MovieChat Forums > Spring Breakers (2013) Discussion > Honest discussion about this movie?

Honest discussion about this movie?

posted 11 years ago by ChristianGerard
63 replies | jump to latest

I am a 27-year old male. I did not watch this movie when it first came out because it's advertisements were very clearly geared at young females, and to a lesser extent young males. It made it seem like another party movie. Last night I got over this fact, and I had literally forgotten that Selena Gomez, and some blondes from shows that my girlfriend watches were in it. Honestly, had I remembered that, it would have been enough to keep me away from watching it. Once you take out that hype, and just concentrate on the movie itself, it was really good! The art direction was really well done and they story did play out to the end.

I would like to know actual reasons of why you did or did not like it.

[–] jinojiwantenggara 11 years ago

TO me it was a long hip-hop music video with a little story in it.
And there were party; boobs; booze; drugs; butt, that about all.

------
"People only want to hear what they want to hear"

[–] tigervispa 11 years ago

What story? I couldn't find any.

[–] JimTKirk 11 years ago

I'm a 26 year old male and loved this movie. I knew nothing about it going in, so all I expected was another debauchery fest. It ended up being much more than that. I came for the bewbs, but stayed for the substance.

Strangely, I found all the main characters very relatable. Who among us hasn't fantasized about breaking free from their mundane life and just dancing the night away? Freezing time at a point when you were young and felt on top of the world. Living as if it were "Spring Break foreva, bitches."

Perhaps this movie shouldn't be analyzed too much. What I got it from it was more a feeling than a coherent message. For whatever reason, it struck an emotional chord with me. I'm sure most of that has to do with the cinematography and song choices. The Britney Spears montage in particular was brilliant.

[–] AlexDuran 11 years ago

It's a very good film. I can see film buffs really appreciating it, people who just wanted to be entertained hating it scathingly.

[–] sm-meehan 11 years ago

The movie is solid. I think you need to know the director going in. I'd be surprised if fans of his are the ones bashing the film. The cinematography is stunning and it boasts my favorite scene of the year around the song "Everytime" by Britney Spears.

[–] senpaidude 11 years ago

It was a mediocre film. Lacked a lot on the story side. Wasn't as bad as people here want to let understand, but wasn't any good either. Just a mediocre film. I think the current rating is quite realistic.

----
Add IMHO in front of my every sentence if it makes you feel any better.

[–] zappalover 11 years ago

I'm 60+yrs old and liked it more as it progressed. It evolves into a formidable satire of youth/hip-hop culture and does so very well. It concludes on a satisfying note -- a logical end-state of the decay that proceeds it. 8/10 stars.

Life is a state of mind.

[–] pauldada 11 years ago

I'm old, too. (sigh) But I didn't see any point to it. The Girls-Gone-Wild beach/party scenes were dated and boring after
a minute or two. Since I grew up before the Disney Channel I didn't recognize any of the actresses, and the brunette aside they were hard to tell apart. They certainly weren't written as distinct characters. That might have been one of the director's points, but so what? If you can't tell who you're watching it's hard to invest any interest in them. If you think that's an 'art movie' choice, see a couple of Terence Malick movies. In comparison, Harmony Korine doesn't have a clue, whether in story, casting, or cinematography. And it's not like he's some brilliant out-of-control kid: he's 40-something.

I'm glad that somebody up the thread here noted the racism. It's kind of shocking that that escaped most of the people posting, pro or con. Here you've got a trio of blonde college girls robbing a chicken joint with a lot of black male patrons
(In what universe would that actually happen?). Then a bunch of wall-to-wall white partying, with one black girl just for contrast, then a lot of posturing among black homies and wannabe's like the Franco character away from the beach (now
the contrast there would have been a premise for an actual movie!), ending with the remaining blondes blowing away a whole extended family of gangstas armed to the teeth. Is that satire? If you insist . . . didn't work for me though.

Who, who ever told James Franco he could act? I've seen the guy in half a dozen movies now, and I wish him no harm, but I just don't see any talent there. The same clueless smirk, again and again.

[–] yan-trussart 10 years ago

No offense but to judge a movie such as "Spring Breakers" by the strenth of its story is pretty ridiculous...

Not all movies demands the same kind of viewing.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LeCadavreExquis 10 years ago

You know what is starting to annoy me? That rethorical strategy of critiquing a film by making up dubious motives others have for avtually enjoying it.

Things like, the only reason you enjoy this film is because it's a middle aged man's wet dream (so, if you did like it you're a probably beyond borderline creepy ephebophile) or if you did manage to extract some social or moral meaning you're either an easily impressed adolescent or a pretentious twat that would interpret the skid marks in his underpants as a (post-)post-modern nod at Duchamp.

The key is not to engage with this tactic of a priori condescension which would legitimize this non-argumentative strategy.

Thought it was an accomplished film: structurally, visually, sonically and, yes, I thought it had something interesting to say... Want to get some inkling why I thought so, read my interpretation: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2101441/board/thread/231006867

Ghosts and lovers, they will haunt you for a while

[–] Wolfbrother1983 10 years ago

I've stated my reasons for not liking this film. It is all style & art, but with little or no concrete story to back that up. Story is the spine of good film.

I gave this film a 6 just for the visual flare & style. It's exact same score for pretty much same reason as "Eraserhead" and "Suspiria".

"America isn't ready for a gay, mexican chicken sandwich" - Poultrygeist

[–] mrdisorder 9 years ago

Movies are a visual medium, they don't need stories. Same as how songs and paintings don't need stories. Hollywood has dug the general public into a hole with thinking that stories are a requirement for a movie.

---
You'll never get what you want if you don't know what it is.

[–] EliCassoutt 10 years ago

This is the most honest discussion about the film that I've come across. It's long, but it's worth hearing if you wanna her why people love the movie and why others hate it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWmqh4reesU

[–] Jakemcclake 9 years ago

The movie was not as bad as some made it out to be.
But you might need to suspend belief for some of it.

That's OK, I do not go to movies to see documentaries often.

The scene that was repeated was repeated for a reason. That scene being the robbery at the Chicken Shack.

The second view of that robbery shows that two of these girls, Brit and Candy are very violent and predatory. That second view of that scene brings you face to face with the fear and violence they thrilled at causing.
When you understand their nature, you can see into the future the other shocking things they do, including the numerous murders at the end.