I saw this in Florida recently, and I think the trailer misrepresents the mood and tone of the movie. It’s very low-key, and there aren’t any scenes of intense drama or suspense. At least, there aren’t any like the trailer implies.
Kingofpain, as I watched trailer I had a gut feeling that the film wasn’t like that in tone, and that the studio was just trying to sell it any way to get an audience. Regardless, I heavily anticipate the much lauded film.
I caught Winter’s Bone at a film festival, and I liked it the most out of the ten features I watched. But I think that portraying it incorrectly in the trailer is going to create the wrong expectations in those who come to see it. I’m kind of pissed, actually.
Some of the worst movies I saw were voted best of festival, while Winter’s Light didn’t make the cut. I was already annoyed by that, but now there’s this idiotic trailer.
Author Daniel Woodrell is a tough-as-nails writer. I haven’t yet read this one. It’’s said to be different than his others. I strongly recommend “Give Us A Kiss”. I’ll be watching for a chance to see this.
I’m curious to hear some more reactions to this film. I just saw it and liked it well enough. I really enjoyed the gritty realism and thought that Jennifer Lawrence’s performance was quite good. Do you think that the suspense could have been dialed up a few notches or did you appreciate the low key approach that Granik used to tell this story?
I think it’s subtle approach is one of things that separates it from the run of the mill crime dramas churned out by the truckload now-a-days. It was kind of refreshing to not have some overly dramatic music telegraphing every suspenseful scene.
Overall, I didn’t think it was a great film but I do think that it worked. What do you think?
I liked it but didn’t love it. performance and images were all solid. the setting and approach may be distinct but the narrative is nothing you haven’t seen a million times before. so i’m a little surprised at the uniform critical applause but that said I’d rather this type of movie get attention than some studio concoction.
I thought this was a very strong film, especially having come out of this country—like you mentioned the lack of sentimental score greatly heightened the realism and the naturalistic performances. Where it perhaps could have transcended “strong” and moved into “relevatory” in my opinion would have been to let some of the shots, especially of the desolate landscape and let that tone sink in a bit more, give the audience more time for reflexive thought.
Given the quality of the film overall and especially the performances I wouldn’t be surprised to see it mentioned around awards time. The AMPAS awards are complete and utter bullshit, of course, but when they serve to give a small, unique (from Hollywood standards) film like this some well-deserved buzz, I’m in full support.
It’s my easy choice for film of the year so far.
I like how we get a perspective of a drug cartel from not being inside it, but being closely connected to it and isolated far from everything else. There’s a lot of implied knowledge involved. The main character knows the law isn’t going to help her, and also knows nobody is going to take a bullet for her. The criminals like her and don’t want to hurt her, but they’re also not going to take any risks to their own safety. They try to talk her down from pushing the issue because they know if they don’t, they’ll be put in a position where they have to kill her. She sees through them and forces the issue, and I really like the solution they find at the end.
Especially with the field expanded to 10 it’s almost certainly going to get a best picture nomination at the Oscars. But, it’s probably not going to win. It might end up getting some crossover exposure.
Frozen River, Ballast, and now Winter’s Bone.
The spawn of Wendy and Lucy?
I saw this on the plane over and really enjoyed it, mostly in terms of the accents and tone. If I had issue, it is that one thing I do not feel I am getting about that community is how they relate to each other outside of the conflict of this narrative; that is to say, everybody knows each other and that is clear, but it seems like they never want to talk to each other, ever, even during more peaceful times.
Anyway, otherwise I really enjoyed it and loved especially the non-actor casting. For how disturbing it is, I felt it was a very positive experience for many of the members of that community to be involved in this movie’s production. I also duly noted the Harlan County, USA references in it.
—PolarisDiB
Winter’s Bone was just ok…worth renting but nothing to write home about.
“that is to say, everybody knows each other and that is clear, but it seems like they never want to talk to each other, ever, even during more peaceful times.”
They all know each other because they are all mostly related in one sense or another. Even though they hate each other, or are at least ambivalent to each others existence, they are united by the ancient bond of “blood”—a bond which has become increasingly less relevant in the drug torn country. I lived in a relatively small country nook that was similar to the one in Winter’s Bone, in that everyone sort of knew each other without actually forming relationships (there was—and is—a huge meth problem there as well.) The older people especially still felt that invisible bond despite the fact that it was becoming increasingly irrelevant in modern society. I always found it strange that old people, whom I have never met before, could somehow recognize me in the street. Everyone knew someone that knew someone that knew me, and I think that’s how it was in Winter’s Bone. The relations that we are witnessing in the movie are merely the remnants of actually connections that have been torn apart by drugs and time.
The film reminded me of Frozen River sans a strong performance like Melissa Leo’s one. I didn’t care for the lead’s performance; I didn’t buy her toughness and her character just didn’t seem real to me. (I know people like her as well as the type of community, so maybe that had something to do with it.) The other big problem was the performance of the tough uncle. I didn’t think he was as menacing or tough as he was supposed to have been. Also, the chemistry between he and the main character wasn’t as strong as it needed to be, imo.
I was pretty disappointed by the film.
I found it powerful, bleak and – apart from the river scene (horrific) – felt it had a relentlessly low key ominous tone throughout. Not sure I found it particularly hopeful (as some of the reviews I’ve read suggest) – even though Ree ‘triumphs’ in her attempt to keep the house and family together (Lawrence’s performance was very strong, I thought), given the way the context is depicted, it feels like merely a reprieve in the midst of the dire, enduring poverty.
There were a couple of things I didn’t get though. There seemed to be some deep secret that she had to ‘let alone’ but what exactly was that? Surely not the fact that her father was mixed up in the drug trade – that was common knowledge and seemed relatively unremarkable for that community. The fact that he was dead and therefore someone was guilty of his murder? The huge animosity towards Ree seemed to be because of what her father had done – what was this exactly? His involvement with drugs? And again, was that really so remarkable?
So for me the film has a dark murky centre – which isn’t exactly inappropriate, I guess. Not sure if it’s supposed to be this dark and murky though – I have a feeling there’re a number of things i missed. Perhaps through being such an outsider to this kind of cultural context. Would be happy to receive enlightenment from anyone willing to dish it out though…
.
-The spawn of Wendy and Lucy?-
I don’t think so . . . much closer to Granik’s own Down to the Bone, which was made back in 2004.
-There seemed to be some deep secret that she had to ‘let alone’ but what exactly was that?-
It’s kind of a knot of circumstances. First of all, it’s partly just a cultural thing—many Ozark people (and many Appalachian people) tend not to be open to outsiders, Ree’s an outsider among the family and therefore wasn’t a part of that little family subculture. Ree’s father was a “crank chef” who was facing charges, and therefore he potentially could testify against the others. They don’t want her to find out he’s dead for obvious reasons. Also, they don’t want he to find out too much about the family “business,” because then she becomes a potential witness for the prosecution, too.
This is what I saw in this film which I truly love, Ana, as far as your questions are concerned. I think the secrect was the people on whose toes she was stepping on by looking for her Father. The power behind whoever was running the drug dealing in that area didn’t want him found. And the reason was their fear of her uncle. And I dissagree that the Uncles character wasn’t menacing. The guy was a bad ass who also didn’t want to know what happened to his brother because he knew his brother probably had it coming, and he had no inclination to stir up a battle over his death. But then the niece does what she does and the Uncle finds out who killed him and when the movie ends it’s pretty obvious that a lot of people are going to get whacked, maybe even the uncle.
Just finished watching it, and although I thought Jennifer Lawrence’s performance was pretty remarkable, I wasn’t entirely blown away. I loved the contemplative tone, and the composition of many of the shots, and how subtle the narrative was in its denouement. There were some great scenes in there – the one between Ree and the army recruiter was particularly poignant without being overacted. But the ending fell flat for me, especially with the gift of those chicks. So “ohmygawdsymbolism” there.
The fact that he was dead and therefore someone was guilty of his murder? The huge animosity towards Ree seemed to be because of what her father had done – what was this exactly?
Ana, I’m pretty sure that Ree’s father, in a moment of desperation and “lack of courage,” as Teardrop states it, had begun to rat out his fellow druggies to the sheriff. There’s a conversation towards the last third of the movie about snitching. The drug dealers, in retaliation, murdered Jessup. They don’t want her snooping around because they don’t want another “witness” to their crime. Someone who’ll could speak up about the murderer.
I’m pretty sure when Teardrop says that “he knows,” he’s foreshadowing his death. I loved the little things in the film like that. We need more film in America that is willing to go subtle and quiet, not bold and loud and obnoxiously obvious. Not much hand holding. This is a good step. But yeah, not jumping up and down for joy over it here.
Apurimac
It’s about time this film got its proper thread. Causing quite the stir at Sundance and Berlin, the trailer for Debra Granik’s was unveiled in the New York Times today.
(http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/456874/Winter-s-Bone/trailers?ref=movies)
Can’t wait.