MovieChat Forums > Only God Forgives (2013) Discussion > Hopelessly bad

Hopelessly bad

posted 11 years ago by ptschultz
71 replies | jump to latest

The only thing in this film - in fact, all that saves it from complete and utter *beep* - is the cinematopgrahy, which was overall pretty great. Funky lighting, good use of slow-mo, complementary colors etc. Looked fancy.

In all other areas though, this film incapsulates the word "pretentious". There is nothing beneath the bright lights and highly contrasted imagery. Nothing. The story is predictable and shallow, all the characters are flat as pancakes and I as an audience member care for none of them, the script and dialogue is laughably cheesy and at times unintentionally funny (the scene at the dinner table and where Julian shouts at May sticks out), the editing is clunky, the soundtrack is misplaced, the fight scenes looks like something from a music video, there are no thrills, no chills, nothing to stimulate the mind or the senses.

The fact that something so self-absorbed and degenerate could get produced, gives me cancer in the penis.

/Marches off.

[–] kelly-wilson 11 years ago

Can you tell me, in your own words, what you think the director wished to communicate?

http://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2013/08/28/only-god-forgives/

[–] ptschultz 11 years ago

That the fulfillment of revenge comes at great personal sacrifice - that it is a destructive force, leaving individuals more shattered and truncated than before. The same theme that Noé explored brilliantly in "Irreversible" and "I stand alone", as did Chan wook park in his "oldboy"-trilogy. Hell, even Christopher Nolan did it better with "Memento" - and that film was a piece of crap, too.

The difference between those films and Refn's, is that the characters in the others seemed real and had personality, the story was engaging and the theme played beneath the conflicts of the plot. Here, it is about as simple and amplified as something you'd expect from a Steven Seagal-b-movie-flick. Basicly, all you end up with is a piece of aesthetic masturbation - pretty pictures of a modern asian metropolis and some ultra violence. In a desperate attempt to come off as artsy or deep or intellectual, he (Refn) then uses long, static shots and overplayes (to an extreme amount) a Freudian sexual tone in all the violence. But there is no perspective, no dimensions in any of it. It is spelled out. It's all on the surface - a Barbara Cartland story of trivial darkness.

TAKE IT OFF!!!!

Yeah, only God could forgive one for thinking this film has any point.

[–] Lee-JS 11 years ago

I was with you right up until 'Memento is a piece of crap'. Stopped reading at that point as your opinion was instantly rendered irrelevant!

[–] Thought_Criminal_J62377 11 years ago

Exactly 100% the way I felt. LOL don't touch Memento

[–] r-daly-09 11 years ago

Same here, i literally stopped reading whatever else he had to say. Memento was a great film!

[–] Soodinum 8 years ago

He lost me when he said "I need everything spelled out for me like in a Transformers film." Well, in not so many words ...

'Then' and 'than' are different words - stop confusing them.

[–] El_Jefe 11 years ago

pretty pictures of a modern asian metropolis

Heh, it's funny you should say that. The movie is set in Thailand, which is, for all intents and purposes, still a developing nation. It's really not a "modern Asian metropolis".

In fact, that was my favorite thing about the movie: it feels very authentic in its Thai setting. The narrow alleys, street dogs, patched pavements, street vendors, and the guy caring for his child in his workshop.

[–] leopoldfrank-1 11 years ago

But Bangkok is kind of a modern asian metropolis....

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] flickfix 11 years ago

I do not understand why films need to be character driven. What's wrong with motif driven where characters represents something else non-human? It's common practice in paintings, sculptures, literary works, photography, theater arts, dance, and done in every culture, so why exclude films?

[–] flickfix 11 years ago

That the fulfillment of revenge comes at great personal sacrifice - that it is a destructive force, leaving individuals more shattered and truncated than before.

But that was not the film I saw. So ...

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] FrankTheTank91 11 years ago

This is an excellent interpretation of the movie. It almost reads like it came straight from the director himself

[–] FrankTheTank91 11 years ago

"The same theme that Noé explored brilliantly in "Irreversible""

Seriously, you trash Memento while cherishing a film that attempts to embellish on the male gentile as a weapon, anal sex, and abusing women?

[–] CodeVeronicaXXX 11 years ago

--"embellishes on the male gentiles"--

I'm having trouble with this line. Are you saying they shouldn't be embellished or aren't worthy? Comes off very much sexist of you. Hope it's not the case.

[–] FrankTheTank91 11 years ago

Thank you for pointing out my rushed and flawed statement. I edited my comment so that it is more clear about my opinion on the movie "irreversible" that the OP seems to want to use as an example of a great film.

I was really surprised to see anyone praising this movie which IMO was only created to provide shock value. There is nothing artistic about a film played in reverse which is quite easy to do. However this was not the issue: The issue is the sense of genuine perversion I get from a director that has the need to spend around 10 minutes on a brutal rape scene. I can support the grittier side of movies that want to provide a true portrayal of similar brutality but the time in which this director languishes on such a scene could only provide eye candy for the most corrupt minded audience. "Irreversible" is closer to representing a faux snuff film than it is art.

[–] Matt_Crawley 11 years ago

Hell, even Christopher Nolan did it better with "Memento" - and that film was a piece of crap, too.

Just no. You're digging a hole for yourself.

Film writer/novelist/music professional
mcoddity.blogspot.co.uk
twitter.com/MatthewCrawley7

[–] ethermusic1981 11 years ago

Memento is definitely overrated. Sure, the happenings play in reverse. So what? Next.

[–] FrankTheTank91 11 years ago

Memento is definitely overrated. Sure, the happenings play in reverse. So what? Next.

This quote can only come from an intellectually challenged blowhard. There is nothing definitive about this movie being overrated because it is your opinion. There is a difference between fact and opinion. Try the online dictionary out and compare the two definitions. I know; you'll be surprised to realize what little you really understand.

[–] ethermusic1981 11 years ago

So many words, FranktheTank, and yet you say absolutely nothing of value.

How about this then, by obnoxious, condescending friend? Memento, IN MY OPINION, is not a very good movie once you get passed the gimmick of it playing backwards. Sure, I remember being rather intrigued by it when I first saw it back when it'd just come out, but that's the problem with gimmicks: they easily can date a film or at least cheapen it greatly once the novelty wears off.

I happen to like one film by Christopher Nolan. The Dark Knight. I think that is his one and only masterpiece. Even that film has numerous problems, but ultimately it's a classic. The rest of his stuff, IN MY OPINION, is a tad overrated, and it seems to be the work of and for the very same people you accuse me of being: intellectually-challenged blowhards. Guess I missed the boat on that one, huh?

[–] mountaindewslave 8 years ago

have you watched The Prestige? that is debatably Nolan's most underrated IMO

she fell through a hole, and was never seen again

[–] Sidd_The_Movie_Slayer 10 years ago

Well no, i don't really agree with you, the film was less about revenge than acceptance.If you notice chang plays a God Character and Julian seeks acceptance form him but the only way to do this is to right the wrongs he has committed,getting the arms that he used to kill his father chopped off. At the same time he is trying to win the acceptance of his mother or the Devil but by the end realizes that he can no longer fight God and takes his punishment. This movie was overall well crafted and thought out but I can understand how scenes like the torture of the hitman can really get to people.
P.S. Nolan and Refn's movies are brilliant, don't dis Memento

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] the_dirty_bandage 11 years ago

I think the great thing about art... any art... is that it hits different people a different way. I watched bits of Alpha Dog, and I liked it for what it was... but I thought the sappy rendition of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" while showing footage of all the characters as happy toddlers was too overt an attempt to hit their audience emotionally. And some people will be hit the right way by it. Some won't. It's all on the audience.

For me the movie wasn't meant to have likable characters that you're supposed to care about. Just like the situations, they're just there to serve a purpose in the overall scheme. It's more a cautionary tale... like a more violent fable... that is there more to convey a message rather than just tell a conventional story. Personally, I don't know what to think of the film as far as "entertainment" or whether or not I'd want to watch it repeatedly... but I concede it was quite effective in almost every technical aspect, especially with such a small budget.

It's not your type of film, fine. "Cancer of the penis"? That sounds like you're rubbing together two brain cells trying to find some sort of witty remark (which fails spectacularly, by the way) in order to illustrate further your dislike. I think the paragraph prior to that sentence encapsulates your feelings perfectly. It's much more well thought-out critique than that I see elsewhere and for other movies. I just think that your last written thought betrays your post... that, as well as the last little retort in your second post.

"Anyone who agrees to rub their breasts live on television is obviously inexcusably disturbed."

[–] ptschultz 11 years ago

Well, I apologize if I undermined my own critique. I could've said something more melodramatic, but I don't think this film is important enough for big emotional testaments. "Cancer in the penis" is about right. It's the same taxonomic level as the film. Actually, it's the perfect phrase.

[–] the_dirty_bandage 11 years ago

Or you could have left it without the puerile comments, period. If the film wasn't important enough, you wouldn't have written as much as you have, or you wouldn't have tried coming up with some "witty" way to end your post... twice.

"Anyone who agrees to rub their breasts live on television is obviously inexcusably disturbed."

[–] kidjay83 11 years ago

This whole film is a cancerous lump just like the douche bag director nicholas winding refn .He was a sperm sample that should of been swallowed not allowed to reach the insemination stage.

My mother would show up on time and know all her lines but who wants to pay to see my mother?

[–] Vega_Lyra 11 years ago

I've seen some people called some bad things on imdb, sir, but that was incredibly well played. <Applause>

Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death.

[–] whatsthisnow 11 years ago

You're ... encouraging him? Please stop. o_O

[–] merqabah 11 years ago

says the person on the internet who doesn't even know how to use "should have"

[–] MetalWorks 11 years ago

Because its characters are more like ideas, representations, manifestations, rather than human characters

Its dark fairy tale without likable characters

[–] LukeGlanton 11 years ago

Really? I loved all the characters...

[–] doctor_victor_vector 11 years ago

all the characters are flat as pancakes and I as an audience member care for none of them, the script and dialogue is laughably cheesy and at times unintentionally funny

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I've read the screenplay. It makes me not want to watch the movie. I had the feeling that the dialogue is spoken by not humans but robots. Here's an example: (maybe it's different from the final draft, but anyway)

JULIAN
I came here to kill you.
CHANG
What's stopping you?
JULIAN
I don't know...
CHANG
Would you like me to tell you?
Julian nods.
CHANG (CONT'D)
You want the Angel of Vengeance.
JULIAN
Yes.
CHANG
Why?
JULIAN
Cause, all my life... I don't know.
CHANG
Yes you do.
JULIAN
My mother wants me to kill you.
Chang stares back at him.
CHANG
And what do you want?

[–] leopoldfrank-1 11 years ago

I just watched the film and don't recall any of that dialogue. I think it may have been replaced by blank stares.

[–] cyril_grey 11 years ago

^Lol. well said.

I hate when a film like this divides an audience and the people who like it try to make it seem like anyone who didn't like it missed some deeper intellect. Fact is, this is a simple revenge tale. It's not deep, the characters are just all bitter and nasty- that doesn't make them "deep". Just making a film with long lingering shots and sparse dialogue does not make a film any deeper than many others. I liked Refn's other films, but I felt like he was taking the piss with this one. It's that fine line between artistic and pretentious. I feel like OGF bleeds too far into the latter to redeem itself. It was a beautiful film to look at and the violence was well paced and effective, but the characters... I'm seeing this a lot lately and I call it the Breaking Bad effect, and that is these anti-heroes with very few, if any redeeming traits. I'm not saying that was the case with BB, but I feel a lot of writers and such looked at that show and said "see! people love to route for the bad guy!" so now all we see are bad people doing bad things, but they are forgetting to give them redeeming qualities. Not to mention, in the real world people don't let other people speak to them like these people do. Maybe one or two, but everyone in this film allows others to debase them in public with no effort to defend themselves- it gets to be a bit much.

But that's just my opinion. I'm not saying anyone is wrong to like it, but they really need to stop with this "you obviously don't get it!" bs. We get it, it's not that hard to get, we just are not impressed with what we see.

And believe me, I've liked some very hard to like films. It has nothing to do with patience.

[–] RaidenPLS 10 years ago

Fact is, this is a simple revenge tale.

Is it? 

It seems to me that this is a film which situates the concept of revenge against moral redemption, and unambiguously endorses the quest for redemption. To characterize Only God Forgives as "a simple revenge tale" is a complete misreading, especially when the murder of Billy is never avenged! I'm not sure what in the film would lead anyone to the conclusion that revenge is a primary (or even a marginal) theme, and if that's what people are looking for then the mixed reactions are unsurprising.

And you will know my name is The Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee!

[–] cyril_grey 11 years ago

and I will say, the end fight was pretty badass.

[–] csjintn 11 years ago

YEA, ptschultz. This film was garbage. I have a friend, who despite all of my efforts to dissuade him from wasting his time on this film, but he was insistent. He is a big Lynch film fan, and can sit through just about anything. He could not even make it past an hour before he turned it off. He is not even sure he will go back to finish it. I reviews films for websnackerblog.com so I HAD to finish it. If my friend could not finish it, though and he is pretty tolerant of films, then you know this film is total *beep*

"Have a better one"

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] da_phil_69 11 years ago

One of the worst films that I've ever seen. Saw it because a website listed it as "TOP thrillers of 2013". Predictable script, awful acting, barely any words are spoken. It's slow and boring. Also very pretentious. The film focuses on trying to make a blank script into something "artistic and deep".

Did anyone see the mother's acting? It's like they got actors off of the street.

First 20 minutes of watching and I could've sworn this is an indie film.

I gave it a 1. The only redeeming quality it has is that it isn't too long so I didn't waste too much time.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]