Hi
Ive written a light hearted blog post about why some people don't like this film.
https://breedbites.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/vanilla-sky-an-awesome-movie-with-so-many-haters/
It is just a bit of fun - I know plenty of women like the film!! But i think there is an element of truth here.
I know my wife and her friends don't like the movie for the reasons I state!
What do you think
it's not bad, but very complicated in the first view and very simple straight forward in the second.
shareI got so bored I just quit watching. And I'm a man. I just found it to be slow and uninteresting. I could sense, of course, that there was going to be a plot twist coming up....but I just got too bored.
shareas sci-fi goes it has no action. As romance goes - it gets too weird.
It is a fusion of genres that pisses off people from both camps - but those who watch with open minds do get genuinely touched by it.
I watched it with an open mind .. as I had no idea what the movie was about .. watched it sheerly because I'm such a huge Tom Cruise fan .. couldn't wait for it to finish .. I've watched plenty of weird movies before but this one is right up there with the worst I've ever seen!
shareSo from your past reviews you thought:
Inside out had
"Absolutely nothing of interest for an adult male."
I don't understand the hype at all. It was boring.
Because people are *beep* insane
shareIf one would ask me for my favorite movie featuring Tom Cruise I'd answer Vanilla Sky. Or Oblivion.
My sister doesn't like this movie very much either, though it was her who recommended it to me.
---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!
they are jealous of david ames lifestyle
shareThe majority of people I know who dislike the movie do so in light of the fact that it's a pale shadow of its original, which is a full-blooded masterpiece.
shareUnless you are Spanish or speak Spanish that is a cultured group of friends you must have that the majority of them enjoy watching old foreign films so they can sneer at the remake. The original is good but I think crowe took it up a notch. Vanilla sky's onion has more layers to unpeel. And the insertion of Julie Gianni was a masterstroke. You can see the humanity in her character
shareMarylin Manson does (did) good covers, because they have a new and quite original sound. But this? This is a poor ripoff. And the 'more layers to unpeel' you're talking about seem to me as a hipster insets served with radiohead sauce to make it even more hipster.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I even googled the phrase hipset insets and got pictures of women in underwear (?!)
I take the point that there is no point in doing a cover version of something unless it is different from the original - there should be an improvement also.
Here is where i think it improves on the original for English speaking audiences.
# It is in English (this is a bonus for English speaking audiences)
# Julia Gianni's character is an altogether more human and frail character than Nuria who is entirely 2D
# The puzzle of "which bit is real" is laid on thicker in Vanilla Sky, with it deliberately supporting several plausible theories
# Stylistically, I prefer Cameron Crowe's touches and the soundtrack, particularly the Sigur Ros track used in the stunning montage at the end
# In the original, when Cesar goes on a shooting spree it was a bad idea from a story telling perspective. Firstly, he loses the good will of the audience. Secondly, astute viewers can see that this version of reality must be a fake to redress the moral imbalance. It is like shouting "this isnt really happening". There is no suspense left after that happens.
All that said, Vanilla Sky borrows so much of the original, word for word, shot for shot in places. It is standing on the shoulder of a giant. But it doesn't make the original any lesser of a film to believe that Vanilla Sky improved it.
Ive got to be honest - other than wanting to feel like an intellectual snob, I can't see why anyone who speaks english as a first language would prefer the original. As a non-American i do sympathise with people who resent it when Hollywood bastardises their culture/history and puts a slant on it that will appeal to US audiences - but I don't feel this is the case in this movie
first: not hipset, hipster.
Movie is in english? So are subtitles.
Gianni is a frustrated psychopatch, nuria is 2D
the puzzle, yes. Spot on. If something is good, let's add some caviar. And tuber. And just everything else, that's best of the best. And additional two disches, tom-yum soup and for desert - cheesecake with gold and daimonds.
both soundtracks are good.
seriously? U sympathized with a guy who steals friends chick, treats people like garbage, etc.? U'r hipster :)
For me the only reason to put Nuria/Julia in the movie was to fill the void. Just to show "you get what you deserve". My guess is Nuria is 2D because Amenabar didn't know how to show justice in any other way (watch Tesis to get my point on that - the movie also has a very good idea behind it but it lacks so much in storytelling).
And this is why remake sucks: Julia is just another addon that makes the picture more and more incoherent. In a bad, hipsterish way.
I dont want to get bogged down in the hipster angle which I am not sure I understand - is it because it is seeking to have a coolness?
Anyway, changing Nuria to Gianni, for me transforms the film.
Watching the original, one is not emotionally caught up in either of the 2 character's suicides.
For me, I was so moved with Gianni's suicide. Her speech in the car with David got her nominated for an award. It was a rare moment of truth in a hollywood movie. The true messed up feelings of the washed up it girl.
And what was so painful was it felt real. Research has shown that a large degree of suicide attempts are impulsive acts - not well planned out things. If the person's mood had passed or there had been some kind of obstacle, they wouldn't have done it - they wouldnt have destroyed their lives and other people's lives. Gianni was a frail person falling apart who needed to feel loved back, not a psychopath bitch. And Diaz understood that - her performance was excellent.
And similarly, in destroying David's life, she also turned him in to a frail person falling apart who needed to feel loved back who eventually committed suicide.
Neither of them were monsters, just humans with human emotions and pain - but David had his redemption through his lucid dream.
That whole aspect is missing in the original. Nuria is 2D and Cesar learns nothing (the selfish shooting spree). This isn't pouring gold and diamonds over your dessert - it is looking for the humanity in people.
If a film-maker can make you see the humanity in Cameron Diaz and Tom Cruise, then that is truly impressive!
I see your point, you're somewhat personally engaged in Giannis character.
But like I've said. I appreciate the coherence of the original: and Gianni is just another reason why I dislike the remake. It's another distraction from the real clue, Davids/Cesars purgatory. Living the nightmare of his past untill he is ready to move on.
That's why we have a pub scene, a moment of facing the facts, loosing the mask. Probably he becomes a man for the first time in his life in the scene with bartender.
That's why we have a killing spree - that's the transgression of the main character who used to be an ahole.
And maybe that's why women don't like the movie - there's no prince charming. We have a witty, selfcentered egomaniac born of money, not exactly any kind of ideal. I mean women who dig that kind of men probably aren't interested in that sort of movies.
A movie about transformation has a remake entitled a movie about everything including Tom Cruise. You are a kind of example of my thesis. You're distracted towards Julia.
# The puzzle of "which bit is real" is laid on thicker in Vanilla Sky, with it deliberately supporting several plausible theories
# In the original, when Cesar goes on a shooting spree it was a bad idea from a story telling perspective. Firstly, he loses the good will of the audience. Secondly, astute viewers can see that this version of reality must be a fake to redress the moral imbalance. It is like shouting "this isnt really happening". There is no suspense left after that happens.
Ive got to be honest - other than wanting to feel like an intellectual snob, I can't see why anyone who speaks english as a first language would prefer the original.
I just watched it for the first time and my reason for dislike is simple: It was all a dream. There's a British sci-fi comedy series called Red Dwarf that did a better version (the novel mainly, but it was also an tv episode) of getting trapped in virtual life called Better Than Life.
Comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable
1) I love Red Dwarf!
2) I see what you mean about "all a dream" as it is often a hallmark of cliche and lazy writing.
However, the Lucid Dream in Vanilla Sky is no more a lazy excuse to tie up loose ends than the dream implanted into Arnold Shwarzeneger in Total Recall.
One of the things I love about the film is the way the story is told. It's the singer not the song... the teller not the tale.
The chronological story is that a jerk got in a car crash, got disfigured, signed up to being cryogenically frozen, then committed suicide.
But the story we see is much different, so layered, just awesome
Just read your blog in regard to this movie for the first time. Point on! Great insights that touched on some of the things I had also determined to be possible causes for all the "haters". Keep the posts like this coming.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the War Room!