Brack

Shannon Nutt

Finally saw BOYHOOD over the weekend. It's a good movie, but it's not a GREAT movie, and I feel confident in saying it wouldn't even be in the awards hunt if not for the method in which it was filmed. I hate to say it's all about the 'gimmick', but it really is all about the gimmick. This movie would not even be talked about had they used makeup to age the actors and shot the same story within a few months' time.

Defiant1

It wouldn't be the same movie if they had filmed it that way. I think seeing characters age 12 years right in front of you is supposed to get you to think about 12 years in your own life, particularly your childhood years. Resonance and all that.

Trevor

Plenty of movies span many years and make you reflect on aging. Most of them just use makeup, effects, and/or different actors to show the process. This one had a unique process, but wasn't really a good movie. If I didn't know the 'gimmick' going in, I would have assumed it was just the usual processes.

Jay G.

Seriously? For the adults, maybe somebody could assume makeup, but I don't know of any "usual processes" that can do this:




It seems like people that don't like the film feel like they have to downplay the "gimmick" somehow. The decision to film over 12 years was a bold, daring move, and it provided a level of realism not possible any other way. That doesn't necessarily mean it resulted in a good movie, but it doesn't make the method the movie was filmed less impressive.

Trevor

Did you miss my 'different actors'? But yeah, I never said the process he used wasn't impressive. I think it's a great experiment and glad it was done.

Jay G.

Nope. Different actors wouldn't work because the changes are gradual and subtle. The point of the image was to show that the child actors slowly change appearance while recognizably remaining the same person.

Using different actors for different ages is an effective shorthand, but it's typically not fooling anyone.

Trevor

Meh. I bet half the public would have assumed different actors/makeup if the movie was shown to them blind.

Jay G.

That's just pointless conjecture.

Trevor

Isn't everything?

Jay G.

No, some things are pointless opinions.

rbrown498

I've been wondering ever since I saw Boyhood why I didn't connect with the film. Generally speaking, I enjoy Richard Linklater's films (Dazed and Confused is one of my ten favorite movies ever, and Bernie is one of my favorite films of the past five years), but this one just didn't grab me at all. At first I chalked it up to not really liking the character of Mason as he grew older, but it seemed that there was more to my distaste for the film than that. And then I read this article, and it summed up my feelings for the film perfectly, even though I hadn't been able to articulate them.

I also think that the film's characters are such relatively blank cyphers that those who are finding a deeper meaning in the film are possibly projecting aspects of themselves onto one or more characters and "seeing" profundity when there actually isn't that much there. Of course, this happens to a degree with every film, but it seems to be much more at play in Boyhood than in, for example, The Grand Budapest Hotel or The Imitation Game. I'm not saying that there's anything necessarily wrong with that, but it just didn't work for me in this instance.

I don't want to give the impression that I hated the film; there's still a lot to admire in it, but it's not something that I want to watch again anytime soon.

james2025a

People are finding deep meaning in this movie? It was barely one dimensional. And that article summed it up very well. I think the problem is that a lot of people are like sheep and feel the need to agree when something is told to them. The more i think about this movie, the more i truly hated it. People defending the movie and saying it is not run by a gimmick are only lying to themselves. And i don't think its that much of an achievement to have filmed it over 12 years. If anything, i think its easier for the film maker telling this "story."

Trevor

I'd completely agree with that article, but it'd just be a pointless opinion.

RichC2

No, I find most people will bitch and moan the second somebody suggests that something is "Great" and they disagree with it. Some people connect with movies, other people don't. Movies like this: the slice of life, plotless "growing" experience is something that either works for you or it doesn't. Not entirely unlike Chef or The Station Agent, though those were both better than Boyhood.

SuperJim88

I'm pretty sure this thread wouldn't have been 200+ posts long had it not been nominated in the Best Picture category and is currently projected to win. Which is fucking ludicrous. It is this perceived greatness that's causing the most uproar.

johnnysd

That article is complete nonsense. Nothing says he has to like the film. But his reasons are just lame, essentially saying the movie isn't good because it was not the film he wanted to see and not dramatic enough and there has to be an arc that leads the protagonist to do something, well dramatic. Horse swaddle.

Shannon Nutt

Actually, BIRDMAN is now the odds-on favorite.

EinCB

I finally saw this today. For all the critical acclaim this movie has received, it did pretty much nothing for me. There was some aspects in the movie that I, too, have experienced. However, I felt like the major difference between Mason and me is that I learned from my experiences. Does Mason?


I didn't come away enlightened, I suppose. It felt like, "Here's a scene. Okay, let's move on." I couldn't relate to this film. There are films that I absolutely love because I relate to them on a personal level. This wasn't one of them. Sorry if I'm not articulate enough.

JaxComet

Cool gimmick but a very average film........