I see those as more of the documentary style where the camera is a character. In
Match Point,
the camera is just kind of
there,
not making any sort of comment. The editing is part of it, too, the way you get short scenes that don't really have anything to do with anything but are just a snapshot of what the character is doing at a particular time. It's a technique that irritated me in
Lost in Translation
for some reason but worked for me here. I could get into the slow burn much more easily. I'm not sure what it is. I'm more fascinated by the filmmaking than the film itself.
I really liked Ebert's review. He does acknowledge that the movie is short on character development, which I noticed as well. He also quite astutely points out that it's basically a noir flick.
I loved Match Point. It's the first movie I can recall that I went into knowing absolutely nothing about it, not even what kind of movie it was. Though I was told at the opening that it was Woody Allen, so I wasn't waiting for the spaceships, at least.
I loved the way it was shot, and the lack of character development seemed absolutely right; it was about people who don't ever develop any character and basically never change. And I totally loved that
he got away with it, completely. No repercussions, only the briefest battle with guilt, no suspicion, nothing. It's so rare that a movie's "moral" point is, sometimes you get away with it, even when you don't deserve to.
Loved how the voiceover at the beginning with the tennis ball going back and forth and tipping off the net was echoed later in the ring tipping off the fence, and
how it didn't mean what I thought it did.
And how the movie's structure gives no hint that he won't, in fact, finally
get away with it all.
What you, P.-C., said about the "narratorless" way it was shot, the camera giving no comment, makes me think, now, that that style was chosen to give the feeling that there was no external moral POV, that there was no all-seeing observer with an opinion, no God, in essence, who would make it all work out "right". As the friend said, sometimes you're just lucky.
In conclusion, let's go make out at the movies.
I agree with everything you just said. Well, almost. I do now, I think. At first, the fact that
he got away with it so completely left me feeling cold and slightly angry.
But as I read more discussions of the movie, I realize that's totally the point, and it's exactly what should happen. I also loved that the ring, which was used as the marketing tool,
didn't mean what the audience would obviously assume it would mean. I mean, can you believe his luck?!
About the lack of character development, I think the characters weren't that fleshed out to begin with. It left me confused about their motivations.
I was confused about their motivations until I realized (I decided, anyway) that they were actually just that shallow and had simple motivations. The only one I remain uncertain about was the main guy, wondering how much of what happened he planned in advance, and how much was just taking advantage of opportunities that came along. It seemed to me that he'd have to be so empty, to be capable of feigning so many emotions for so long and never cracking and letting the real ones through. If any of the other characters had had complicated scheming minds of their own,they wouldn't all have trusted him so completely. None of them ever had a suspicion.
Oh, I think what we saw was what we got with Chris. He just floated along, reacting. He pretty much did whatever he felt would allow him to come out ahead.
I think you're right. I don't think he had any deep emotions or deep thoughts. He got lucky so many times, too, really, not just the once.
I loved the poor detective. He was brilliant, and right, and he'll never even know it.
Remarkably, this wasn't produced by Sci-Fi. But I'll bet they air it, bless them.
The movie tells how a reckless genetic engineering experiment goes horribly wrong and a flock of innocent sheep is transformed into a pack of blood-thirsty killers.
[link]
Just saw The Matador LOVED it. Hated the 'stache.
I just got back from seeing the big gay pirate movie #2! And I loved it!
How many people sat through the entire credits to see the extra scene?
I did poorly on quiz 1, got all but 14, 21, 23 and 30 on quiz 2. There's a third one?
