127 Hours (Danny Boyle)

[Watashi]

I don't know. Probably? Eventually? I know a mouse would.

You know? A mouse is dumb enough to fall for a mousetrap. Why would a mouse chew its arm off in that situation? The mouse would probably die.

[Barty]

I don't know. Probably? Eventually? I know a mouse would.

That's the point, that's what makes humans interesting, the same stimuli can produce vastly different outcomes among different people. Hence the reason comparing a mouse to this movie is not apt.

Also, the rock would crush the mouse and be dead.

[DavidSeven]

You know? A mouse is dumb enough to fall for a mousetrap. Why would a mouse chew its arm off in that situation? The mouse would probably die.

Your understanding of mice rivals your understanding of this movie.

[Watashi]

Your understanding of mice rivals your understanding of this movie.

I didn't realize you were such an expert of mice being crushed by rocks.

[DavidSeven]

The film is a chaotic mishmash of no storytelling, rapid storytelling, internal examination, disorienting frustration and jubilant moments. In short, it felt like I was inhibiting the chaotic mind of Ralston and was enraptured throughout.

The film succeeds precisely because it puts the audience in the mind and even body of Ralston, producing a roller coaster like effect of jarring experiences. I didn't think for example the amputation scene was graphically gory, but thanks to Franco's and Boyle's direction was nearly physical shaking from unease, something that never happens to me. I couldn't shake the thought what if I was there trapped, and imagining myself doing the same.

In short, it worked for me, because it's meant to be an experience and I got one. There's no such thing as an "objective" observer here.

I don't think we really get into Ralston's mind. I think we get in the mind of Danny Boyle as photographer of nature and inanimate objects. Some people connect with the emotional experience of this film. Fine, I accept that. I don't think it has much to say, and I think Boyle's aesthetic is garbage. It's a paper thin story with often distracting direction. If the scenario enthralls you in itself or if Franco wins you over by himself, fine. But I just don't think Boyle has done anything substantial here. Subjectively, of course.

[Pop Trash]

I have a feeling this will be like Into the Wild where people on M.C. will beat it up, but everyone in real life I talk to will love it.

[Derek]

I have a feeling this will be like Into the Wild where people on M.C. will beat it up, but everyone in real life I talk to will love it.

1) I liked Into the Wild and so did at least a few other MCers.

2) People in real life have shitty taste in movies. I'd trust MatchCut 10 times out of 10.

[DavidSeven]

I think Boyle's own Slumdog is the right analogy. 94% Tomatometer; mostly derided on Match-Cut. I mean, if you didn't like Boyle's direction there, I can't see how you would like this. I predict the less populist leaning MCers would hate it, but you never know. I've definitely played the part of lone dissenter before.

[Ezee E]

See, there is a little more to the movie then just an escape from a rock. Ralston's first thoughts of death occur to him during this time. What he screwed up on in life, and the type of life he never got to have. This affected me greatly.

I will say that the movie makes him out to be more of a douche then he really is, and definitely doesn't show how smart he was from the beginning.

[Spinal]

I like Danny Boyle. I liked Slumdog Millionaire. I have zero interest in this movie.

[Watashi]

Match-Cut and I often don't see eye to eye. I didn't expect much from the movie given the fading respect of Danny Boyle, but I was won over. I don't expect many people to follow.

[Watashi]

I think Boyle's own Slumdog is the right analogy. 94% Tomatometer; mostly derided on Match-Cut. I mean, if you didn't like Boyle's direction there, I can't see how you would like this. I predict the less populist leaning MCers would hate it, but you never know. I've definitely played the part of lone dissenter before.

Boyle's direction is the same in Trainspotting and 28 Days Later and I love those movies. It's not like he amped up his style for Slumdog. He's been doing this since day one.

[Rowland]

1) I liked Into the Wild and so did at least a few other MCers.

Yep, it was one of my favorites from that year, and I believe it occupied Trans' top spot.

[Boner M]

Yep, it was one of my favorites from that year

Me too.

[number8]

I like A Life Less Ordinary.

[Raiders]

I like A Life Less Ordinary.

Ew.

I will definitely see this as I usually like every other Boyle film and I was "meh" on Slumdog so who knows.

[Pop Trash]

I have zero interest in this movie.

Not enough sexy lesbians?

[Ezee E]

I wrote somewhere on this site that I predicted that Match Cut would hate this movie. We'll see if everyone else follows D7.

[DavidSeven]

Boyle's direction is the same in Trainspotting and 28 Days Later and I love those movies. It's not like he amped up his style for Slumdog. He's been doing this since day one.

Hm. I don't know about that. I really like both of those films as well. It's been a while since I've seen either, but I remember the style of those films being different. Yeah, his style has been frenetic from day one, but it seemed more grounded in a a reality based aesthetic, almost verite-ish with a more active camera. Slumdog felt like a departure or perhaps an "evolution." More overtly polished -- almost like a TV commercial or music video aesthetic. So yeah, I do think he's "amped" up his style in some regard. Haven't seen Sunshine.

[Ezee E]

A Life Less Ordinary might be the most eccentric Boyle movie.

[NickGlass]

Hm, this is a tricky one--not because it's difficult to grasp, but because Boyle does too much visually and too little thematically. And, consequently, I was intrigued but never truly moved. His excessive, but not particularly audacious, cinematic techniques--some that work, a handful that don't--are compelling whether they're inspired or miscalculated. Even with built-in ideas, it all feels so surface-y.

Franco does a fine job at enacting whatever each scene calls for--sort of like a two-week acting program where one day you have to experience "anguish," the next "hunger," then "delirious absurdist comedy," then "self-realization." Speaking of self-awareness, the one moment that comes to a thematic head--a quick montage and monologue that feels too prepackaged and neat--basically espouses a lame, repurposed summation on fate and regret. Stop that, Danny! Memory is a rich theme--work with it.

[Boner M]

I liked it. Like Into the Wild, it feels exactly like the movie it's subject would've made of his experiences, and all the better for it. The overly celebratory ending and Sigur Ros-scores uplift at the end is a bit much, and Buried is still the better hot-dude-in-a-tight-spot movie of 2010, but I have no problem with the accolades this one's getting either.

[Boner M]

The film is a chaotic mishmash of no storytelling, rapid storytelling, internal examination, disorienting frustration and jubilant moments. In short, it felt like I was inhibiting the chaotic mind of Ralston and was enraptured throughout.

The film succeeds precisely because it puts the audience in the mind and even body of Ralston, producing a roller coaster like effect of jarring experiences. I didn't think for example the amputation scene was graphically gory, but thanks to Franco's and Boyle's direction was nearly physical shaking from unease, something that never happens to me. I couldn't shake the thought what if I was there trapped, and imagining myself doing the same.

In short, it worked for me, because it's meant to be an experience and I got one. There's no such thing as an "objective" observer here.

Good post.

[DavidSeven]

Gotta say, I'm surprised at Nick and Boner's enthusiasm for the film, tempered as it is (much more in Nick's case). I can accept (though might not agree) that Boyle effectively transports you into this experience, but is there anything significant to be gleaned from that or is the transportation in itself enough? Is the simple fact that he got you to the "experience" the mark of success? Are you taking shots now? FYI -- I'm seriously asking myself if that's fair approach to take. Maybe I need to see Avatar. Didn't see Into the Wild either BTW.

[Boner M]

Is the simple fact that he got you to the "experience" the mark of success?

Actually, yeah. I appreciate this kind of filmmaking, that's dedicated above all things - even at the expense of some things - to relating a perspective or experience. I like survival stories, and their innate ability to offer space for emotional projection onto their prolonged depiction of physical processes (thus, the weakest parts here are the flashbacks). The film doesn't always work, but its flaws are the result of overreaching, which are the best kind of flaws. And yeah, Franco anchors everything beautifully. I suppose the 'man vs. nature' and 'indomitability of the human spirit' themes are pretty tired, but I think Boyle breathes life into them. It all felt very alive, and recognisably human - in a way that Slumdog Millionaire didn't.