See a film I edited - Page 6

innerSpaceman · 02-08-2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mousepod

I quietly cheered when your name came up on the screen (there was one other person in the theater with me - I wanted to run up to him and say "I know that guy!," but I kept my composure).

Heheh, I peppered the credits with polite applause so that our cheering for Tom wouldn't seem quite so singular and friendobvious.

It didn't work.

I have a feeling the other 3 people in the theater caught on that we knew the editor.

Ok, i'll start off the talk about the movie:

Tre is a relentless asshole, and i just don't see the character arc that redeems him in the slightest.

mousepod, you missed the post-show reveal that the story is an autobiographical work of non-fiction. Does that alter your perception of the film in any way?

(We had a private Q&A session after the film. Sorry you missed it. But yeah, the Sunset-5/Former-Virgin locale has the lamest parking in Los Angeles, and thus it is double-doomed. Good luck with that remodel now that Virgin is gone. Uh-huh. Did I mention there were 8 of us in the theater? That's going to be a big night for them.)

LSPoorEeyorick · 02-08-2008, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Tre is a relentless asshole, and i just don't see the character arc that redeems him in the slightest.

No, indeed. But though Kakela earns sympathy at the beginning of the film, she gradually destroys that through the narrative. (She gradually destroys herself, too.) Tre is "trying not to," while Kakela is "trying to." They're both responsible for their behavior, but in the end, I think I favor Tre more than Kakela. And what of the last scene? Was she lying to him? Well, obviously she was, but which was the lie?

Tom · 02-08-2008, 06:47 AM

At the risk of repeating myself, my thanks again to those who came to the film, and those who were there in spirit.

And especially to Mousepod, for going above and beyond.

Ghoulish Delight · 02-08-2008, 08:22 AM

Redeem? Definitely not. Change? Certainly.

He exposed some redeeming qualities, but in the end failed his attempt at redemption.

BarTopDancer · 02-08-2008, 09:25 AM

Bummer that I missed it. I'll have to watch it when it hits DVD.

innerSpaceman · 02-08-2008, 10:36 AM

I don't even think Kakela is really clear herself on what's her truth and what's her lie.

But neither do I think Tre's shell was cracked open more than a pinch. And I don't think that crack revealed anything but that the asshole exterior concealed a tender heart of total asshole.

At least I found Kakela complex and sort of fun to loathe, whereas I found the title character completely annoying, unsympathetic and dreadful throughout.

I liked the horse, though.

(But it all went downhill from Gabe's nude scene in the first two minutes, heheh

)

mousepod · 02-08-2008, 11:11 AM

Interesting that it's autobiographical. I imagine that the innocent character who did no wrong except love his woman and stick with his friend is the author (whine, sniffle). Personally, I'm not a fan of infidelity movies (and how much of a telegraph was it to name the guy "Tre"?), so I decided to focus my attention instead on Tom's work, which was excellent.

My biggest gripe had to do with the 'print' that I saw. I'm not sure if it was a result of the video it was shot on or the video it was transferred to, but the blacks weren't black. I'm not sure what the technical term for it is, but the scenes that take place in the dark - the party scene, the final scene - were difficult to watch because the darker parts of the frame glowed gray...

Ghoulish Delight · 02-08-2008, 11:21 AM

That's funny, because the print at Sunset was TOO black. It's a film that takes place a lot at night, and I thought that perhaps they could have used a better lighting budget, but Tom assured me that the film he worked with was perfectly well lit.

LSPoorEeyorick · 02-08-2008, 11:21 AM

The transfer was bad - you're definitely right - Wednesday's projection of it at the Sunset 5 was worse than Thursday's, at least.

I'm not that much for infidelity movies, either. But no - you've pegged it wrong - Kakela was the screenwriter.

Gemini Cricket · 02-08-2008, 11:30 AM

I find it redeeming for the Kakela character that "she" wrote the screenplay. It was like a confession of sorts. Brave to put it out there, I guess. (Although, I guess we don't really know how much of it is true and how much of it was added...)
Kind of her having the final say in what happened and not really making herself some sort of heroine or sympathetic character.
Just a thought.

On another note, this movie made me want to watch Closer again.

02-08-2008, 06:47 AM	#3
Tom Valued member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 541	At the risk of repeating myself, my thanks again to those who came to the film, and those who were there in spirit. And especially to Mousepod, for going above and beyond.
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 08:22 AM	#4
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Redeem? Definitely not. Change? Certainly. He exposed some redeeming qualities, but in the end failed his attempt at redemption. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 09:25 AM	#5
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	Bummer that I missed it. I'll have to watch it when it hits DVD. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 10:36 AM	#6
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	I don't even think Kakela is really clear herself on what's her truth and what's her lie. But neither do I think Tre's shell was cracked open more than a pinch. And I don't think that crack revealed anything but that the asshole exterior concealed a tender heart of total asshole. At least I found Kakela complex and sort of fun to loathe, whereas I found the title character completely annoying, unsympathetic and dreadful throughout. I liked the horse, though. (But it all went downhill from Gabe's nude scene in the first two minutes, heheh )
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 11:11 AM	#7
mousepod You broke your Ramadar! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,635	Interesting that it's autobiographical. I imagine that the innocent character who did no wrong except love his woman and stick with his friend is the author (whine, sniffle). Personally, I'm not a fan of infidelity movies (and how much of a telegraph was it to name the guy "Tre"?), so I decided to focus my attention instead on Tom's work, which was excellent. My biggest gripe had to do with the 'print' that I saw. I'm not sure if it was a result of the video it was shot on or the video it was transferred to, but the blacks weren't black. I'm not sure what the technical term for it is, but the scenes that take place in the dark - the party scene, the final scene - were difficult to watch because the darker parts of the frame glowed gray... __________________ "Give the public everything you can give them, keep the place as clean as you can keep it, keep it friendly" - Walt Disney
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 11:21 AM	#8
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	That's funny, because the print at Sunset was TOO black. It's a film that takes place a lot at night, and I thought that perhaps they could have used a better lighting budget, but Tom assured me that the film he worked with was perfectly well lit. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 11:21 AM	#9
LSPoorEeyorick scribblin' Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: in the moment Posts: 3,872	The transfer was bad - you're definitely right - Wednesday's projection of it at the Sunset 5 was worse than Thursday's, at least. I'm not that much for infidelity movies, either. But no - you've pegged it wrong - Kakela was the screenwriter.
	Submit to Quotes

02-08-2008, 11:30 AM	#10
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	I find it redeeming for the Kakela character that "she" wrote the screenplay. It was like a confession of sorts. Brave to put it out there, I guess. (Although, I guess we don't really know how much of it is true and how much of it was added...) Kind of her having the final say in what happened and not really making herself some sort of heroine or sympathetic character. Just a thought. On another note, this movie made me want to watch Closer again.
	Submit to Quotes