Snow/Movies/RV/Blessings

[tvguy]

By the way, TV, when I asked "Why does this movie exist?"  What I'm really asking is: Why is this a story that needs telling?"  Other than a showpiece for Afflecks incredibly nuanced acting, I can't answer that question.

Interesting. Why does any story (movie, book, play, etc.) exist? Many times we learn about "the human condition" by well written and scripted fiction. 

The Scarlet Letter, The Red Bad of Courage, The Grapes of Wrath, The Angle of Repose, American Pastoral, and To Kill A Mockingbird, maybe represent some fiction revealing things we might otherwise not be aware of. 

Movies too, provide that and often in living color and portrayed vividly by actors who give us clear understanding of the characters and the importance of the theme or story being told. 

And of course, before all that, Shakespeare! Persons knowing at least one line from a Shakespeare play is better for it.

Interesting for you to make comparison to some of those stories. I haven't read all of them but the ones I have had conclusions. They told a story and it meant something in the end. Transformation is a wonderful theme and I do love it. One of my favorite things in a story.  And for me it makes the reason for the story is apparent. They were not simply illustrations of the human condition. Not for me anyway. To me, this film is a story that shows only the condition but no story, other than how he got there.  So, from a purely existential POV I guess it hits it mark. Kind of like EraserHead. (that's a bit of a referential joke) To me, that's a huge difference.  Two of my favorite films of 2015 fascinated me simply because of their approach to viewing "the human condition".  Those being Room and Love and Mercy. One had strong themes regarding mental illness and was so well done that when I saw it in the theater I felt like I was going crazy with Brian Wilson. That says a lot about the film maker and the actor. The other is about what is reality?  And the theme of change and emergence and transformation, some of my favorite themes.  My point in asking why this story exists, is because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone. And Affleck is brilliant, BUT, and for that I question it's reason for being told other than to showcase his acting ability and the film makers art.  Then it's about their art and not the story if you can see what I mean...so the film stands as a tribute to an art form but not for the story itself.

I like your reviews

because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone

Now after reading that who isn't rushing to the theater?

[Juniper]

By the way, TV, when I asked "Why does this movie exist?"  What I'm really asking is: Why is this a story that needs telling?"  Other than a showpiece for Afflecks incredibly nuanced acting, I can't answer that question.

Interesting. Why does any story (movie, book, play, etc.) exist? Many times we learn about "the human condition" by well written and scripted fiction. 

The Scarlet Letter, The Red Bad of Courage, The Grapes of Wrath, The Angle of Repose, American Pastoral, and To Kill A Mockingbird, maybe represent some fiction revealing things we might otherwise not be aware of. 

Movies too, provide that and often in living color and portrayed vividly by actors who give us clear understanding of the characters and the importance of the theme or story being told. 

And of course, before all that, Shakespeare! Persons knowing at least one line from a Shakespeare play is better for it.

Interesting for you to make comparison to some of those stories. I haven't read all of them but the ones I have had conclusions. They told a story and it meant something in the end. Transformation is a wonderful theme and I do love it. One of my favorite things in a story.  And for me it makes the reason for the story is apparent. They were not simply illustrations of the human condition. Not for me anyway. To me, this film is a story that shows only the condition but no story, other than how he got there.  So, from a purely existential POV I guess it hits it mark. Kind of like EraserHead. (that's a bit of a referential joke) To me, that's a huge difference.  Two of my favorite films of 2015 fascinated me simply because of their approach to viewing "the human condition".  Those being Room and Love and Mercy. One had strong themes regarding mental illness and was so well done that when I saw it in the theater I felt like I was going crazy with Brian Wilson. That says a lot about the film maker and the actor. The other is about what is reality?  And the theme of change and emergence and transformation, some of my favorite themes.  My point in asking why this story exists, is because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone. And Affleck is brilliant, BUT, and for that I question it's reason for being told other than to showcase his acting ability and the film makers art.  Then it's about their art and not the story if you can see what I mean...so the film stands as a tribute to an art form but not for the story itself.

I like your reviews

because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone

Now after reading that who isn't rushing to the theater?

Hey, I'll tell you when I think it's worth it.  After seeing this and appreciating it, truly, I still don't think it was worth the price of a ticket. BTW, apparently I wasn't the only one who thought so based on the comments I heard from other patrons.

[tvguy]

By the way, TV, when I asked "Why does this movie exist?"  What I'm really asking is: Why is this a story that needs telling?"  Other than a showpiece for Afflecks incredibly nuanced acting, I can't answer that question.

Interesting. Why does any story (movie, book, play, etc.) exist? Many times we learn about "the human condition" by well written and scripted fiction. 

The Scarlet Letter, The Red Bad of Courage, The Grapes of Wrath, The Angle of Repose, American Pastoral, and To Kill A Mockingbird, maybe represent some fiction revealing things we might otherwise not be aware of. 

Movies too, provide that and often in living color and portrayed vividly by actors who give us clear understanding of the characters and the importance of the theme or story being told. 

And of course, before all that, Shakespeare! Persons knowing at least one line from a Shakespeare play is better for it.

Interesting for you to make comparison to some of those stories. I haven't read all of them but the ones I have had conclusions. They told a story and it meant something in the end. Transformation is a wonderful theme and I do love it. One of my favorite things in a story.  And for me it makes the reason for the story is apparent. They were not simply illustrations of the human condition. Not for me anyway. To me, this film is a story that shows only the condition but no story, other than how he got there.  So, from a purely existential POV I guess it hits it mark. Kind of like EraserHead. (that's a bit of a referential joke) To me, that's a huge difference.  Two of my favorite films of 2015 fascinated me simply because of their approach to viewing "the human condition".  Those being Room and Love and Mercy. One had strong themes regarding mental illness and was so well done that when I saw it in the theater I felt like I was going crazy with Brian Wilson. That says a lot about the film maker and the actor. The other is about what is reality?  And the theme of change and emergence and transformation, some of my favorite themes.  My point in asking why this story exists, is because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone. And Affleck is brilliant, BUT, and for that I question it's reason for being told other than to showcase his acting ability and the film makers art.  Then it's about their art and not the story if you can see what I mean...so the film stands as a tribute to an art form but not for the story itself.

I like your reviews

because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone

Now after reading that who isn't rushing to the theater?

Hey, I'll tell you when I think it's worth it.  After seeing this and appreciating it, truly, I still don't think it was worth the price of a ticket. BTW, apparently I wasn't the only one who thought so based on the comments I heard from other patrons.

It seems like it's not uncommon for a movie that I thought was a POS to get good or even great reviews. I'm just not deep enough or others like to pretend they are. Or a little of both

[Juniper]

Interesting. Why does any story (movie, book, play, etc.) exist? Many times we learn about "the human condition" by well written and scripted fiction. 

The Scarlet Letter, The Red Bad of Courage, The Grapes of Wrath, The Angle of Repose, American Pastoral, and To Kill A Mockingbird, maybe represent some fiction revealing things we might otherwise not be aware of. 

Movies too, provide that and often in living color and portrayed vividly by actors who give us clear understanding of the characters and the importance of the theme or story being told. 

And of course, before all that, Shakespeare! Persons knowing at least one line from a Shakespeare play is better for it.

Interesting for you to make comparison to some of those stories. I haven't read all of them but the ones I have had conclusions. They told a story and it meant something in the end. Transformation is a wonderful theme and I do love it. One of my favorite things in a story.  And for me it makes the reason for the story is apparent. They were not simply illustrations of the human condition. Not for me anyway. To me, this film is a story that shows only the condition but no story, other than how he got there.  So, from a purely existential POV I guess it hits it mark. Kind of like EraserHead. (that's a bit of a referential joke) To me, that's a huge difference.  Two of my favorite films of 2015 fascinated me simply because of their approach to viewing "the human condition".  Those being Room and Love and Mercy. One had strong themes regarding mental illness and was so well done that when I saw it in the theater I felt like I was going crazy with Brian Wilson. That says a lot about the film maker and the actor. The other is about what is reality?  And the theme of change and emergence and transformation, some of my favorite themes.  My point in asking why this story exists, is because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone. And Affleck is brilliant, BUT, and for that I question it's reason for being told other than to showcase his acting ability and the film makers art.  Then it's about their art and not the story if you can see what I mean...so the film stands as a tribute to an art form but not for the story itself.

I like your reviews

because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone

Now after reading that who isn't rushing to the theater?

Hey, I'll tell you when I think it's worth it.  After seeing this and appreciating it, truly, I still don't think it was worth the price of a ticket. BTW, apparently I wasn't the only one who thought so based on the comments I heard from other patrons.

It seems like it's not uncommon for a movie that I thought was a POS to get good or even great reviews. I'm just not deep enough or others like to pretend they are. Or a little of both

Yeah, I've run into movies with great reviews that I hated or at least didn't like and movies that I loved getting poor reviews. This movie deserves it's reviews. That doesn't mean it's a good movie and I recommend seeing it. Does that make sense?

[Wonky3]

By the way, TV, when I asked "Why does this movie exist?"  What I'm really asking is: Why is this a story that needs telling?"  Other than a showpiece for Afflecks incredibly nuanced acting, I can't answer that question.

Interesting. Why does any story (movie, book, play, etc.) exist? Many times we learn about "the human condition" by well written and scripted fiction. 

The Scarlet Letter, The Red Bad of Courage, The Grapes of Wrath, The Angle of Repose, American Pastoral, and To Kill A Mockingbird, maybe represent some fiction revealing things we might otherwise not be aware of. 

Movies too, provide that and often in living color and portrayed vividly by actors who give us clear understanding of the characters and the importance of the theme or story being told. 

And of course, before all that, Shakespeare! Persons knowing at least one line from a Shakespeare play is better for it.

Interesting for you to make comparison to some of those stories. I haven't read all of them but the ones I have had conclusions. They told a story and it meant something in the end. Transformation is a wonderful theme and I do love it. One of my favorite things in a story.  And for me it makes the reason for the story is apparent. They were not simply illustrations of the human condition. Not for me anyway. To me, this film is a story that shows only the condition but no story, other than how he got there.  So, from a purely existential POV I guess it hits it mark. Kind of like EraserHead. (that's a bit of a referential joke) To me, that's a huge difference.  Two of my favorite films of 2015 fascinated me simply because of their approach to viewing "the human condition".  Those being Room and Love and Mercy. One had strong themes regarding mental illness and was so well done that when I saw it in the theater I felt like I was going crazy with Brian Wilson. That says a lot about the film maker and the actor. The other is about what is reality?  And the theme of change and emergence and transformation, some of my favorite themes.  My point in asking why this story exists, is because it is simply a story of misery with no redemption, no conclusion. Therefore, it becomes a study in that alone. And Affleck is brilliant, BUT, and for that I question it's reason for being told other than to showcase his acting ability and the film makers art.  Then it's about their art and not the story if you can see what I mean...so the film stands as a tribute to an art form but not for the story itself.

Good points, all Tia. Without a "spoiler" I can't reply to a few of the things I thought I saw as "the human condition" and I thought it had a theme of "redemption" of sorts. 
Better we continue this in a couple of months so we don't spoil it for others. 
But, like all art, it's subjective and we all come to it with our own attitudes and leave with our own impressions. Your take on this is certainly as valid as mine! 

PS: Tia, if you have Netlix streaming I'd like to suggest you watch "Blue Jay" and let me know what you think. Opps...can't stop now: Also maybe watch "Learning to Drive" and see what you think.

[Valuesize]

This HAD to be the worst movie thread of all time.

[Juniper]

This HAD to be the worst movie thread of all time.

Question:  Why?

And question 2.  Are you going to help it get better?