MovieChat Forums > Beyond the Black Rainbow (2011) Discussion > Fan-freakin'-tastic

Fan-freakin'-tastic

posted 13 years ago by The-Kurgan
24 replies | jump to latest

This is an awesome movie, but you just know it's going to chalk-up a lot of haters, simply because it's not your typical modern fare, and will be unrecognizable, and interminable, to the younger crowd.

Simply put, it's clearly modeled after scifi films ranging from mid-sixties to late seventies (even though it's set in the early '80s), doing its best to capture the mood and style of the period (and succeeding in spades). It's also very obviously trying to lovingly mimic classic Kubrik, with a just-right additional mix of Cronenberg, Carpenter and Coscarelli to round things out. Doing such was a very brave and risky move for 21st century movie-making, but it worked perfectly. Granted, this style might not be your cup of tea, but if it is, it's an absolutely brilliant must-see that'll blow you away.

Yes, it's very, very slow, like 2001, ST:TMP (extended version) kinda slow, and slightly ambiguous, but overall it just simply works, and the ambiguous portions are easily figured out with a minimum of mental math if you're simply patient and assemble the pieces as they're given to you. This is most definitely NOT an action film by any means, but I'm also hesitant to agree with the "scifi" label, and would instead suggest "psycho-surreal" bordering on thriller, drama and horror, with a definite "altered consciousness" tag. (In truth, there's only one element of the film that could be considered scifi, and that could be anything from ancient alien technology to simply a microwave oven wrapped in pretty lights and given a multi-gigawatt enema --no explanation is forthcoming, and its origins are not really important to the story.)

If you are a young person, please do yourself the favor of being patient with this film. Knowing the movie industry, this could be your last chance to experience a majestic, thought-provoking style of filming that, until now, had been lost and virtually forgotten, shy of dusty rentals.

And to imagine, this was a first effort from this writer/director. Amazing.

(BTW, if the powers-that-be are reading this, you've got at least one DVD sale waiting to be made, but please, this is one movie where definitive extras are called for. Would very much like to see "behind the scenes" and "making of" segments, script notes, interviews, etc.)

[–] dil337 13 years ago

Don't forget Tarkovsky.

Fantastic movie. Those who don't like it...well, it's no longer a matter of opinion - they're just wrong and can't appreciate art.

----

[–] The-Kurgan 13 years ago

Y'know, crazy as it sounds for a scifi and movie buff my age (46), I don't think I've ever seen any of Tarkovskiy's work. Naturally I know of Solaris, --what self-respecting fanboy hasn't at least heard if it?--, but I just never got around to watching it. Suppose I should do that soon, now that you've reminded me. :)

(You'll find this heresy, I'm sure, but yes, I've have seen the remake.)

Those who don't like it...well, it's no longer a matter of opinion - they're just wrong and can't appreciate art.

Careful, now. Don't wanna alienate potential viewers who might not catch the tongue-in-cheek nature of that comment.

Actually, I don't have a problem with some people not liking it, should that end up being the case. My only hope is that they'll be able to set aside any presumptions or comparisons, and allow themselves to view the movie on its own merits.

[–] sarastro7 13 years ago

If you like great movies, you should definitely watch some Tarkovsky. Stalker is slow but very pensive and gripping (well, there are a couple of scenes, perhaps, that are too slow, but only a few). Solaris is a fantastic masterpiece, with infinitely greater depths than the remake (though I like the remake as well).

[–] scntst 13 years ago

I'm 21 and I loved this film. I was exhausted when I started watching, almost certain I'd end up passing out after reading statements about this movie being too long & progressing slowly but it had me on the edge of my seat.

The visuals, the story (which I still didn't entirely understand but got the gist of most of it) & the music were incredible. Definitely one of my favorite films which I'll probably watch several more times this week & recommend to all my friends.

Thanks for a great review & explanation of this masterpiece, I only hope people can provide it with the patience it deserves but it's understandable if others cannot appreciate it's genius.

[–] The-Kurgan 13 years ago

Your post gives me hope. Don't want to get into a rambling social commentary or anything, but it's all too easy to make certain negative assumptions regarding youths and their respective intellects these days (insert obligatory MTV joke and interwebs mashup), so thanks for that. :)

Dunno about genius. Love for the material, a surety of what he wanted to craft and the strong competence to do so is what impressed me. Heh, besides, if the writer/director reads that, hubris dictates that he's obligated to go out and prove you wrong on his next project. lol

We've already commented on the cinematography, so let me expand on a couple of other areas. You mentioned the music, and in my opinion it's an amalgamated sound, inspired by two sources: The more recognizable "tune" portions (dramatic repetitive notes, etc) sounded like John Carpenter, which I like, even though all of his soundtracks sound like variations on each other (a "one trick pony" that fortunately Carpenter knows how to ride in different directions for effect).

Secondly, the electronic vibrato; a resonating hum that stretches and gives the viewer a sense of tension and dread, mixed with wonder and curiosity. Oh, now that is definitely inspired by Don Coscarelli's "Phantasm" series. Note how it plays out for long scenes, but then suddenly stops, and we're left with no music for tense moments. If you've seen Phantasm (as an aside, probably the scariest movie I've ever seen), you'll recognize that tone and tactic immediately. An excellent choice for any film if you're really trying to freak-out your audience. :)

As for the story, this is an area where you'd need to either pay attention to recent American history, or be old enough to remember it first-hand. The sixties, and to a slightly lesser extent the seventies, were a time when people thought psychedelic drugs could be used for a lot more than just "getting high." The governments, naturally, thought it was an avenue to explore for mind control and potential weaponry, and the private sector thought it was something that could be used to "open doors" to mind expansion and exploration through altered consciousness. One such project, of many in the latter category, is what we see in this movie.

As for my interpretation of the events that unfolded in this film, based on one such experiment, I'll post that separately, after I've had my coffee (I had a late start today). ;)

[–] Warrior_Poet 13 years ago

Haven't seen this film yet and am seeking it out, but just wanted to say that "It's better to burn out than to fade away!" Please don't cut my head off.
____________
"I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo."

[–] kjs-2 12 years ago

Well 2001 is that way. It isn't slow at all IMO. It is super tense most of the way through the film. I might have to try this one out as well.

[–] creaturefeeture 13 years ago

How violent/graphic is it?

[–] lightcaster1 13 years ago

There are only 3 scenes with graphic violence and to be fair... it's kind of tame compared to a common slasher/horror film. Also, there's a graphic illustration of female genitalia, not sure if you find that horrible but it's there.

And by the way, I'm 18, a horror and art film fan and I LOVED THIS FILM! It's pretty slow but I loved every film that Tarkovsky made (Solaris is on my top 3 best sci-fi movies ever) and his films are slow as well so I had no issues with that, however, it's very surreal and it's not very accessible so I can see people hating this with a passion while others will love it. There's no middle ground in this film.

[–] creaturefeeture 13 years ago

Awesome, thanks, sounds like something I can handle.
Glad to hear you liked it. Seems like there's a lot of negative reviews on here which is discouraging, but if the film is anything like the trailer then I'm sure it will be great.

[–] filterdecay 13 years ago

I loved it. I never post on imdb but it was really well done.

[–] smek2 12 years ago

Wtf are you talking about "younger" persons. I am probably older than you and i found this movie pretentious and disappointing. Granted, the visuals (and sound) where atmospheric but the lack of any coherent, substantial plot made this movie a shallow, pretentious mess.

[–] kyyylekey 12 years ago

Whereas what I find shallow and pretentious is your need to have a "coherent, substantial plot" and not being able to let one movie be a surreal, primarily audio-visual experience. The history of film is dominated by efforts to have a substantial plot, yet inexplicably, one of the relatively few times a director places less emphasis on that, there are still plenty of critics ready to lambaste it for lacking something that they could literally find in hundreds of thousands of other places.

[–] stevejer 12 years ago

I totally respect your comments, but please please please don't dismiss "the younger crowd" so decisively. I have great faith in the intelligence of discerning young moviegoers.

[–] Necrometer 12 years ago

Thanks for this thread... it gives me faith to check this movie out, which I've been eagerly awaiting in the San Francisco Bay Area (it opens on Friday). In case the orginal poster ever stumbles back this way, I'd strongly urge him to check out Tarkovsky's Stalker. It might be my favorite movie.

HAIL TO THE CHIMP! http://i35.tinypic.com/1zoxa4m.gif

[–] piggeek 12 years ago

It was a successful project but not a successful movie. I have no trouble with slow pacing and more questions than answers. I don't think this movie really gave us questions. It gave us nothing and then we try to fill in the gaps. This movie succeeded in capturing the feel of older better movies but failed to deliver anything else.

Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted.