Post by james on Feb 16, 2009 11:27:46 GMT -5
Derrick -
Count me in as another fan of this film (though I have to admit that the only reason I went to see it in a theater was the fact that I loved Fincher's previous movie, Zodiac).
One thing you didn't mention (I don't think?): the film is set in New Orleans, and it ends with Hurricane Katrina. I could be reading too much into this, but I definitely wondered if the film was intended, on one level, as a tribute to the people of New Orleans, who were so often ignored by the media and the government after the flooding. The film was partially shot in New Orleans and other parts of Louisiana, and as little as I know about either, it seems to be set in a specific culture with accurate regional accents (at times).
It's been compared to Forrest Gump, but I think Benjamin Button is the better movie, by far. One thing you can see is the different views of women in the two films. In Gump, there are only two female characters to speak of, and they both exist only in relation to the title character - you don't see any inner life otherwise. (Plus, Jenny exists to make all sorts of bad choices, but the "game" (movie) is rigged because Forest is retarded and can't really make the same decisions - everything just happens to him through no action on his part).
All of the female characters in Button have their own lives apart from Benjamin - his adoptive mother runs a retirement home, his first love wants to cross the English Channel and eventually does, Daisy is a dancer and eventually starts a studio. But all of the characters seem much more interesting in this movie, where I almost felt that the characters in Gump existed to be laughed at.
One other thing I want to mention about the movie, that I also liked - Fincher's use of "old-time" film technique from the silent era (sorry, I don't know the technical terms). He does this for the early scene with the story of the clockmaker, and again sporadically for the story of the old man who was struck by lightning seven times. That style worked for me, where the CGI in Gump putting Tom Hanks alongside historical figures just seemed like a stunt.
Another difference between the two is that Forrest Gump walks through life (or history, or whatever) practically by accident and never seems to be affected by it. Benjamin Button meets people and is truly affected by them, especially Daisy in the short time they can be together. And the movie ends with the shots of all of the major characters and what they achieved as Benjamin knew them. Worked for me and I walked out loving the movie. And I'm usually not interested in this type of movie that seems like it's Oscar-bait. It was Fincher behind the camera that made me want to see it, and I'm glad I did.
(Also, the scene of the U-Boat attack in the ocean is extraordinary - it has to be seen on the big screen to be fully appreciated).
Count me in as another fan of this film (though I have to admit that the only reason I went to see it in a theater was the fact that I loved Fincher's previous movie, Zodiac).
One thing you didn't mention (I don't think?): the film is set in New Orleans, and it ends with Hurricane Katrina. I could be reading too much into this, but I definitely wondered if the film was intended, on one level, as a tribute to the people of New Orleans, who were so often ignored by the media and the government after the flooding. The film was partially shot in New Orleans and other parts of Louisiana, and as little as I know about either, it seems to be set in a specific culture with accurate regional accents (at times).
It's been compared to Forrest Gump, but I think Benjamin Button is the better movie, by far. One thing you can see is the different views of women in the two films. In Gump, there are only two female characters to speak of, and they both exist only in relation to the title character - you don't see any inner life otherwise. (Plus, Jenny exists to make all sorts of bad choices, but the "game" (movie) is rigged because Forest is retarded and can't really make the same decisions - everything just happens to him through no action on his part).
All of the female characters in Button have their own lives apart from Benjamin - his adoptive mother runs a retirement home, his first love wants to cross the English Channel and eventually does, Daisy is a dancer and eventually starts a studio. But all of the characters seem much more interesting in this movie, where I almost felt that the characters in Gump existed to be laughed at.
One other thing I want to mention about the movie, that I also liked - Fincher's use of "old-time" film technique from the silent era (sorry, I don't know the technical terms). He does this for the early scene with the story of the clockmaker, and again sporadically for the story of the old man who was struck by lightning seven times. That style worked for me, where the CGI in Gump putting Tom Hanks alongside historical figures just seemed like a stunt.
Another difference between the two is that Forrest Gump walks through life (or history, or whatever) practically by accident and never seems to be affected by it. Benjamin Button meets people and is truly affected by them, especially Daisy in the short time they can be together. And the movie ends with the shots of all of the major characters and what they achieved as Benjamin knew them. Worked for me and I walked out loving the movie. And I'm usually not interested in this type of movie that seems like it's Oscar-bait. It was Fincher behind the camera that made me want to see it, and I'm glad I did.
(Also, the scene of the U-Boat attack in the ocean is extraordinary - it has to be seen on the big screen to be fully appreciated).
