Black Swan

explain yourself

It was slow, boring & definitely not his best like people usually say.

Never really found Portman that attractive and Kunis? Well, she looks like I should find her a lot more attractive than I actually do. If I'm honest, the biggest pull this film has for me is Winona Ryder. If she was involved in said naughty fumble, I'd be lot more interested. How could I not be?





Oh, and The Wrestler is vastly overrated. If Ron Howard had made that, it would've been torn to pieces.

Slow isn't an opinion and therefore not a criticism. I don't agree with people saying it's his best, different =/= best or worst or whatever. As far as boring goes, I don't know. I didn't give a hoot about wrestling and still don't but I still find myself intrigued by the character every time I see it. I don't even like any of the characters except Wood's, who's part makes me tear up every time for some reason. I thought it's film style was really creative as well considering it's budget and also improvisation of setting and script. It's just a really honest film that I don't see much of nowadays, and the decrescendo is wonderful to me.
By saying this you're also implying those involved have some big name to them which garnered them the praise alone, but neither Rourke (at the time) nor Aronofsky was a big name before this, so your criticism is invalid.

Can you explain this to me? I genuinely don't understand what you're getting at. I meant the style and the story that was told. I didn't mean the level of fame that those involved had.

That said, are you telling me that there's not praise for Aronofsky due to Pi and Requiem? Just look at Black Swan. Also, you can't tell me that Mickey Rourke wasn't the cause celebre of the year.

Praise for Pi and Requiem wasn't recognized by mainstream audiences. Black Swan came out after The Wrestler so of course more people are interested. Also, of course Rourke was a big name that year, he just made a "comeback" even though he was in good roles before that.

I don't know why you were confused, you said Ron Howard would've gotten stoned if he was the director, that has nothing to do with the story/style, that's a direct target of people involved.

I just read where Kunis got down to 95 pounds for this role.

This movie doesn't appeal to me at all. Don't even see this as a Netflix possibility. Unless there's a hot, steamy scene between Kunis and Portman. Then I might give it a shot.

__________________
"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Ernest Hemingway

Confirmed.

__________________
If I had a dollar for every existential crisis I've ever had, does money really even matter?

Calling it slow & boring is not a criticism but definitely a strong personal opinion of mine...
& I said it's his weakest film, not his worst.. & nothing about the film intrigues me.. I'd still give it a 5/10 for his efforts, but I don't think i could sit hrough it again...


Seriously?? Mickey Rourke goes way back my friend... He has worked in some great films & with great stars as a lead.

Not only is he an established action star, b-film star, romantic hero..
He is an expert in all fields of acting.
Probably the newer generation hasn't heard of him, but I have grown with most of his films.. & yes, he is one of the most underrated actors.. But doesn't make him any less popular.

He has had more reputation as a villain in the past decade or so.. But I don't think Rourke regained his lost glory coz of this movie, in fact people claimed that he finally got some recognition.

read

Yes, I have read that.. & I also mentioned that the only people who weren't familiar with Rourke were the younger generation i.e. below 20 age group..

Don't forget that just few years ago he got great response for his portrayal of Marv in Sin City. So I don't think Rourke was not a big name at the time.

But he so wasn't! Rourke's unpopularity was the main reason studios did not want to fund it; familiarity and popularity are not synonyms.

Looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, WT. I simply don't see what the popularity of Rourke and Aronofsky has to do with a schmaltzy, overly sentimental film.

You're the one who brought up popularity in the first place

No, I said if Ron Howard had made that film, it would've been torn apart. What's that got to do with popularity?

You're running me in a circle

Looks like a limited release tomorrow, is anyone going to see it? It doesn't open where I live until the 10th.

If I can find a babysitter, I am there

If you find a babysitter, and you get there, come back in here and tell us what you thought of it!

Damnit, the limited release affects me too. There is an Alamo Drafthouse near me, the franchise that has SXSW Festival in Austin, and they usually get all the limited releases. I guess I have to wait until the 10th as well.