CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Post-Release Garden State
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post-Release Garden State

post #1 of 53
8/19/04 at 1:23pm
Thread Starter 
Have at it
Reply
post #2 of 53
8/19/04 at 2:55pm
I dont get this prerelease and postrelease threads. the prerelease ones are full of spoilers anyway :?
Reply
post #3 of 53
8/19/04 at 3:09pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakeem
I dont get this prerelease and postrelease threads. the prerelease ones are full of spoilers anyway :?
Most prelease threads shine away from spoilers, but you can't stop someone from posting them in there.
Reply
post #4 of 53
8/19/04 at 6:01pm
http://www.foxsearchlight.com/gardenstate/gs_081704.pdf


Here are the theaters again. I figured I'd repost them here since we're moved. And I'll comment later ont eh movie. I won't be able to see it until tomorrow when it opesn here.
Reply
post #5 of 53
8/19/04 at 6:37pm
Yes! My shithole theater is getting this on Friday.
Reply
post #6 of 53
8/19/04 at 11:53pm
Caught this on Sunday, thought it was great, but Portmans delivery sometimes bothered me, it's not really bad, it's just that to me she sounded like she ate a lot of sugar before a take sometimes, loved it though.

8/10

P.S. Watch Scrubs.....dammit.
Reply
post #7 of 53
8/20/04 at 12:04am
I saw the film this afternoon and really enjoyed it. It was a solid debut from Braff and I thought it had some great performances from the three main leads. It was nice seeing Braff playing a serious role after his goofy role as Dr. Dorian on Scrubs.

My favorite line was, "If you ever need a Kato, you know where to find me."

The best part of the film though is the soundtrack. It's certainly one of the best compilations of indie music mixed in with some classics I've heard in a while.

This is one of those films that you really can't judge immediately. You have to let it seep in.

8.5 out of 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Chocula
Caught this on Sunday, thought it was great, but Portmans delivery sometimes bothered me, it's not really bad, it's just that to me she sounded like she ate a lot of sugar before a take sometimes, loved it though.
I think that was how her character was supposed to be. She was this hyperactive needy chick with health problems. She found love with a guy who had been drugged for a LARGE (wink, wink) portion of his life and was dealing with life lucidly for the first time in a long while.
Reply
post #8 of 53
8/20/04 at 12:12am
Oh, anybody else out there notice that the actor (Michael Weston) that played the crazy police officer, Kenny, in the film is the same guy who played Jake, the psycho that carjacked and kidnapped David a few weeks ago on Six Feet Under?
Reply
post #9 of 53
8/20/04 at 1:47am
Im watching GS for the second time this weekend currently my number 4 of the year (Y)
Reply
post #10 of 53
8/20/04 at 9:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by moovyphreak
My favorite line was, "If you ever need a Kato, you know where to find me."
I didn't really get that line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by moovyphreak
She was this hyperactive needy chick with health problems. She found love with a guy who had been drugged for a LARGE (wink, wink) portion of his life and was dealing with life lucidly for the first time in a long while.
Yeah I take back what I said she and her character was good, her bit in the pet cemetary about his mother was both sad and funny. I certainly have to check this out again to take it all in some more. Liked the bit with the fire bow and the ear pulling. That'd be horrible to live like he did in the opening, with the super plain room with just the phone and laying there all limp. He's like a robot at the start. Having said that it was great to see Andrew bloom through the film. Nice sight gags also, liked the one certificate attached to the ceiling, it's especially funny considering how there's still room for another one.
Reply
post #11 of 53
8/20/04 at 10:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by moovyphreak
My favorite line was, "If you ever need a Kato, you know where to find me."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Chocula
I didn't really get that line.
My take on it is that Mark was referring to Kato Kaelin. He was admitting he would be willing to shack up with and mooch off of Large's fame, much like Kato was doing with O.J. Simpson back in 1994 when the murders took place.
Reply
post #12 of 53
8/20/04 at 3:28pm
A very nice movie, especially for a directorial debut. It dragged in a few places, but overall strong.

Portman's character didn't bother me. She could have. She had typical quirky girl written all over her, but Portman gave her a little more dignity and kept her a little more grounded than that.
Reply
post #13 of 53
8/20/04 at 3:52pm
I am just really glad to hear that Portman is returning to respectable acting roles after playing a wooden hair monster in the Star Wars prequels. It's hard for me to comprehend going from Leon to Phantom menace, but stranger things have happened I suppose.
Reply
post #14 of 53
8/20/04 at 3:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarpWhistlee
I am just really glad to hear that Portman is returning to respectable acting roles after playing a wooden hair monster in the Star Wars prequels. It's hard for me to comprehend going from Leon to Phantom menace, but stranger things have happened I suppose.
I doubt she or Ewan relized how bad it would be and by the time they did they were already involved. Ewan for instance hasn't done a very good job about keeping his mouth shut when it comes to talking about how much the prequels suck.

I suspect that deep down Natalie feels the same, but she's stuck like the rest of us just hoping the next one will get better.
Reply
post #15 of 53
8/20/04 at 8:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by moovyphreak
My take on it is that Mark was referring to Kato Kaelin. He was admitting he would be willing to shack up with and mooch off of Large's fame, much like Kato was doing with O.J. Simpson back in 1994 when the murders took place.
Funny, cause when I laughed I thought he was referring to Kato.. Green Hornet's sidekick. for the fact Mark had to ride in the sidecar.

But the other reference works better to me.
Reply
post #16 of 53
8/20/04 at 9:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal
Funny, cause when I laughed I thought he was referring to Kato.. Green Hornet's sidekick. for the fact Mark had to ride in the sidecar.

But the other reference works better to me.

Yours seems more like something Braff would write though.
Reply
post #17 of 53
8/21/04 at 2:12am
Just got back from seeing this, and I have to say I'm disappointed. The movie was very funny and had some really great and real dialogue, but it sort of fell apart in the last 5 minutes or so. I pretty much have the same problems with it that Devin did.
Reply
post #18 of 53
8/21/04 at 2:12pm
I liked some of the visual jokes, and shots, but thought the film meandered. Portman's lying was a schtick. I particularly do not like speeded-up party shots. I thought when Ian Holm appeared suddenly behind the refrigerator door he should have been making a Bilbo ring-covetous face, though he was still creepy just by being there. I don't believe in first time stories about dead parents.

The main importance of the movie to me was to see Natalie Portman... not be Queen Amidala. Because she does that, sometimes. You know, sometimes when she's hanging around the house or she's on the Daily Show, she doesn't have paint all over her face and this very constipated look. It's important to remember this.

All that said, Mr. Braff did a very good job for making his very first film. He should continue to make more.

And yes, I did notice that the crazy cop was the Six Feet Under guy, in kind of a similar role.

I wanted more details about the side effects of lithium. I wanted someone not to be quirky.
Reply
post #19 of 53
8/22/04 at 4:24am
I liked it. Alot.

Somewhat flawed, but overall it was very cool and is definitely one of my favorite films of the year.
Reply
post #20 of 53
8/22/04 at 4:59am
I loved it I want it on dvd so bad.
Reply
post #21 of 53
8/22/04 at 6:18pm
this was a great film. I enjoyed it. I watched this a week after renting the station agent.. and both of these films seem like gems. They aren't heavy on plot but more of character.

I love how Large's (sp) friend hates scams & pyramid schemes and yet he has his own con with the Safety Mart.

Method Man (shocker) had some good quotables in this movie too.
Reply
post #22 of 53
8/22/04 at 9:25pm
"Who just saw some titties? Raise your hand if you saw some titties."
Reply
post #23 of 53
8/23/04 at 2:01pm
Absolutely loved it - especially for a first time writer, director and star (on film). The writing was really sharp - there were places where it lagged, but it never really got weepy and self-flagellating which is what I feared it would do. I loved the character of Zach Braff's friend...The X scene did kind of drag for me, I never understand why filmmakers have to show it in super-fast-motion, it never feels like that for me.
Reply
post #24 of 53
8/23/04 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by moovyphreak
My take on it is that Mark was referring to Kato Kaelin. He was admitting he would be willing to shack up with and mooch off of Large's fame, much like Kato was doing with O.J. Simpson back in 1994 when the murders took place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal
Funny, cause when I laughed I thought he was referring to Kato... the Green Hornet's sidekick, for the fact Mark had to ride in the sidecar.

But the other reference works better to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kueller
Yours seems more like something Braff would write though.
I thought about Kato, the Green Hornet's sidekick as well before posting, but for some reason, Kato Kaelin came to mind.
Reply
post #25 of 53
8/24/04 at 11:28am
Caught it last night. Liked it an awful lot. Very endearing characters, very good dialogue, very good visuals, very good soundtrack.

My only real problem was having to stomach the uber-conventional ending after all of the monologues about "doing something completely original and fresh". That said, it was executed rather painlessly and devoid of cringeworthy melodrama.

Did anybody else go apeshit over the Desert Storm trading card thing? I have a box FULL of those things in my basement at home. I think I got them at a garage sale when I was a wee lad. I'm not sure if anybody stole my Wolf Blitzer, though.
Reply
post #26 of 53
8/24/04 at 9:07pm
Just got back from seeing this movie and I LOVED it. It is by far one of my favorite movies now. I also enjoyed the music. As soon as I came home I bought the soundtrack, which is something I never do.

I started to cry because I was laughing so hard when Sam's mom was holding that dead gerbil. I think I was the only person in the theatre laughing.
Reply
post #27 of 53
8/24/04 at 10:38pm
Yeah, I've also got the DS trading cards and loved that scene. It was so funny, but the humor wasn't forced. "You're much better than that Corky guy and he's actually retarded"
Reply
post #28 of 53
8/27/04 at 12:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Gistmeister
My only real problem was having to stomach the uber-conventional ending after all of the monologues about "doing something completely original and fresh". That said, it was executed rather painlessly and devoid of cringeworthy melodrama.
That was my thought exactly. Not only was it cliche to run off the plane and profess his love for the girl, but how the hell did he find her? Normally the girl is sobbing and heading toward the exit door. In this movie, she's in a phone booth by baggage claim!

Also, my other minor issue is that it seemed like they had Natalie's character have epilepsy soley to explain why she was so quirky. Yet I think she was the most normal person in the film. It kinda took the fun out of her character for me.

I think it was good directoral effort for Braff, but as mentioned in this thread already it was a little meandering at parts. Good flick, but could have been better.
Reply
post #29 of 53
8/27/04 at 1:00pm
I remember hearing a rumor that Braff's character was originally supposed to die in the movie - maybe the endind was a last minute tack on.

It certainly didn't stand up to the quality of the rest of the film - which was one of my favorites this year. Loved the visually quirkiness to match the characters' perculiarities, and thought the whole film was well written and performed. Not a huge movie - but one that is just completely likeable.
Reply
post #30 of 53
8/27/04 at 1:10pm
Yeah, but epilepsy used to mean that a girl was possessed by the devil so it runs a little deeper than just explaining she's quirky. At least that's my interpretation.
Reply
post #31 of 53
8/27/04 at 4:51pm
Zach said that it was too obvious if he had Natalie had an epileptic attack at the end.

and about the rumors of him dying at the end in a plane crash, that was only a rumor, Zach said that he always wrote the ending with them staying together.

Im obsessed with this movie. going for my fifth time tonight
Reply
post #32 of 53
8/27/04 at 6:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirby Drummond
Yeah, but epilepsy used to mean that a girl was possessed by the devil so it runs a little deeper than just explaining she's quirky. At least that's my interpretation.
Even if that were so, what's the point? So she is possessed by the devil. What does that have to do with anything? Her character is quirky, outgoing, and full of life. Everything Large isn't. She shows him how to open his eyes to the world and feel again and they live happily ever after. How exactly does the epilepsy help tell that story?
Reply
post #33 of 53
8/27/04 at 6:01pm
It doesn't. That's the point. My review spelled it out for you.
Reply
post #34 of 53
8/27/04 at 10:42pm
Large had that pain in his head at the start of the movie and then we didnt see him having them anymore.

so same with Sam's epilemcy problem. who cares?, I dont see why we need to see them having problems with those. they just have those problems and we dont need to see them having them all the time IMO
Reply
post #35 of 53
8/27/04 at 10:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf
It doesn't. That's the point. My review spelled it out for you.
This is a discussion thread for people to discuss the movie. I didn't realize we were only allowed to post "I agree/disagree with what Devin said."
Reply
post #36 of 53
8/28/04 at 1:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakeem
Large had that pain in his head at the start of the movie and then we didnt see him having them anymore.

so same with Sam's epilemcy problem. who cares?, I dont see why we need to see them having problems with those. they just have those problems and we dont need to see them having them all the time IMO

I have epilepsy, but most people that I interact with will never know that. It's kind of like that.
Reply
post #37 of 53
8/28/04 at 2:06am
ok, so i just got back from seeing this.. and i was a bit disappointed as well..
and my main beef seems to be Braff.. he never really seemed convincing to me. infact he couldnt even pull off a "hey, hows it goin" when he would run into his old friends or someone that knew him.. it just felt.. wrong.. to me. i dont know why. i'd guess it was bad acting.

Portman and Skaarsgard were great, though. Portman especially. as was the soundtrack.. although it was a bit too conventional for a movie like this.

i think the film seemed to be trying too hard. the script was smart, but some of the lines felt forced. I never bought the whole Braff/Ian Holm dynamic.. that hardly worked at all for me.. Braff's inexperience as a director, though forgiveable.. was quite apparent.
and the ending was definately a total cop-out.

. thats my immediate impression, anyway.

and where is devin's review? for some reason i cant seem to locate it.
EDIT: nevermind, i found it. 9.3? damn, thats high.
Reply
post #38 of 53
8/28/04 at 2:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kueller
I have epilepsy, but most people that I interact with will never know that. It's kind of like that.
yeah of course. thats why I didnt think it was wrong to have it in the movie. I mean, she has it, and we know only cause her mom mentions it in front of Large so she explains it to him, but after that there was no need to have her having an attack or something like that.
Reply
post #39 of 53
8/28/04 at 3:04am
something just occured to me..

sadly, i think the trailers for this flick were better than the movie. especially the first frou frou trailer. i never felt the film really bottled that bit of lightning.
Reply
post #40 of 53
8/28/04 at 6:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakeem
yeah of course. thats why I didnt think it was wrong to have it in the movie. I mean, she has it, and we know only cause her mom mentions it in front of Large so she explains it to him, but after that there was no need to have her having an attack or something like that.
I don't care that they didn't show her having an epileptic attack. The fact that she has epilepsy at all seems superfluous. There is no point for her to have it other than for her to wear a goofy helmet.
Reply
post #41 of 53
8/28/04 at 10:00pm
Quote:
I don't care that they didn't show her having an epileptic attack. The fact that she has epilepsy at all seems superfluous. There is no point for her to have it other than for her to wear a goofy helmet.
I think the point of Sam's epilepsy is that it is really embarrasing for her to have to wear a helmet to work and there are probably any number of other things she can't do because of it, but she accepts and deals with it and lives her life as fully as she can. Whereas Large's father put him on medication for years to keep the pain from his mother's accident from hurting him. The conversation in the bar after Sam's epilepsy is revealed seems to be the point of the fim: Have a good cry when stuff hurts, then deal with it. Because if you try to bury it, it'll bite you in the ass.
Reply
post #42 of 53
8/29/04 at 12:47am
I liked it a lot, but probably more for its craft than its story. I liked the details and character bits, but was surprisingly uneffected emotionally by the ending. Part of it may be that I'm just not crazy about Portman as an actress. I don't find her particularly attractive and her acting seems a little too forced for me.

That said she's aesthetically very beautiful which detracted from the story for me too. I think the role would have been stronger in the hands of someone a little less convenional. Someone quirkier.

But yeah, a really good debut certainly, I just couldn't get around the fact that it seems like Braff cast Portman just because he has a crush on her or something. But Hell, I'd do that too I suppose.
Reply
post #43 of 53
8/29/04 at 3:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jch323
I think the point of Sam's epilepsy is that it is really embarrasing for her to have to wear a helmet to work and there are probably any number of other things she can't do because of it, but she accepts and deals with it and lives her life as fully as she can. Whereas Large's father put him on medication for years to keep the pain from his mother's accident from hurting him. The conversation in the bar after Sam's epilepsy is revealed seems to be the point of the fim: Have a good cry when stuff hurts, then deal with it. Because if you try to bury it, it'll bite you in the ass.
totally agree (Y)
Reply
post #44 of 53
8/29/04 at 4:23am
If nothing else I think this movie showcases how much talent and potential Braff has for future movies. I wouldn't give it a 9.3, maybe more like an 8 or an 8.5, but maybe that's just grasping at straws. If he has more movies like this in him, I think we have a hollywood force on our hands. Also it was very inspiring to me as an aspiring screenwriter. The script seemed great, but not so mind blowingly original (think charlie kaufman) that it was completely out of reach or something. Just gave me confidence that there are good writers out there who don't necessarily have to be billions of iq points ahead of me. Braff is probably only thousands ahead.
Reply
post #45 of 53
8/29/04 at 4:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarpWhistlee
If nothing else I think this movie showcases how much talent and potential Braff has for future movies.
I hope so. That's almost waht worried me about all the detail in the movie though. I hope he didn't blow all his good ideas on his first one. I doubt it though.
Reply
post #46 of 53
8/29/04 at 4:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jch323
I think the point of Sam's epilepsy is that it is really embarrasing for her to have to wear a helmet to work and there are probably any number of other things she can't do because of it, but she accepts and deals with it and lives her life as fully as she can. Whereas Large's father put him on medication for years to keep the pain from his mother's accident from hurting him. The conversation in the bar after Sam's epilepsy is revealed seems to be the point of the fim: Have a good cry when stuff hurts, then deal with it. Because if you try to bury it, it'll bite you in the ass.
I just think its superfluous. A regular person can give that advice too (and mean it). Epileptics don't have the market cornered on feeling pain.
Reply
post #47 of 53
8/29/04 at 4:37pm
Of course you think that way. If, instead of having a snappy come back, you had read my review or my interview with the filmmaker you would understand that Braff was trying tor break out of cinematic storytelling conventions where everything has to mean something. In real life sometimes you just meet people with epilepsy.

Whether there are deeper thematic reasons for it is another story. But as far as "not paying off in the end" or something, Braff wasn't interested in pandering to the lowest common denominator in the audience.
Reply
post #48 of 53
8/29/04 at 6:12pm
Other people in the thread said that it may mean something more. I personally don't care if there is a "pay off". I just felt that the whole epilepsy thing served no purpose storywise and mentioned so in this thread to people who believe that it does. Its called a discussion. You should try it sometime instead of posting "snappy comebacks". Shouldn't you be outside protesting? Or are you too busy trolling the internet?
Reply
post #49 of 53
8/29/04 at 6:17pm
If you feel it served no purpose storywise you were looking for it to pay off. This isn't science.

I am at the office working, as I have things that need to be done. We can't all spend our student loans on blow, some of us must earn our money.
Reply
post #50 of 53
8/29/04 at 6:35pm
I didn't need it to be central to the story, but yeah I do think that her epilepsy should at least have been acknowledged other than in the one scene where she says "Hey, I have epilepsy."

As for the personal attacks, I've spent my student loans on vacationing in Peru (May-June), California (July), and North Carolina (August). This is the first full week I've been home in months. But if I did do blow (as you seem to think I do on a regular basis), I wouldn't have to pay for it.

Clearly you are doing alot of work right now. It's a wonder you still have a job. Rachel must have had to fight hard for you.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Post-Release Garden State