I just watched it, and I am.. blown away, surprised, amazed, boggled.

The interview with the director made a very good point that resonated with me: A lot of people are drawn to contradictions. I would amplify that and say that the notion of a Jewish Nazi is utterly illogical and incomprehensible, yet it did happen, at least once. (The movie is based on a 1965 incident when a person who had been involved with the American Nazi Party and later the KKK turned out to have been Jewish. The man shot himself not long after the news article hit the press.) I will probably never grasp, effectively, the notion that a person can be his own enemy. It would like me trying to make myself fall up instead of down; it is just that basic a contradiction. I think it's why I like this movie anyway.

As an aside, Alvin Toffler wrote of a "Gay Nazi" movement that briefly flourished in the late 1970s. I can't make that compute either, but there you have it.

On a related subject, I felt one of the best scenes in the movie was when a sensitivity training session evolved just a bit away from two groups of people who had completely opposite experiences and into an actual debating session - just briefly.

I would advise watching this movie when you're not stressed out or anything, because the movie has the main character saying and doing things that are, obviously, going to be quite revolting. But it is worth watching.

[ 01 May 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

It's not that hard for me to get my head around the idea, though. The idea of 'self hate' is not new. It's an aberation of traditional rebellion, perhaps.

I remember reading that there was a jewish man who was one of the directors of the Heritage Front in Toronto in the early 90's. There is - or was - a Jew in the leadership of le Pen's Front National in France, as well (though the FN is not as extreme as the Nazis, and has no overtly anti-semitic policies).

In any case, The Believer is a fascinating character study.

[ 02 May 2004: Message edited by: 1st Person ]

quote:

---

This is a totally different kind of movie, but the the ending of "The Usual Suspects" (1995) just blew me away completely. I remember staring at the TV screen, jaw dropping to the floor, and rewinding to watch the last 5 minutes at least 3 times.

---

quote:

---

the 2nd viewing was a completely different movie from the first.

---

quote:

---

I found the same thing with Fight Club.

---

I've watched the wonderful Donnie Darko several times to see if the time shifts make sense. It's being re-released in the theatres apparently and I'll definitely catch it on the big screen!

12:01, whose premise was dumbed down for Groundhog Day, The Thirteenth Floor and the underrated eXistenZ are also good flicks that depict worlds where all is not what it appears to be.

[ 06 May 2004: Message edited by: Sisyphus ]

I loved the technique of it: the whole film was a series of vignettes that were all filmed, but then were animated by coloring the actual footage, giving it a very real/surreal feeling.

The content itself is all over the map, but hangs together very well, IMHO. It really is a film about philosophy, and philosophical ideas about the nature of life, and reality. There is a lot of talk (like in many Linklater films) flowing past you, and I'd need more viewings to fully appreciate it.

"hey man, you got a joint?"
"No."
"It would be a lot cooler if you did."

quote:

---

Originally posted by swirrlygrrl:
I didn't find Memento to be all that great - possibly because I'd both been warned to watch carefully, and had seen Following prior to that. But it was thought provoking, taking the comforting lies we tell ourselves to the extreme. The dvd does have a neat feature where you can watch the movie in chronological order.

---

I just saw Following recently. I saw Memento too, and liked it at the time, but Following made much more of an impression.

Anyone seen The Goddess of 1967?

[ 06 May 2004: Message edited by: Mike Keenan ]

quote:

---

Interestingly enough, though, it was the only movie I've ever seen people walk out of in the theatre. Weird.

---

quote:

---

Waking Life worked only because the amazing animation helped blunt the effects of Linklater's horrible, uber pretensious, faux-philosophy. Otherwise it would have been another shitheap like Slacker. Buddy should stick to far elike Dazed and Confused. No wthere's a movie.

---

Now, BD, you have to admit that you've probably had at least one or two of those uberpretentious philosophical conversations in your lifetime, and that at the time, for you, they were probably pretty interesting, perhaps even fascinating. For you.

Linklater's amazing because somehow he manages to hear everything everyone's talking about all the time, and bring it out in his films' dialogue. It's just really real. I don't think it's him pontificating, so much as regurgitating. And that he finds such entertaining and interesting ways to do it (as in the mid 70's texan highschoolers smoky stream of consciousness or the fuzzed out, ever fuzzier animation of the lucid dreaming) makes it easier to swallow when they get a bit loopy with their philosophizing.

And besides, there are some genuinely interesting and thought-provoking sentiments expressed in both those movies.

But yes, Slackers sucked ass. Mostly just because it was all so angry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Willowdale Wizard:

was it during the self-immolation scene?

---

quote:

---

"hey man, you got a joint?"
"No."
"It would be a lot cooler if you did

---

HA! I also love:

"That's what I love about high school girls. I get older...they stay the same age."

(The motto for dirty old men everywhere.)

quote:

---

"hey man, you got a joint?"
"No."
"It would be a lot cooler if you did."

---

uh, dudes, it's actually like this:

Mitch gets in the car and is introduced to Wooderson. Mitch says "how's it going"

Wooderson, after a mischevious pause, inquires, "say man, you got a joint?" and Mitch replies, awfully cautiously, "No..not on me, man", and Wooderson says back, "'d be a lot cooler if you did"...

(if yer gonna quote lines from my movie, you gotta do it right!).

My other favourite is at the very end, when they're all piling into Wooderson's car to go get the Aerosmith tickets, and Wooderson goes "heeeyy, watch the leatherr, man!". That's funny too.

My favourite in the whole movie is always Slater, though..."fixin'ta be a lot better man..."

When I said:

quote:

---

But yes, Slackers sucked ass. Mostly just because it was all so angry

---

I was really talking about Suburbia. That's Linklater's movie about some twentysomethings who hang around a corner store and bitch and moan all the time.

Slackers is a totally different movie, and it's not really all that bad, but it's not a Richard Linklater movie.

That's all.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Lizard Breath ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lizard Breath:
I was really talking about Suburbia. That's Linklater's movie about some twentysomethings who hang around a corner store and bitch and moan all the time.

---

Gee, that sounds just like Clerks. Except Clerks was good.

quote:

---

Waking Life worked only because the amazing animation helped blunt the effects of Linklater's horrible, uber pretensious, faux-philosophy.

---

I think Waking Life worked for a lot of reasons, not least of which was the amazing soundtrack by Glover Gill and his Tosca Tango Orchestra.

As to the "pretentiousness" of most of the dialogue, agreed.

As is all high-falutin' philosophy-talk.

I've observed that this bothered mostly people who expect some sort of serious pedagogical function from their artsitic consumption and who resented their idea (which I don't agree with) that Linklater was trying to convince the audeience of something or other.

I didn't see it that way.

I'd call the movie a celebration of ideas, period.

Stupid ideas, banal ideas, flaky ideas and ideas that are provocative, amusing and important.

Vernon, Florida

It's hilarious. Or cruel. Depending on the day, I suppose. But when it's funny there's nothing in the world that's funnier.