was great. I have to agree that A Serious Man totally nails that killer monologue at the end. What a good year he’s having.

The script itself, to me, is just solid. Didn’t really connect emotionally, but it was well constructed. But the leads all pack a punch.
I’d give the whole experience about a 7/10.

Does anybody know what that Bach song was?

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this
This movie! Is great! It’s like watching the late hours of summer breathe.

radialright
May 19, 2004
PINKU BENTO BOXU ^_^;;
Loved this movie, it really is absurdly gorgeous and languorous and sensual.

Timothee Chalamet was so compelling and believable (all the little sideeye glances and the awkward teenage thirst). Armie Hammer as the oversized Doctoral Candidate Ken was also pretty drat enjoyable; his transformation from seemingly unflappable and self-assured to more open and playful and giddy was some fine work. The parents were fantastic too, I thought Amira Casar's performance was subtle and underrated.

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene
There was a review by the SFWeekly about this movie, and the reviewer was so offended by the subject matter that she posted a picture of her review copy disc split in half. I’ve never seen a movie reviewer act so unprofessional.

Nihonniboku
Aug 11, 2004

YOU CAN FLY!!!

Ubiquitous_ posted:

There was a review by the SFWeekly about this movie, and the reviewer was so offended by the subject matter that she posted a picture of her review copy disc split in half. I’ve never seen a movie reviewer act so unprofessional.

Yeah, there is a small number of people who are really angry about the movie, generally pushing their 2018 American values (and laws) onto a subject matter that is neither from 2018 or American. And the angriest people I've seen are people who haven't even seen the movie.

I think part of the problem is that Armie Hammer, even when he was actually 24, he looked over 30. So now that he actually is in his 30s, he looked even that much older than Thimotee, who looks younger than his real age of 22.

wizardofloneliness
Dec 30, 2008

If it’s the review I’m thinking of, the major complaint was the age difference, which I do kind of agree about. But the review was basically just “I morally disapprove of this”, which isn’t exactly what I would call a review.

Coffee And Pie
Nov 4, 2010

"Blah-sum"?
More like "Blawesome"
I do not approve of interspecies relationships, officer, that’s why I’m pissing on this flaming copy of Turner and Hooch.

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this
I understand where people are coming from regarding the age difference, particularly in this year, but speaking as a gay man who grew up in a conservative community it's refreshing to see a film that approaches the reality of tentatively developing queerness in a system where "being gay" is essentially not an option. The only characters in the film who are out are so vividly out that they can be dismissed as ridiculous, which is both a form of rebellion against the crushing norms of heterosexuality and a kind of sterilization, rendering them harmless and ineffective, and therefore functionally useless to the confused closet case. Now that it's the present, hopefully we can have more examples in media and a more healthy cultural representation of gay teen lifestyles that don't require being "led" by more knowing people in their 20s, but a lot of criticism of the gap in the film from heterosexual viewers strikes me as a huge and semi-willful ignorance of the stifling social violence inflicted on queer people through the years.

Nihonniboku
Aug 11, 2004

YOU CAN FLY!!!

Magic Hate Ball posted:

I understand where people are coming from regarding the age difference, particularly in this year, but speaking as a gay man who grew up in a conservative community it's refreshing to see a film that approaches the reality of tentatively developing queerness in a system where "being gay" is essentially not an option. The only characters in the film who are out are so vividly out that they can be dismissed as ridiculous, which is both a form of rebellion against the crushing norms of heterosexuality and a kind of sterilization, rendering them harmless and ineffective, and therefore functionally useless to the confused closet case. Now that it's the present, hopefully we can have more examples in media and a more healthy cultural representation of gay teen lifestyles that don't require being "led" by more knowing people in their 20s, but a lot of criticism of the gap in the film from heterosexual viewers strikes me as a huge and semi-willful ignorance of the stifling social violence inflicted on queer people through the years.

That is probably the most intelligent defense of the movie I've read. I really mean it.

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene
I think the argument I find most baffling is likening this film's romantic relationship age gap to the Kevin Spacey situation, whereas I think they couldn't be more different. Removing the age of consent in Italy out of the situation, nothing presented in either the book or the film depicts Elio being taken advantage of as Spacey had done. One thing that's rarely considered is that the book was written in 2007, when the gay rights movement was just beginning to pick up steam w/r/t things like gay marriage or hate crime laws (in my home state of Oregon, that's when we enacted anti-discrimination laws for sexual orientation, as an example).

I also find it funny how often the fact that both Elio and Oliver are depicted as bisexual in the book and film is unmentioned. It's a rare film in that respect, given most media treats male bisexuality as either a phase, or a tool for adultery.

Echoing that Magic Hate Ball has a fantastic defense of the film. Thank you.

Ubiquitous_ fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jan 27, 2018

TychoCelchuuu
Jan 2, 2012

This space for Rent.
On more or less this topic, I found this article interesting.

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this

TychoCelchuuu posted:

On more or less this topic, I found this article interesting.

This article kinda sucks. She first trips up over the assumption that it can't be simultaneously a flawed relationship and a depiction of something that "feels a lot like" true love, and then fails to understand a huge swathe of the movie (their hesitance to make their feelings known) and aggressively misconstrues the role the parents play, particularly in the context of the time and place, before suggesting that she's not totally sure if the dad was meant to be outing himself in the final monologue. The last four minutes of the film is Elio crying, for pete's sake - this is not a film meant to assuage straight people about how happy and uncomplicated gay relationships are and have been (at the same time, thankfully, it's not just another queer weepy - broadening it to address the complexities of aesthetics and love in regards to aging was a wise and fruitful choice). She seems to want a film that specifically address her concerns.

Nihonniboku posted:

That is probably the most intelligent defense of the movie I've read. I really mean it.

Ubiquitous_ posted:

Echoing that Magic Hate Ball has a fantastic defense of the film. Thank you.

Thanks! It's something I've thought a lot about during this year.

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene
Any interpretation that reads Mr. Perlman's monologue as an "outing" of himself is totally missing the point. The monologue is meant to cement that Elio's father appreciates love in all its forms, and the tragedy of never experiencing love when you have it right in front of you, no matter the gender. It's definitely an article that misreads the film, and the book.

It also helps to have read the book re: Oliver, as the film misses the mark somewhat slightly in fleshing out Oliver as a person and his own vulnerability when it comes to his relationship with Elio.

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this
Do you mean that he wasn't indicating that he's not straight, or that the point of the monologue isn't about him outing himself?

Ubiquitous_
Nov 20, 2013

by Reene

Magic Hate Ball posted:

Do you mean that he wasn't indicating that he's not straight, or that the point of the monologue isn't about him outing himself?

A little of both. His monologue digs at the overall weight of true love, and to let yourself experience all of the emotions that come from heartbreak so as to not let yourself become cynical, or bitter. I never read the monologue as his father admitting to any bisexuality or homosexuality, not that it would matter if it did. I haven't read the book in quite some time, though. I just think that interpreting the scene in that way detracts from its universal truths.

One touch I like about the film is the flies that linger in many scenes, even in the final one. There's Elio's nosebleeds, too, and the fact that they have an orchard where uneaten fruit would be left to rot. There's visual language that hints towards what's coming on the horizon (and, at the time the film is set, is currently happening in America) in terms of the AIDS crisis. The film encapsulates an idyllic life for this kind of love before a lot of sorrow will occur.

Ubiquitous_ fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Jan 27, 2018

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this

Ubiquitous_ posted:

A little of both. His monologue digs at the overall weight of true love, and to let yourself experience all of the emotions that come from heartbreak so as to not let yourself become cynical, or bitter. I never read the monologue as his father admitting to any bisexuality or homosexuality, not that it would matter if it did. I haven't read the book in quite some time, though. I just think that interpreting the scene in that way detracts from its universal truths.

See, I took it as an admission of (at least) bisexuality, which then led into the universal truths (and warnings) about appreciation and love. His expression and enthusiasm towards his work and the things he loves are so open that I feel like both elements can be true without one aspect of the monologue infringing upon the other.

Ubiquitous_ posted:

One touch I like about the film is the flies that linger in many scenes, even in the final one. There's Elio's nosebleeds, too, and the fact that they have an orchard where uneaten fruit would be left to rot. There's visual language that hints towards what's coming on the horizon (and, at the time the film is set, is currently happening in America) in terms of the AIDS crisis. The film encapsulates an idyllic life for this kind of love before a lot of sorrow will occur.

One of my favorite aspects of the film is how many things float around on the sides of the main relationship - they're not so blatant as to be diminished by becoming mere metaphor, so they make these kind of soft suggestions towards thematic connections and allow the viewer to lay them over the film.

exquisite tea
Apr 21, 2007

Carly shook her glass, willing the ice to melt. "You still haven't told me what the mission is."

She leaned forward. "We are going to assassinate the bad men of Hollywood."


I saw this movie last night. It was beautifully shot and not too boring, although like most films of this generation it could have been about 15-20min shorter without losing anything of value. The kid is a really talented actor and Armie Hammer seemed like he was trying to do his best Jeff Colby impersonation. I was extremely disappointed (dicksappointed) that there was no schlong in this movie. How can you make a movie this gay with no schlong. I give it 8 semi-hard dongs out of 10.

wizardofloneliness
Dec 30, 2008

What do you all think about the director saying he wants to do a sort of trilogy in the style of Before Sunrise? Personally, I thought the movie was fantastic but I also tend to think less is more a lot of the time, especially in regards to movies. Also, I guess the director mentioned he would want the sequel to focus more on HIV/AIDS, which I would be pretty unenthused about honestly.

I haven't read the book, but instead of the telephone scene they meet in person 20 or so years later. I thought the ending to the movie was pretty final, but perhaps the book ending left more room for a possible continuation of their relationship.

All of that said, if Guadagnino and the main cast decided they all wanted to do another one I would obviously see it. But I'm pretty good with the ending we got.

Timeless Appeal
May 28, 2006
I like the ending as is because it has this sense of tragedy that Oliver is never going to really be out, while Ellio has a chance. It's not just a matter of two lovers saying goodbye, but despite the fact that the age difference is only seven years, they're almost like these passing ships, two different gay experiences.

Nihonniboku
Aug 11, 2004

YOU CAN FLY!!!
I don't need a sequel, I thought the ending was perfect and beautiful. But my friend who I saw it with was furious that they didn't include the epilogue from the book.

But if they make one, I'll be there opening night.

Dr. S.O. Feelgood posted:

I haven't read the book, but instead of the telephone scene they meet in person 20 or so years later. I thought the ending to the movie was pretty final, but perhaps the book ending left more room for a possible continuation of their relationship.

That's not exactly what happened. Book spoilers: They actually meet a few times after the main events. First, instead of a phone call at Hanukkah, Oliver actually comes to visit them. He announces his engagement, and Elio tries to get one last gently caress out of him. Oliver agrees to cuddle with him for a bit, but Elio wants more, and they part ways angry at each other. The next time they interact is a few years later. Elio is in the States studying at grad school when Oliver brings his wife and two sons to visit Elio's parents in Italy. They speak on the phone, and Oliver says he wishes Elio would meet his children. Fifteen years after the main events of the book, Elio sits in on one of Oliver's university lectures. After class is over, Elio goes to say hi to Oliver, who doesn't recognize him at first because Elio has a thick beard, but he does after a moment. They go to get drinks to catch up with each other, and even though they haven't been in contact with each other in many years, it becomes evident that they've both been following each other's careers this whole time. Oliver keeps insisting that Elio go home with him for dinner so he can meet his wife and children, but Elio refuses saying that it would be all too real, that he prefers to live in a separate timeline where they stayed together. The final time they meet in the book is 20 years after the main events. Elio's father has passed away, and Oliver comes to visit him in Italy where they plan to scatter some of his ashes. It's hinted that they might try and be together again, but that's it.

Luca has said that should he do his proposed sequels, they wouldn't follow the events of the epilogue. Which makes sense, since there isn't a lot to go on. It makes sense that he would potentially venture into the HIV/AIDS thing because that was at the forefront of gay identity in the 80s, but at the same time, part of what makes CMBYN so special is that it doesn't fall onto the common tropes of gay cinema: AIDS, family disownment, violence, and death. It focuses on this one, brief, perfect first love. And that's all that I need. CMBYN is a dream, and bringing other elements into this cinematic universe would be almost too much for me to bear, it would kill me.

Hollismason
Jun 30, 2007

Witchfinder General

I'll be honest I had high hopes for this movie because I was under the impression that it was going to be more like Weekend, which is another kind of slice of life gay film. I was utterly disappointed in this film. I don't know why people keep saying " Oh it's so gorgeous" because to me it seemed like the most uninteresting looking film that's been made in northern Italy. The actors were good but the material itself is just not very compelling and I found both characters really boring. The thing that agravated me the most though was PAN AWAY TO TREES like come on if your going to have a gay love story you should have at least some gay sex beyond two men hugging each other.

I was a big fan of the book but the film and how everyone is gushing over it I just don't get.

If you wanna really great slice of life gay film then just watch Weekend which is superior to this film in almost every way.

Nihonniboku
Aug 11, 2004

YOU CAN FLY!!!

Hollismason posted:

If you wanna really great slice of life gay film then just watch Weekend which is superior to this film in almost every way.

Weekend is a fantastic movie. Superior in every way? Well, I love CMBYN. But I think it's a great companion piece to CMBYN.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this
Weekend is not superior to this movie.

  • Locked thread