PieEye said:now you see I don't get why that bit would be even close to funny.
PieEye said:of what? the film?
PieEye said:probably looked nice or something - the film was always going to be stylised - it was aping a stylised genre. Were you really surprised by that?
citydreams said:Anyway, get some sleep brainy, you done good.
Reno said:It was a gimmicky exercise in style that seemed to exist in a vacuum. Having contemporary High School students represent various Film Noir archetypes just struck me as contrived and didn't excite me very much. At times it reminded me of watching a school play. When the absurdity of the concept was played for laughs, as with the villains mother who offers orange juice during negotiations it worked, but for most of the time it did take itself far too seriously. If you've seen the films its based on you can tick of the references and I suppose it served its purpose as a Hollywood calling card for its director.
Hollis said:Jesus christ.. this thread reads like an edition of "Dinner with Portillo".. grim, grim stuff.
jodal said:I liked it. Didn't think it was pretentious really, I mean, isn't that just a label people use when they don't understand something?
jodal said:Its hard to please some people.
jms said:exactly. bits of this thread read like fucking newsnight review, just criticising something for the sake of it.
Reno said:Generally people don't criticise for the sake of it, but because they find fault with something. This process is part of what is known as having a discussion.
There is no general consensus that Brick is a good film so get over yourself.