The Limits of Control - Jim Jarmusch

[Dillard]

Hot news from Reuters/Hollywood Reporter via Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080213/people_nm/jarmusch_dc_1;_ylt=AlswdvBy3lN EBEn0aZNREhwE1vAI)!



BERLIN (Hollywood Reporter) - Writer/Director Jim Jarmusch has enlisted past collaborators Bill Murray and Tilda Swinton along with Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal for his upcoming thriller The Limits of Control.

The road movie centers on a mysterious loner who attempts to complete a criminal job. The film will shoot this month on location in the Spanish cities of Madrid, Seville and Almeria. It will be distributed in the U.S. by Focus Features.

Control marks the third teaming between Jarmusch and Murray after Coffee and Cigarettes and the art-house hit Broken Flowers. Swinton also appeared in Broken Flowers along with Sharon Stone, Jessica Lange, Chloe Sevigny and Julie Delpy.

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter

I realize I'm a tad early with this one, since we probably won't see it until 2009, but a reteaming of Jarmusch and Murray is very, very exciting for me, as I loved Broken Flowers. Swinton and Bernal are often great too.

[Ezee E]

Bill Murray playing another loner?

C'mon.... He's better then that.

[ledfloyd]

i loooved broken flowers and i love bernal. and oh yeah, i love jarmusch too. nice.

[Dillard]

Bill Murray playing another loner?

C'mon.... He's better then that.Stick with what works.

[bac0n]

Tilda Swinton was in Broken Flowers? Where? I totally missed her...

[Dillard]

She plays Penny, the girl living on a farm in the middle of nowhere with her aggressive biker boyfriend/husband, who, correct me if I'm wrong, I think was played by Larry Fessenden.

[Ezee E]

She plays Penny, the girl living on a farm in the middle of nowhere with her aggressive biker boyfriend/husband, who, correct me if I'm wrong, I think was played by Larry Fessenden.
The last one right? Or is it the yuppie? Those two I don't picture as well.

[Dillard]

Mmmmm. I don't remember the order very well. She's pretty trashy and she has long hair that partly covers her face (which is why it's hard to remember that she's in it). The boyfriend punches him out. She has a pink typewriter. Murray ends up in the backseat of his rental car in the middle of a field.

[Ezee E]

Mmmmm. I don't remember the order very well. She's pretty trashy and she has long hair that partly covers her face (which is why it's hard to remember that she's in it). The boyfriend punches him out. She has a pink typewriter. Murray ends up in the backseat of his rental car in the middle of a field.
Yep. She was the final one. Wow, I wouldn't have even thought that was her.

My idea was always that she was the mother that sent the letter.

[Velocipedist]

Jim + Bill + Tilda (again) + Gael? I'm entirely excited.

[origami_mustache]

I'd rather not even know about this, because now I will be anxiously anticipating it for soooo long.

[ledfloyd]

Bill Murray playing another loner?

C'mon.... He's better then that.

according to chud the loner is being played by Isaach De Bankole

[Boner M]

Stills (http://www.ecartelera.com/noticias/3150/imagenes-limits-of-control/)

Holy moley, this looks sexxxy. Doyle + Jarmusch!

[Stay Puft]

Doyle + Jarmusch!

I didn't know that. Very excited now!

[[ETM]]

Huge Jarmusch fan here, very excited, Murray in small role, which is preferable.

[Qrazy]

Jarmusch sucks but Doyle will probably help him suck less than usual. I preemptively give this film a C+.

[Benny Profane]

Jarmusch rules but Doyle will probably help him rule more than usual. I preemptively give this film a A+.

I concur.

[Qrazy]

I concur.

http://420.thrashbarg.net/i_see_what_you_fucking_did_the re_bird.jpg

[Qrazy]

http://www.apple.com/trailers/focus_features/thelimitsofcontrol/

[Boner M]

I hope Jarmusch's humor is more present than that trailer seems to suggest. Doyle's work looks awesome, though.

[Winston*]

This will be good.

[Boner M]

7 reviews on RT, all rotten, including Ed Gonzalez & Anthony Lane. Yikes.

[Stay Puft]

D'Angelo gave it a 35. The word "pretentious" was used.

[MacGuffin]

This is gonna be awesome.

[right_for_the_moment]

Reverse Shot, Glen Kenny, and Jonathon Rosenbaum all like it though. I'm still excited for it

http://www.indiewire.com/article/mission_impassable_jim_jarmusc hs_the_limits_of_control/

http://somecamerunning.typepad.com/some_came_running/2009/04/the-limits-of-control.html

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=15562

[[ETM]]

D'Angelo gave it a 35.

Oh noes.


The word "pretentious" was used.

Ah, okay.

[ledfloyd]

rosenbaum seems to be the critic that best 'gets' jarmusch, so that's good enough for me.

[Pop Trash]

rosenbaum seems to be the critic that best 'gets' jarmusch, so that's good enough for me.
But he did write an entire book on Dead Man, so there might be some incentive for Jarmusch to succeed for him.

[Derek]

But he did write an entire book on Dead Man, so there might be some incentive for Jarmusch to succeed for him.

Because if Jarmusch achieves more mainstream success, non-cinephiles will buy a full-length book on Dead Man?

[Sven]

Rosenbaum is also grotesquely overfond of Richard Linklater, so while a good, probably great critic, my respect remains in check.

I don't take recommendations from Armond for Spielberg films, nor from Ebert of Scorsese films.

[Pop Trash]

Because if Jarmusch achieves more mainstream success, non-cinephiles will buy a full-length book on Dead Man?
I'm not sure where you got "mainstream success" out of this. I was mostly talking about Jarmusch succeeding as an auteur in total. Like maybe, maybe Rosenbaum might have a bias towards Jarmusch since he wrote an entire book about one of his films?

[Derek]

I'm not sure where you got "mainstream success" out of this. I was mostly talking about Jarmusch succeeding as an auteur in total. Like maybe, maybe Rosenbaum might have a bias towards Jarmusch since he wrote an entire book about one of his films?

Jarmusch is already considered an auteur and you certainly don't need to make all great films to be considered one. It seems like you're suggesting that Rosenbaum might be supporting the film as a ploy to give Jarmusch a better reputation than he deserves which is an unnecessary shot at one of the best working critics. If you're suggesting that his bias is that he likes him because he wrote a book about one of his films, well, you've cracked the case. :)

[Sven]

:)

I notice you've been tempering your posts with Mr. Smiley a lot lately. I guess you've finally learned after all those "I should've added a smiley" instances.

[Derek]

I notice you've been tempering your posts with Mr. Smiley a lot lately. I guess you've finally learned after all those "I should've added a smiley" instances.

At least with posters I haven't conversed with much, I don't want my smartass quips to be taken too seriously. Otherwise, I go through stretches where I throw them out liberally, probably depending on my mood.

[transmogrifier]

Rosenbaum is also grotesquely overfond of Richard Linklater, so while a good, probably great critic, my respect remains in check.

I don't take recommendations from Armond for Spielberg films, nor from Ebert of Scorsese films.

Nor Svensos for Herzog films. Or trans for Sonic Youth albums. Obsessions are fun. :)

[ledfloyd]

eh, rosenbaum didn't like broken flowers.

[Raiders]

eh, rosenbaum didn't like broken flowers.

Yes he did.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/archives/2005/0805/050805.html

[Grouchy]

I didn't like Broken Flowers either.

But I'm a fan of stuff like Dead Man or Mystery Train.

[number8]

Tomorrow I'm interviewing Gael at 12 at a hotel and then I have to run over to the theater for a screening of this at 1. Kind of a shitty schedule.

[Sycophant]

When you need to go, offer to give him "a ride" to the theater, and wink lewdly.

[number8]

When you need to go, offer to give him "a ride" to the theater, and wink lewdly.

I'm actually interviewing him for Rudo y Cursi, which I've seen, together with Diego Luna. They've got interviews all day long, so it's unrelated. The Limits of Control screening is just an inconvenient coincidence.

[Sycophant]

I'm actually interviewing him for Rudo y Cursi, which I've seen, together with Diego Luna. They've got interviews all day long, so it's unrelated. The Limits of Control screening is just an inconvenient coincidence.

Oh. Then just proposition him bluntly.

[number8]

One of my interview questions is "So Diego was just in an Oscar-nominated film about gay rights and he had a gay sex scene in it. Gael, if you were playing a gay man and had to do a steamy sex scene, which reporter would you do it with, and what would you be willing to do? Please give details while I unbuckle my belt because I just had a big lunch."

[Sycophant]

You're smooth as butter, Mr. Ponto.

[Pop Trash]

I don't take recommendations from Armond for Spielberg films, nor from Ebert of Scorsese films.
Yeah, exactly. Even though I am as fond of Scorsese as Ebert, it's hard for me to take his reviews of his films that seriously at this point. Also, I'm not so sure about Rosenbaum being a great critic. He gets way to hung up on political implications in films.

[ledfloyd]

Yes he did.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/archives/2005/0805/050805.html
hmm, i must have confused him with someone else.

[Pop Trash]

Anyone see this yet?

[number8]

Anyone see this yet?

I did. Dug it a lot.

[MacGuffin]

Going to see this in about fifteen minutes.

[chrisnu]

Thread moved, because it's not upcoming. ;)

I should see this on Monday.

[MacGuffin]

Thread moved, because it's not upcoming. ;)

I should see this on Monday.

Be prepared for an excellent movie, and the best Jarmusch since Dead Man. Seriously, I'm still a bit stunned by its moodiness. This is a movie about being there, seeing things, talking to people you don't know, exploring, wandering, listening, and being surprised by. I can do without all the hitman stuff and we'd still have a movie of scenes that never fail to resonate long after its over (much like how the man in the movie mentions for the notes a guitar has played over a long period of time). The characters are all magnificently crafted.

I don't really know how I can talk anymore about this movie, because there is nothing there on the surface. There is no possible way for this to be described as a superficial movie. It just resonated so well with me. Jarmusch puts the world on film and asks us to look at it in many different ways. A lock for my top ten of 2009.

[Addendum: I realize little if any of this makes any sense. You just have to see it, especially you, Jarmusch fans. Don't go in expecting any plot, because the movies offers something far more valuable than that: it's a very existential movie and its moments are captured very beautifully by Christopher Doyle.

I can't think of any other way to articulate my feelings for the movie right now. Perhaps later.]

[MacGuffin]

Did I mention this movie looks really, really amazing?

EDIT: This is probably more like a 9. Let's see how I feel tomorrow.

[B-side]

Be prepared for an excellent movie, and the best Jarmusch since Dead Man. Seriously, I'm still a bit stunned by its moodiness. This is a movie about being there, seeing things, talking to people you don't know, exploring, wandering, listening, and being surprised by. I can do without all the hitman stuff and we'd still have a movie of scenes that never fail to resonate long after its over (much like how the man in the movie mentions for the notes a guitar has played over a long period of time). The characters are all magnificently crafted.

I don't really know how I can talk anymore about this movie, because there is nothing there on the surface. There is no possible way for this to be described as a superficial movie. It just resonated so well with me. Jarmusch puts the world on film and asks us to look at it in many different ways. A lock for my top ten of 2009.

[Addendum: I realize little if any of this makes any sense. You just have to see it, especially you, Jarmusch fans. Don't go in expecting any plot, because the movies offers something far more valuable than that: it's a very existential movie and its moments are captured very beautifully by Christopher Doyle.

I can't think of any other way to articulate my feelings for the movie right now. Perhaps later.]

Interesting. Seems easier and easier to understand why the responses have been so divided.

[MacGuffin]

Interesting. Seems easier and easier to understand why the responses have been so divided.

Even more so after you watch the movie. You either feel it or you don't.

[MacGuffin]

Also, this movie makes me want to read some Arthur Rimbaud. I'm guessing his complete collection is the place to go?

[origami_mustache]

Did I mention this movie looks really, really amazing?


of course...Christopher Doyle shot it...he's THE BEST.

[Duncan]

Also, this movie makes me want to read some Arthur Rimbaud. I'm guessing his complete collection is the place to go?
Yes, his complete works are worth reading. What about the film makes you want to read his poems? Is he quoted?

[MacGuffin]

Yes, his complete works are worth reading. What about the film makes you want to read his poems? Is he quoted?

Yep, he's quoted in the beginning. Something about how once the writer reached deep waters he no longer needed the ferryman or something like that. It was very fitting for the movie.

EDIT: It was this one...


As I was floating down unconcerned Rivers
I no longer felt myself steered by the haulers:

Translated differently.

[MacGuffin]

Thread moved, because it's not upcoming. ;)

I should see this on Monday.

Well?

[Milky Joe]

This is a movie about being there, seeing things, talking to people you don't know, exploring, wandering, listening, and being surprised by.

This is all very true. The film was very Buddhist in that way. I love, love the sentiment behind it. But man, it really tested my patience in terms of just being compelling enough to sit and watch, and I am someone who prides themselves on their patience both as a filmgoer and as a liver of life. I would just assume go and appreciate the (infinitely more interesting) things happening outside. I realize that the boredom was intentional and sort of meta-, but still. I don't think I'd call this an excellent film, but merely an interesting one.

[chrisnu]

Well?
This is playing in one theater 40 miles away. :frustrated: Didn't have time on Monday. Should have time this coming Monday. Thankfully, it's playing for more than one week.

[number8]

I thought it was pretty mesmerizing. 2 hours breeze by.

[MacGuffin]

I thought it was pretty mesmerizing. 2 hours breeze by.

Yep, would be well worth 40 miles. Don't miss this one.

[Stay Puft]

Yep, would be well worth 40 miles. Don't miss this one.

I'm planning on going 85 miles tomorrow to see it. :)

[MacGuffin]

I'm planning on going 85 miles tomorrow to see it. :)

WORTH IT

[chrisnu]

I'm planning on going 85 miles tomorrow to see it. :)
I don't realize how spoiled I am. I feel like an ass. I just don't understand how this ends up in 11 theaters. Broken Flowers showed in more than 400.

[Sycophant]

Knock it off with your humility, chrisnu. On June 5th, it's coming to a theater that is 2.5 blocks from my apartment and 1.5 blocks away from my office.

And I still might be too lazy to go see it.

Also, why is the release so limited? Isn't Jarmusch like the ultimate indie-cred director?

[number8]

Also, why is the release so limited?

For control.

[balmakboor]

I would have to drive to Minneapolis. Is it worth 13 hours of driving, round trip?

[chrisnu]

I would have to drive to Minneapolis. Is it worth 13 hours of driving, round trip?
Hell, I probably wouldn't do that if Jarmusch was presenting the film himself. :) However, as you can see, I'm not the best person to ask.

[Ezee E]

I saw the Simpsons episode with Jim Jarmusch last night.

[Milky Joe]

I walked 6 blocks to see this. I felt it was worth it.

[number8]

I leisurely walked 4 blocks whilst chatting with two cute girls the entire time to see this. It was meh.

[trotchky]

I could travel 20 miles to see it but I don't really feel like doing that, especially since I don't go to the theater much any more and The Brothers Bloom is now playing closer to me.

[MacGuffin]

The Limits of Control (2009, Jim Jarmusch) ***

Yeah, man!

[Stay Puft]

Yeah, this definitely worked for me, though I have some reservations. Some of the variations didn't entirely work for me, at least on a superficial level, but I suppose that's inevitable in a movie like this. I also could have done without some of the dialogue. Favorite scene is probably when Lone Man stumbles upon a music rehearsal.

Also, I've been finding that Jarmusch always works better for me on repeat viewings. I liked Broken Flowers when I first watched it, for example, but I was more deeply impressed when I watched it again last year. I'm looking forward to revisiting Limits of Control when it's on DVD and really letting it sink in.

[chrisnu]

Woosh! That's the sound of this film going over my head. I'll read through here a little later. I like its style, though.

There were only three people in the theater, and I was the only one left by the end. Pretty neat having a theater to yourself.

[chrisnu]

Nice avatar, Clipper Ship. That's probably the moment from the film I remember the most.

Based on the reviews I've read, I think my experience was partially ruined by the absolutely terrible sound problems. I'd like to see it again, but not there. Hell no.

[MacGuffin]

Nice avatar, Clipper Ship. That's probably the moment from the film I remember the most.

Based on the reviews I've read, I think my experience was partially ruined by the absolutely terrible sound problems. I'd like to see it again, but not there. Hell no.

Thanks, man. And geez, sorry about your screening.

[chrisnu]

Rosenbaum's review (http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=15562) makes me want to see Point Blank, immediately.


“There are limits to artistic self-indulgence,” begins Todd McCarthy’s review in Variety. I disagree. And there are no limits to the pleasures that can be afforded from this kind of freedom.

I was thinking something related to this. I was glad that Jarmusch had the freedom to make this. I'm not sure if it could be any less commercially appealing.

I think that having all the Oscar-nominated actors limited to cameos is almost a red herring.

I can't really pin down why I liked it yet, other than the fact that I did like it. I'm drawn to it. A very peculiar thing to say about a film, for me.

[origami_mustache]

I really enjoyed the extremely minimal soundtrack, and it actually almost lulled me into sleep.

[trotchky]

I really enjoyed the extremely minimal soundtrack, and it actually almost lulled me into sleep.

I loved the soundtrack too (favorite part of the movie) but it didn't affect me like that, I found it pretty thrilling. Makes me want to listen to some BORIS to get the taste of pretentious tripe out of my mouth.

[trotchky]

Ed Gonzalez stated what I was thinking throughout the film:
Resembling what a David Lynch film no doubt looks like to people who don't actually like David Lynch films

Only I reckon it's more like a David Lynch film without any of the things that make David Lynch films compelling and watchable.

[MacGuffin]

Ed Gonzalez stated what I was thinking throughout the film:

Only I reckon it's more like a David Lynch film without any of the things that make David Lynch films compelling and watchable.

I actually don't think it's anything like a David Lynch movie at all.

[trotchky]

I actually don't think it's anything like a David Lynch movie at all.

Well, it's surreal, and it builds its surreality through a series of key motifs that include 1)nonsensical and frequently laughable phrases uttered by 2)a series of weirdos who 3)act like they aren't human or else have mad cases of Aspergers. It also involves a mysterious, conspiratorial plot whose details are fuzzy (big difference between this and Lynch though: Lynch always reveals all by the end of his films; Jarmusch mistakes aridity for depth).

And that's where the Lynch similarities end, in my mind. It's really only like a David Lynch film when it comes to surface details. Everything else--that is, the cinematography, and all the subsets of meaning derived from it--are horribly inferior to a great Lynch film, primarily because it's so dry and boring and presents nothing stimulating to the audience to make them invested enough in this abstract, metaphorical conceit to care what any of it means.

In that sense (its intentionally minimal plot details, action, etc. that just end up being brackish and fail to hide its pretentious grasp at existentialist meaning) it reminds of Twentynine Palms, another movie I hate that you love (:P).

[Milky Joe]

The notion that everything is subjective, reality is imagined, etc. is straight out of Lynch's talks. As well as other places, of course, Lynch didn't invent the idea, but the idea fueling the film is the same thing that fuels Lynch. That's the biggest similarilty to Lynch that I see, besides the surface level surrealism.

[MacGuffin]

Maybe you guys are right, but like Lynch's movies (and Jarmusch's other movies), I didn't really look too far into this one and really took it as more of an "experience", although a few philosophical ideas were indeed quite thought-provoking (I really look for these sorts of things on later viewings, that said). Maybe I don't look at surrealism the same way (dreamlike atmosphere in a real-life setting?), but if these movies are both surreal as you say (and I didn't really look at it this way, because of the real-life philosophies) then they are two vastly different styles of surrealism you would have to admit.

[trotchky]

I need to see this again. Forget my previous comments. It's the most thought-provoking film I've seen this year and I should give it another chance.

[Philosophe_rouge]

I didn't like this movie very much.

[chrisnu]

This is already gone. Criminy.

[Duncan]

Link (http://limitedcontrol.posterous.com/the-limits-of-control-by-willi)to the Burroughs essay the film's title references. I don't think it's that interesting, outside of his distinction between "control" and "use." Still, there your go.

[trotchky]

Link (http://limitedcontrol.posterous.com/the-limits-of-control-by-willi)to the Burroughs essay the film's title references. I don't think it's that interesting, outside of his distinction between "control" and "use." Still, there your go.

So, what limits control is its need for language, which explains all the (obviously non-linguistic) meditation and how he used his "imagination" to kill his controller. Makes sense.

[right_for_the_moment]

I dont think this has been posted yet: http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/jim-jarmusch

Kind of an interesting interview w/ Jarmusch about the film

[Spaceman Spiff]

Seeing this this weekend. I'm excited.

[Boner M]

My friend summed this up well: "That was the most pretentious movie I've ever liked".

[Boner M]

Aformentioned friend wrote an awesome review of this on Facebook. I've gotta invite this guy sometime.

watched limits of control today, conclusion:

1) lopsided boobs and thick rimmed glasses are pretty sweet

2)black dude taichi is pretty cool, it lets you bypass armed guards with your imagination

3) this is my plot summary for the film: black dude gets hired by bored self indulgent big name casts who sound like they are all artschool sophomores(how american of me) to go kill big bad oppressive conglomorate right-wing art culture and bohemian hating bill murray, who we assume runs the entire world(ALLEGORICAL ? YOU BET YOR ASS) .

black guy get hints and help through above mentioned sophomores by exchanging matchboxes with little notes in them carrying the serial keys for your pirated copy of assassins creed which the black guy consumes (he actually eats them) coz he's a mad HAX who drinks 2 cups of coffee, in seperate cups.this repeats for about an hour and a half then the black guy arrives at a fortress that looks like it came straight out of sho kosugi and van damme's 1988 classic "black eagle" what with the black capped assault rifle carrying lackies.

black guy uses his awesome imagination and the next thing you know he's in bill murray's room killing the dude with a guitar string.

art and bohemians: 1, bill murray: 0. movie ends

4) chris doyle loves shooting ppl from the 2nd floor

5) this is a spoiler alert for (3)

6) boris and sun0))) and earth, fuck yeah!

7) i actually liked the movie

[MacGuffin]

Aformentioned friend wrote an awesome review of this on Facebook. I've gotta invite this guy sometime.

Yeah, do it. I'm glad you liked the movie.

[Melville]

Aformentioned friend wrote an awesome review of this on Facebook. I've gotta invite this guy sometime.
I'll totally rep him for that review if he joins.

[Winston*]

Hmmm. Should've been funnier.

[ledfloyd]

i loved this. loved it.

[Boner M]

i loved this. loved it.
Awesome. I think this one's rep'll increase majorly over time, Dead Man-style.

[Spinal]

Ed Gonzalez stated what I was thinking throughout the film:

Only I reckon it's more like a David Lynch film without any of the things that make David Lynch films compelling and watchable.

This was my sense of it. It was like watching someone attempt Lynch without having Lynch's gift for scenario. Or atmosphere. Or dialogue.

[Boner M]

I don't get the David Lynch comparisons... it seems that Lynch is just the default reference point for anything cryptic & mysterious. Rivette seems more apt.

[number8]

I don't get the David Lynch comparisons... it seems that Lynch is just the default reference point for anything cryptic & mysterious. Rivette seems more apt.

I'm actually gonna say Jarmusch.

It feels like a Jim Jarmusch film.

[Winston*]

I'm actually gonna say Jarmusch.

It feels like a Jim Jarmusch film.

Except more boring.

[number8]

There's no such thing as a boring Jarmusch film.

[Spinal]

I've only seen two Jarmusch films, but both have been pretty damn boring. Don't think he's for me.

[Derek]

I've only seen two Jarmusch films, but both have been pretty damn boring. Don't think he's for me.

He seems to fall squarely into the "minimalism of which Spinal cannot abide" category.

[Stay Puft]

I don't get the David Lynch comparisons... it seems that Lynch is just the default reference point for anything cryptic & mysterious. Rivette seems more apt.

Agreed.

Also, while I still enjoyed the film, Mike D'Angelo had it pegged. Or, alternately, Boner's friend summarizes it perfectly with the last line of point three.

[Rowland]

Hypnotic, preposterous, keenly self-aware, cinema as architecture, wanna watch again.

[Derek]

Hypnotic, preposterous, keenly self-aware, cinema as architecture, wanna watch again.

:pritch:

[Pop Trash]

Yeeesh, I dunno. So the cinematography and music are all tip-top (as to be expected), but it just felt like Jarmusch on auto-pilot. It's one of those movies that I 'got' early on, but had to sit there and wait for the two hours to go by to confirm what I already suspected. Some interesting ideas, but it's just such a slog to get through. The difference between this and something like say Mulholland Drive is that the surreal scenarios and vignettes in that are memorable, compelling, and emotionally gratifying. This on the other hand...

[Derek]

It's one of those movies that I 'got' early on, but had to sit there and wait for the two hours to go by to confirm what I already suspected.

I'm curious what you mean by this since the film, and most of Jarmusch, is about the journey not the destination.

[MacGuffin]

I'm curious what you mean by this since the film, and most of Jarmusch, is about the journey not the destination.

I think Pop Trash is playing the "hipster nihilism" card.

[Heidi]

The film is hypnotic. love the feeling of sitting there in a state of half-consciousness. One half of my brain was watching this movie go by, the other was all over the place in a state of erratic deep thoughts triggered by the randomness of the film. Great experience. Really enjoyed watching the main dude's hand open and close those matchboxes. Such great hands.

[ledfloyd]

The film is hypnotic. love the feeling of sitting there in a state of half-consciousness. One half of my brain was watching this movie go by, the other was all over the place in a state of erratic deep thoughts triggered by the randomness of the film. Great experience. Really enjoyed watching the main dude's hand open and close those matchboxes. Such great hands.
yes. zoning out while watching beautiful minimalist cinema is one of my favorite things.

and fwiw i found this film far more engaging that most everything else i watched last year.

[Bosco B Thug]

Aformentioned friend wrote an awesome review of this on Facebook. I've gotta invite this guy sometime.

watched limits of control today, conclusion:

1) lopsided boobs and thick rimmed glasses are pretty sweet

2)black dude taichi is pretty cool, it lets you bypass armed guards with your imagination

3) this is my plot summary for the film: black dude gets hired by bored self indulgent big name casts who sound like they are all artschool sophomores(how american of me) to go kill big bad oppressive conglomorate right-wing art culture and bohemian hating bill murray, who we assume runs the entire world(ALLEGORICAL ? YOU BET YOR ASS) .

black guy get hints and help through above mentioned sophomores by exchanging matchboxes with little notes in them carrying the serial keys for your pirated copy of assassins creed which the black guy consumes (he actually eats them) coz he's a mad HAX who drinks 2 cups of coffee, in seperate cups.this repeats for about an hour and a half then the black guy arrives at a fortress that looks like it came straight out of sho kosugi and van damme's 1988 classic "black eagle" what with the black capped assault rifle carrying lackies.

black guy uses his awesome imagination and the next thing you know he's in bill murray's room killing the dude with a guitar string.

art and bohemians: 1, bill murray: 0. movie ends

4) chris doyle loves shooting ppl from the 2nd floor

5) this is a spoiler alert for (3)

6) boris and sun0))) and earth, fuck yeah!

7) i actually liked the movie Haa, this is perfect.

I enjoyed this. First Jarmusch, besides the too-long-ago-seen Dead Man and Ghost Dog. A hypnotic and stylish film, one whose allegory is 1-2-3 connect the dots, but that's not necessarily bad when it's done poetically and affectingly, as it is here. And it's a nice one that's easy to get behind. "Art is everything"? Yeah!!