Quote:
Originally Posted by Engine
Alfred, I think that what the characters and actions represent are right there on the surface, in plain view. I think the appeal is just watching the extremely simple story unfold. And the action scenes that are always brutal and/or gruesome.
Overall, I felt the minimal plot and story was rectified with an incredibly good atmosphere and I wasn't bored by the film at any point. I didn't find it to be particularly cerebral or "Lynchian" (Lynch uses a lot of story and plot, however much he distorts and and obscures them).
Kristin Scott Thomas really steals every scene that she's in, although maybe that's because she's the only one who has lines made of multiple entire sentences. Gosling's acting was as at least as minimal as everything else and it kind of validates this parody:
|
Maybe it was because I mostly spoiled the major plot points for myself by reading post-Cannes discussion, but I really was not watching this film for the plot. I was watching it to see how the plot fit together, how the pacing was, how the tension was built, symbolism, etc. And of course to admire the film's technical aspects.
Where I find the film "Lynchian" is mostly in how Refn messed with tone and realism. A film like Blue Velvet begins with the tone of a normal crime thriller, before introducing some of its more bizarre characters and going full-on Lynch. This film had the same occasional tonal irregularities that only served to make the film more bizarre as it went along.
Spoiler for some plot points:
The film opens with an absolutely captivating sequence at Julian and Billy's boxing club, before Billy decides he wants to hire a prostitute. In the most calm and subtle voice, he tells the pimp, "I want to fuck a 14-year old." I know this caught a lot of people off guard, myself included at my screening, and there were a lot of nervous giggles.
The same thing happened when Kristin Scott Thomas' character (who is like a bull in a china shop in this film, and sharply contrasts with the silent, solemn characters) calls Mai a "cum-dumpster" and exclaims how enormous Billy's cock was compared to Julian's (as dramatic music plays).
Even Chang's post-maiming karaoke scenes had their own bizarre, uncomfortable Lynch feel. I'm not saying that Refn was purposely imitating Lynch's style, because these are two very different directors, but there are many similarities to be drawn. I feel like he was going for the same sort of weirdness, but of course, he handled it in his own way.