I actually saw it last night. And while it is fairly entertaining in the moment, it’s a pretty stupid film in my opinion and I don’t think I’ll ever want to watch it again. I don’t really get all the hype about it.
Yeah.. I couldn’t help but notice it follows in the same tread marks. Well crafted film, but I felt it missed the mark it was aiming for. The theme of aging backwards was as much of a weakness as a strength. It inspired me to feel and to think at various points, but not exactly in alignment with the film.. or rather, not in the direction the film was tugging.
It’s written completely with very little help from Fincher by Eric Roth, the writer of Forrest Gump.Roth lost his mother during the process of writing the script. I saw it yesterday after nearly surviving a riot in the local megaplex and enjoyed it thoroughly. I have always hoped Fincher would evolve to the state of Auteur, and with this film, in my eye he has. I felt it was a celebration of death, one far superior in emotion than Synecdoche, New York; which just left me leaving the film feeling like shit. Sure Benny Button is more audience friendly and not as thought-provoking, but I still felt enthralled with life and love after it. Oh, and the Buttons! THE BUTTONS! Best opening studio logos, ever.
One of the first things I said after seeing the film was that it’s a more mature version of Forrest Gump. Yet, that doesn’t mean it’s better :)
I found it to be a goofy melodrama full of ridiculous accents that seemed to come and go as they pleased, over the top effects, and one of the most offensive uses of hurricane Katrina I could imagine.
I was expecting high-class magical realism, and I was disappointed in nearly all ways.
I saw the film about a month ago at a press screening, so while nothing has really stuck with me (the film wasn’t ‘fantastic’) I do remember that the film did feel a bit like a recreation of Forrest Gump. I also hated how both films exploit historical events for eye candy. Isn’t there any originality anymore?
To be quite cynical:
David Fincher’s doing this to get his Oscar; Brad Pitt: “me too”; the cinematography was replete with bloom and absent purpose; it was a mediocre film with production values high enough to make the willfully believeing viewer forget his/her life for 168 minutes.
Regarding Forrest Gump , it’ s a lesser film than Forrest Gump . While the latter is inclined towards social commentary and a survey of three decades of American history in a semi-subjective manner and how it got where it was. The former was just… A story. Or, as I would say, the attempt and waste of a story from an otherwise interesting concept.
Yet again Fincher’s craft is impeccable, there are certain “gump” traits that beg to be noticed.Curious case if a mix of a good chunk of entertainment factor, a little bit of leisure factor, great deal of emotional factor and overall for Fincher, for Brad Pitt, for Cate Blanchett – don’t miss it!
It was ok. There were many unnecessary sequences. I got a “Big Fish” feel from the film, which I found to be very annoying. But I sat through it and found it entertaining, in a “brain-fart” type of way. Not a big fan of Fincher.
I’m going to go ahead and disagree with you all and say I loved it. It had problems yes, but I can’t remember the last time I loved an on screen pair as much as I loved Daisy and Benjamin. Call me a sentimental fool, but I was crying at the end, and various parts in the middle. It might not have been perfect, but it swept me away in the story to the point where I didn’t care if some of the plot devices were cliche’s or if it wasn’t ocean-deep. I’m glad I haven’t become cynical enough to the point where I can’t become engrossed in a films story and characters like I was during this movie.
@Atlussaga – personally for me it was like an emotional rollercoaster too, i did not go into a movie theater expecting a bad or a good movie so in a way it turned out good for me….though a little slackened pace in the first hour, could not complain about anything else, also I see a oscar nominee in Brad Pitt.
and @Akash I agree with your thoughts on Fincher and Synecdoche
I don’t think many people get that this is a fantasy film about love and loss, one far more meticulously detailed than both Gump’s harrowing journey and Big Fish’s whimsical, muddled desires, and not a high-art realist piece attempting to show the emptiness of one’s life. No, this is a fucking party and the weird looking kid just trying to walk is in the center of it. But there is the Katrina reference, the decay of America, which is so powerfully pulling the film along. Doom is written all over the film, yet a sense of hope echoes past it.
XXXX: “I also hated how both films exploit historical events for eye candy. Isn’t there any originality anymore?”
What does that mean? Eye candy? So when Forrest picked up the book that the young black girl dropped while she was walking into a recently unsegregated school, that’s eye candy? Or that Benjamin was born the day of the end of the Great War, that’s eye candy? The comedic scenes, like Gump meeting Kennedy, I can understand, but if anything, that just getting a laugh out of the audience.
I just got back from seeing Button, and while I wouldn’t compare anything except the on-again, off-again romance to Gump, I really didn’t care for it, much for the same reason that I didn’t care for Gump: they are both way too sentimental for their own good.
Also, the Katrina thing was hopelessly stupid and tacked on. Really, they should have left out the hospital nonsense altogether.
@sacredaho, the one thing I did not like about Button is the hospital situation.