JENNIFER'S BODY Post-Release - Page 3

I remember that happening with Swingers. That really was annoying. Can't say Juno had that effect. Though I wasn't in college anymore when that came out.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/20...ODY/Page1.html

My ultra-late review.

Though I've mostly come to have forgotten I'd even seen the movie, I think your review did a great job reminding me of the movie's strengths. The relationship between Needy and Jennifer had promise to be more interesting which could've allowed the moment of Needy ripping the BFF locket off of Jennifer to hit harder.

I avoided this for a few reasons:

1) I truly hated Juno

2) The ads made it look stupid and generic

3) That line that is in EVERY ad for the film..."I'm not going to bite...YOUUUU"
just sounds awful and seemed to indicate to me some shoddy writing and acting.

4) I can't stand Megan Fox

Ok, thats more than a few reasons!

Your review makes me think I should go and check this out now and reassess my previous thoughts. I hope so cause I love horror movies (And Buffy) and would love to see this one work.

Saw this tonite. I enjoyed it. It's not gonna change my life or anything (nor was I expecting it to), but it's a slick, entertaining, sexy, and, at times, creepy ride. Megan Fox exudes evil and sexiness at the same time. There's something playful and terrifying in her physical transformation.

And, damn, those lips...

" A walking blaze of fuck energy. "

Oh Devin, we need to start compiling your most creative quips.

With the low turnout for this and Aeon Flux, is Kusama in trouble?

Long version HERE:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...Jennifers-Body

From Devin's review:
Firstly... "backlash" implies that at one point someone was well thought-of (see: Lindsay Lohan); which I'm pretty sure has never once applied to Fox. Her "highest" regard thus far has been "basically-functional-as-eye-candy-in-'Transformers."

Secondly... with respect, I just can't get on board with you (or anyone else who's offered the same analysis) i.e. labeling the Fox/Cody sniping as "misogynistic." What evidence does anyone making this charge have for it, other than the fact that both of these people happen to be women?

I'm not seeing anything in the turnaround on Cody that smacks of "this stuff is lousy because it's written by a chick!," it's mostly closer to "this stuff is tiresome because everyone talks to one-another in fluent text-message-ese with frames of reference localized entirely within a Spencer's Gifts." As for Fox... the "backlash" isn't complicated: She's a DOGSHIT "actress" who's been coasting on (thoroughly-generic, incidentally) sex appeal. Used to be you could work that act for a year or two before people caught on and got sick of you, but this is the information age: Megan Fox had outlived her entire usefulness approximately 15 minutes and change after the first wave of her teenaged male "fans" got home from "Transformers."

Frankly, I don't even see THAT MUCH "hate." They aren't catching anything that any actor/director "team" that just released a stinker hasn't caught. Compare the proportionately-mild ribbing Cody is taking from this to what Michael Bay and Uwe Boll take on each subsequent film. Heck, she's not even catching HALF of what Kevin Smith regularly catches...

There were websites celebrating the failure of the film.

One particularly classy motherfucker on AICN's talkbacks put it quite succinctly. 'Written by a whore, directed by a dyke, starring a slut.' The movie itself isn't the best or worst anything but it's vehement attackers are transparent and pathetic.

Venom on an AICN talkback? Wicked shocka', that...

Click around any story on that site (or any site, really) long enough and you'll find people straining to find the worst things to call everyone involved. Michael Bay talkbacks are wall-to-wall-to-wall hate, ditto Tyler Perry, ditto Uwe Boll, etc. (ALL well-deserved, I might add.) IT'S THE INTERNET! I fail to see how bagging on Cody/Fox/Kusama is somehow "worse" because they're women - there's nothing special, unique or important about THESE particular sets of insults; it's just web-douches being web-douches.

I just hope Devin's well-written review inspires some of the folks that may have been kept away by the more inept web reviews to see it at some point. Obviously, the movie is going to slip away from theaters soon no matter what. But horror movie nerds, you have no excuse. Certainly a flick written by a fan of the genre. So, you know, a rarity.

I actually forgot how annoying a lot of that was. Jennifer's Body never, ever, got that bad.

Saw this tonight and really liked it. Probably my second favorite horror film this year behind Drag Me To Hell. It has its problems, but all the leads are really great and Cody and Kusama go some interesting places in the film.

Devin pretty much nailed it in his review, especially with the Buffy comparison. Not only is the film similar in themes to Buffy, but comparisons between Cody and Whedons writing can be made. It's weird how people on the internet glorify one, while they seem to vilifying the other.

I don't care for Whedon, either, but did he ever have a line as cringe worthy as "honest to blog" or "moveon.org"?

"Do you know what happens to a toad when it's struck by lightning?"

And all of Alien: Resurrection.

Not to mention a great deal of the original Buffy movie.

And just about 80% of the rest of the stuff being released today.

Others have beaten me to it, but I have all 7 seasons of Buffy I know for a fact I can find something.

Also, was "moveon.org" not that cringe worthy for anyone else? I haven't been trolling High Schools lately, but it sounded like something a 17-18 year old might say.

I haven't seen the movie, but to ignore the creepy comments thrown around about Cody is putting your head in the sand. I don't give a shit that you didn't like Juno, but when you're explaining your dislike of the movie, and words like bimbo or slut start getting thrown around, then we get to the heart of the matter, and your problem with female sexuality for starters.

I'm sort of venting here, but it's not an imaginary "you", but response to some specific troubling comments I've read recently on this very board.

Because of the long, long, long history of women being generally oppressed by societal power structures that favor men?

And if someone says "OH COME ON THEY WERE ALLOWED TO MAKE THIS MOVIE/VOTE" I will drive to your house and punch you in the fucking face.

So does anyone have theories as to why the movie has done so badly despite being pretty good? I would wager that a big hurdle would be casting Megan Fox in a movie that is more tailor-made for women, considering I don't know too many women who are in love with Fox.

The trailers did absolutely nothing for me, so I was kinda surprised at the moderate-to-good reviews the film has received here.

I also should add that the movie advertising is trying desperately to get men/boys to see the movie, which also misses the mark.

Yeah, it's a horror movie that focuses on the friendship between two high school girls, so its got that hurdle to jump. The ads were pretty dull as well, and there seems to be a Megan Fox backlash going on, so it didn't help that the ads mainly featured Fox. I was actually going to wait until DVD, but Devin's review inspired me to check it out.

I read an interview with Diablo Cody recently where she referred to JB as "the FIRST feminist horror movie." That statement is either a hyperbolic lie or based on willful ignorance-- either way, I think her credibility flew out the window.

I think it's funny to dismiss the detractors of this movie as misogynists, considering how hard it tries to cater to the boner contingent. You have the standard high school stereotypes-- good girl, bad girl-- which, if Ms. Cody really wanted to make some kind of feminist statement, would be used to subvert the form, right? Instead, they just fulfill the standard male movie fantasy of "hot chicks making out" and reinforce the praying mantis/ maneater horror archetype that is, in fact, born from the very DEFINITION of misogyny.

None of those things would have bothered me if the movie had a decent script, good acting, unique direction, etc. But between the blatant product placement/ chain store namedrops, the pedestrian camera angles, and the worst movie soundtrack in my recent memory, I just can't understand why anyone would see this movie as something other than a missed opportunity.

Sorry for the long-ass rant for my first post-- I've been lurking on the boards for months and finally got up the nerve to post. Forgive me?

If you're gonna spend time seeing one horror flick this year, make no mistake that DRAG ME TO HELL should be at the top of your list. That's a modern-day classic (yeah, I used that word...I've seen it twice, and my instinct is screaming C-L-A-S-S-I-C).

If you've got spare cash and a hot date (or just spare cash), JENNIFER'S BODY will suffice.

I don't think the Needy/Jennifer kiss is about that at all. There's some pretty obvious sexual tension between the two the entire film, and the scene is where Needy finally gives in to it. I think it's more character development than "hot chicks making out". And I think the people that Jennifer murders are less about revenge and more about fucking with Needy's head. Two of the boys are obviously two that Needy liked, and Jennifer knows that and comments about it frequently throughout the film.

One of the movies flaws though lies in the fact that the Jock she kills is pretty underdeveloped and I don't remember him having any connection to Needy.

And of course those people totally don't understand this concept at all, which is itself troubling.

I'm definitely not the kind of person who thinks that sex is anti-feminist-- quite the opposite, in fact. Those Andrea Dworkin types confuse the shit out of me.

I guess my point was that for all of Ms. Cody's blabbering about this movie having a feminist agenda, the characters and actions are actually nothing more than what you'd find in any other standard top-40 teen slasher flick. Her statement that this is the FIRST feminist-themed horror movie already outs her as profoundly ignorant on this subject. I'm as lowbrow as the next guy when it comes to movies-- I like blood, guts, boobs, and boogeyman as much as anyone, even more than most--- but if she's gonna talk the talk, she's gotta walk the walk.

Where did you see her call it the "first"? Just curious.

And unless the movie opens with a title card saying it's the first... who gives a shit?

I don't give a shit, not really. I'm just promoting discussion, is all.

The politics of the movie don't even really bug me. Had I thought the rest of the movie was any good, I wouldn't have even thought about it.

The interview was in BUST, I think. Let me check up on it.

Wow. Suddenly, I'm back in College...

Honestly, what relevance is that supposed to have? Because women weren't allowed to vote until 1920 (and still make 25% less than men, and so on and so on) we're supposed to go "kid gloves" on shitty movies with female writers and directors? Apply some sort of gender-bias-repairations "curve" to film criticism?

Yeah, I kicked the shit out of this movie. A few months before that, I kicked the shit out of "Transformers 2" and I don't recall myself or anyone else being accused of anti-semitism or in some other way pre-biased against Michael Bay. "Jennifer" is catching the same exact shitstorm that bad genre films made by MEN catch on the interwebs, as it should be.

See, since "I'm a movie expert" was NEVER part of Cody's schtick, the fact that she'd say such a thing and (apparently) believe it inclines me to be more sympathetic in some respects; because it would seem to suggest that she's unaware of the existance of, say, "Ginger Snaps," "Heavenly Creatures," "Teeth," etc. and thus can't be fairly accused of having ripped them off.

How do you "kick the shit out" of a movie? By sitting in the theater and shrugging?

Well, yes, actually...

Though after that, I went home and filed my review:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...Jennifers-Body

You hand it to a scrutinizing editor.

Are you intentionally aping that Yatzee guy, or is that how all reviews for anything go on that site? Anyway, I didn't make it far beyond how much you don't think Megan Fox is hot - no offense. But I already read a lot of reviews I don't agree with on this one. halofan's. Collider's.

Hope more folks catch this this weekend. Be nice to get some movie-centric conversation going on this one - not that I think the "baggage" discussion is invalid or anything. There were a number of shots that stood out to me in this. Somebody mentioned it before, but you got to love the first bloody glimpse we get of Jennifer post-feeding. And that long shot of the dark street as the goth kid crosses it is pretty fantastic. Growing on me more and more - probably because I think folks are being so unfair to it.

That shot gave me the chills. Actually, the entire scene had me on the edge of my chair.

Gave me a NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (the original, of course) flashback as I was watching that sequence.

Yeah, the more time I've had away from the film, the more I realize just how much I liked it. I agreed with A.O. Scott when he said that the film deserved to have a cult following.

Oh, Kusama has composition DOWN, there's no question. She's a great technical filmmaker, though thus far she's showing less and less evidence that it can translate into skillfull visual storytelling. As it is, there's very little visual rhyme or reason "linking" the more rote slasher-style "boo!"/palms-slamming-on-piano-keys bits and the big filmschool money shots like the swimming scene or the long hold on "the kiss."

Right now, the filmmaker she reminds me most of is Paul WS Andersen, i.e. undeniable technical chops but lacking either an ability or inclination to marry it to worthwhile material (though both of them are overall superior talents to, say, McG, Michael Bay or Ratner.) She's the sort of (originally) "indie" filmmaker who makes me sad that the 21st independent film world is sorely lacking an equivalent to Roger Corman - someone to both give young filmmakers a "break" run them through boot camp on the way there. I imagine if Kusama and other filmmakers in her generation had been "forced" to cut their teeth in the trenches making DTV schlock that HAS to come out on time and under-budget, we'd see vastly less uneven work in stuff like this.

That's twice you linked this review in this thread. You're looking a lot like a spammer to me.

Which I'm not, hence why I didn't put it a second time until asked for clarification; and even then it was a toss-up between whether re-posting the link or just saying "see my previous post" was the "less douchey" move. Final calculation was that "see previous post" always sounds kinda snobby to me, as though the post-ee is assuming that everyone was soooo edified by what he'd written that it ought be forever seared into their psyche. In retrospect, I ought've just qualified what "I kicked the shit out of this movie" referred to in the first place. In any case, if the re-posted link came close to some violation of your posting guidelines vis-a-vi spam; then I appologize and resolve that it won't occur again.

Besides, if I wanted to "spam," wouldn't I just put the damn thing in my signature?

I just saw this, and I'm really not getting the major hate there seems to be out there for the movie. It's not great, but it's not bad. Overall it was a pretty good movie.

Actually, I think Kusama's problem is a lot more upper level than PWSA. Andersen doesn't really give a fuck about anything interesting. All of the cool shit he shoots is the point. All the crane shots, CGI-wizardry, and swank lighting seems to be all he cares about and the plot, character, etc. is just glue. His shit is boring on top of being terrible. Jennifer's Body is never boring (a bit predictable perhaps...) Kusama wants to use her keen eye to tell an interesting story well, or at least she is in this one movie of hers that I've seen. I'm just not sure how entirely successful the film is.

Her problem, and in this case it could partially be in the script, was tone. Horror comedy is one of my favorite genres because you have to be a tonal master in order to really nail it. When it works, its unlike anything you've ever seen. This film gets most of it right, it is the last 15% of greatness that it's missing. I'm not freaked out as much as I should be during the touchstone horrific moments, or I'm not laughing loudly as a brutally welcome relief to all the tension I should be feeling. The excessive pop music choices don't exactly help in some cases. Not that JB isn't damn close in parts. I liked the film well enough.

Again, these are the kinds of criticism reserved for talented people or those who give a shit.

Not gonna lie, the lack of discussion on how the movie handles the idea of a woman's control of her body image here is pretty disappointing. Needy seems comfortable in her own body, except when she compares herself to Jennifer - who becomes dependent on a ritual in order to make herself look the way she wants to look; otherwise, her skin begins to break out, her hair dries up, she loses a glow about her. If that isn't a good parallel to the binge/purge cycle of a bulimic, what is? Kurasma even seems to shoot the world from Jennifer's point of view following her first kill as though everything is super-saturated (I'm specifically remembering the shot of her walking out into the woods after her swim), like she's on a sort of high from the experience (which both fits narratively - the first feast would be the most fulfilling, wouldn't it? And isn't it also common for bulimics to have that kind of "high" feeling following a purge?).

The movie's not perfect, not at all - the last chunk of the film becomes a tangled mess right when it should be straightening out and speeding to the finish - but it's saying a lot of different things that are interesting and true for the particular subjects Cody seems to enjoy writing about: teenage girls. The dramatic shutdown the internet's given it seemed pre-ordained, however, since there was already the inexplicable rage over the mere existence of Juno as a successful, award-winning script and the continuing paparazzi coverage of Megan Fox, things that - surprise! - aren't under their control.

Interesting read, I suppose this mass audience of male slobs just don't relate to more or less girl specific themes.

Rant 1:

I get irked by people who can't relate to films because the main characters don't represent their demographic. Marketing gurus and executives are still paddling the notion that a film has to have characters that represent the audience in the shallowest of terms, and I'm starting to see evidence that they might have a point. It's like a self fulfilling prophecy. I'm referring to guys who would somehow have a problem watching the film because it had two female leads dealing with feminine issues (although I'd beg to differ that the film really did focus on themes only women can relate to).

There are more ways than one to relate to a film. I hate the notion that American audiences would devolve into watching only the films they can live vicariously through the characters in.

It reminds me of how people couldn't watch Arrested Development because the characters weren't "sympathetic". I just wonder if audiences "relating" to characters in every sense of the word is really the only way to do things (in terms of storytelling).

I think some European filmmakers actually tend to go in the opposite direction, presenting characters you can only observe from a distance as voyeurs (Lars Von Trier's Anti-Christ, Gasper Noe's Irreversible for example).

I know that a part of the thrill is watching a character you understand going through conflict, but this is the reason we have strings of White cop/Black cop films and why 90 percent of every film is headlined by a 25-35 year old white American lead. In terms of business it's understandable. But there's to much of a dichotomy between films that serve as thrill rides and nothing more, and art house cinema.

Rant 2:

I get that Diablo Cody can be polarizing, but I think it takes an inability to think outside one's bubble to dismiss her in absolute terms. She has a distinctive style, not appreciating that style does not mean that that style is in itself a reflection of poor talent. I think she does have an intelligent eye. The criticism she's taking kind of reminds me of how people were reacting to Quentin Tarantino when he first started out. Pulp Fiction is being praised to high heaven now, but I do remember it being very polarizing upon its conception. (note: I'm in no way equating Pulp Fiction or Quentin with Jennifer's Body or Cody).

I am not a big Cody fan or anything, but I appreciate someone doing something witty and distinctive in an industry that's starting to revolve around marketing statistics and remakes.

As for Megan Fox, I don't really get the attacks on her acting. In fact, I'd wager that a lot of the people attacking her acting don't actually know how to judge performance. The woman's no Cate Blanchette, but to deny that she commands the screen with screen presence and charisma in this film is to bring one's own bias baggage.

Of course you can dislike her performance, or find her bland, but again, one shoult be careful not to confuse one's personal dislike for something with the actual nature of the thing in question.

The movie isn't a masterpiece, but I think most of its criticism is derived from backlash and bias against Cody and Fox and not from the actual film. I'd wager that all it would have taken was replacing Fox with someone more critically acclaimed for people to tone down the smug.

Translation: DEEEERRRRP