a quick review of rotten tomatoes' critics' blurbs seems to defy my initial thought that reviews might split based on the gender of the reviewer, but they DO seem to split based on the critic's view of whether the film is a rumination on the pain of being a trapped female (like Ebert's) or an anti-feminist piece of trash intended only to satiate womens' interest in seeing lots of pretty shoes (i.e., http://www.slate.com/id/2151855/nav/tap1/ ). aren't lots of films blatantly sexist, but reviews actually deal with more than the 'political message' in reviewing them? it seems to me sh'es getting a short stick, because just b/c she's a female, her films can be about and appeal entirely and only to females, and therefore the sole determinant of goodness is whether it's pre- or anti- post- or post-post or, ha, post postpost-femininist??? ( http://www.ew.com/ew/article/review/movie/0,6115,1547540_1_0_,00.html )

Does the movie have a lot of pretty shoes? Because if so, I'm in.

i knew you were gay!

Flea, regardless of the director's intentions, woman or man, the movie looks somewhat dull to me. I feel like I can read about the movie and more or less have seen it. Perhaps I am wrong... As a side note, I saw the Prestige last night, I won't say much except that I was disappointed.

on a serious note, i haven't seen it yet, and i'm waaaay backed up on movies to see (science of sleep and the departed included), but i am still going to flat out proclaim my annoyance that anyone would ever look at the story of marie antoinette as any kind of feminist parable whatsoever. i don't care if she was purchased, exploited, treated poorly, beaten, raped, or beheaded: the idea, concept, and existence of royalty has been one of the most detrimental institutions in the history of the human race, and they all deserve(d) to be murdered by the oppressed. so, i don't care how many smiths songs sofia uses, i ain't gonna feel bad for the bitch.

ps i hope it's good. i'd hate to think lost in translation was a fluke.

pps the prestige looks nearly identical to capote. i mean, the illusionist.

What, you haven't seen The Departed yet, jbg? But it's about Boston!

Hi Slater - I agree. It looks a bit dull to me too, but I may still watch it. (I like shoes.) I just wish the negative reviews would say "it's dull" instead of "it's a flawed feminist parable."

But I'm concerned about your tepid Prestige review!!! NOoooooo! Did you see other Nolan films (Batman Begins, Momento), and did you like them?

i been busy! it's at somerville, so i'll probably go soon.

Got ya on the Marie Antionette reviews, Flea-- I have not looked at them
too closely, but I would find that type of view annoying-- unless, of course, I actually saw the film and agreed.

I did not like Lost in Translation though-- so because I read that Sofia Coppola viewed her three films as a trilogy, I can sense what MA is like. Probably just some backlash on the part of reviewers as Coppola has attracted a lot of attention recently and has the courage to do things a little bit differently.

In any case, I have seen Nolan's other films (Batman and Memento). Liked Batman a lot, pretty lukewarm on Memento. I'm pretty critical of films though (much like the crazymonk).

liked batman a lot, lukewarm on memento? i have a hard time getting that. one's a really interesting, complex story innovatively told, and the other's about a guy in a rubber suit. not that i didn't like it, but still.

I agree with JBG, Batman and Memento were pretty much identical. If you liked one, you should haved liked the other an identical amount.

I disagree. Memento was good, but its complexity felt more like gimmickry at times. Batman was a damn good superhero movie. They're two different genres, and one could easily like one and not the other. And don't forget about Insomnia, which I also liked.

I just saw The Prestige. Unlike Slater, I was not disappointed. I thought it was compelling and fun. I'll write something about it soon.

Wow, I'm surprised crazymonk... I will look forward to your thoughts... I guess it did provide a lot to talk about, but in my view not in a good way.

As for Batman, Memento, and the Prestige-- I think Nolan's films are largely about how he as director can establish a distinct, mysterious mood to frame his stories. Batman provided a backdrop of urban decay and hope that was fascinating and gritty, whereas Memento established a mood but became somewhat dull mid-movie with its one-trick pony plot device.

The Prestige seems mired in a similar Memento-like plot device-- where we are led to believe that the end of the film will bring everything full circle and show the director's brilliance. Unfortunately, the ending was not intended to be open-ended (like I think Memento was) and left me with questions about the plot and characters that were not compelling but instead rather directed toward the many flaws of the story's continuity and details. There was not a backdrop to the story that helped the movie succeed beyond its foreground.

"wait - so the cops KNEW that internal affairs was setting them up?!"

The Departed fucking blew.
I wonder if it's worth pointing out that the first of SC's movies was based on a book written by a man? Or are we just supposed to redirect the conversation altogether? Haven't seen Marie Antoinette, and probably will just wait until I can rent it. The thing that bothers me about SC is not so much to do with her, but with what seems to me to be a general consensus that she's a bigger risk-taker than I really think she is. Her movies aren't wierd enough to appeal to my no-holds-barred love of well-applied wierdness, nor are they populist enough to be a balance of true wierdness and true accessibility. Is that fair to say? It's been a long time since I've seen or read Virgin Suicides, but I seem to remember the book being much darker, more chilling, affectingly wierd than the movie.