Serious Movie Discussion XLI

[europe1]

It's downright annoying and does less for me without a proper intellectual adversary.

You know what, based on your line of reasoning, try All About Eve next. It might be right up your ballpark.

Or alternatively, something like Philidelpiha Story.

Intellectual heavyweights dueling with their emotions and lifestyles through awesome dialogue.

If she was a proper representative of her culture rather than an exile I'd say that was true. But maybe she is supposed to represent some of its problematic aspects, in the sense that her failure to maintain the right virtues (beauty, chastity) ultimately dooms her.

It wasn't yesterday that I saw Streetcar, but if memory serves, I did read the narrative more as an criticism of the "Southern Belle" cultural arctype, which Blanche's embodies.

I'm not sure what you mean by calling her an exile. That she's lost her riches? But the point of Streetcar is to illustrate how such an particular upper-class mentality is not glamorous or likable, that in fact breeds into stereotypes and antagonism about ethnic groups and lower-class people. The conflict Belche has between herself and... everything else is that her Southern Belle persona tunes her into looking astray at so many people.

It's not that Bella represents problematic aspects of the Southern Belle, it's that the Southern Belle in-and-of-itself is a problematic, antagonistic mentality -- and the only situation in which it can trive is the affluent upper-classes where you don't have to deal with anyone that isn't of your own kind.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Its a character driven piece, what you are viewing as the centrical plot is vehicle to further who Julian is and the existential conflicts he is dealing with. Its your opinion, but to criticize a film cause you want 'more plot' sounds like you want a traditional story telling outline in your films, which you won't get from Refn.

It sounds to me like you're accepting everything Refn gives you as perfect in-and-of itself without imagining other possibilities. My criticism is entirely conceivable without reducing his films to Transformers. I know you've admitted to fanboy-ism already but you're now indulging in some of the black-and-white thinking that comes from that.

The use of the setting is another criticism I see for Refn films sometimes which makes no sense. Its used to stylized the movie in a unique, artistic way with nightmarish undertones to parallel the dark story that is being told. Would you rather it was more bland visually? I don't get it. Seems like you're looking too deep into things that shouldn't be, and not deep enough into the things that require more thought.

I liked the setting, which is why I criticized the lack of use of it.

I can't make any sense out of this paragraph about Drive. No offense, but you seem like the type to favor mainstream movies over independent artistic pieces. OGF isn't about cheering for a protagonist, its not about a romance, and I don't get where you're going in regards to the gym. Its all about the inner conflict of Julian and how it comes to a forefront through the film's events.

Reductionism again. I know what the film's about, I'm saying it was unsatisfying. Going further, I'm saying it likely could have been more satisfying yet fundamentally about the same thing. It was economical in a refined way no doubt, but when I'm not especially interested in what's being focused on, the efficiency loses its impressiveness.

We can agree to disagree here.

You know what, based on your line of reasoning, try All About Eve next. It might be right up your ballpark.

Or alternatively, something like Philidelpiha Story.

Intellectual heavyweights dueling with their emotions and lifestyles through awesome dialogue.

Thanks! I'll try the first tonight.

It wasn't yesterday that I saw Streetcar, but if memory serves, I did read the narrative more as an criticism of the "Southern Belle" cultural archetype, which Blanche's embodies.

I'm not sure what you mean by calling her an exile. That she's lost her riches? But the point of Streetcar is to illustrate how such an particular upper-class mentality is not glamorous or likable, that in fact breeds into stereotypes and antagonism about ethnic groups and lower-class people. The conflict Belche has between herself and... everything else is that her Southern Belle persona tunes her into looking astray at so many people.

It's not that Bella represents problematic aspects of the Southern Belle, it's that the Southern Belle in-and-of-itself is a problematic, antagonistic mentality -- and the only situation in which it can trive is the affluent upper-classes where you don't have to deal with anyone that isn't of your own kind.

I like this analysis and almost agree entirely - it's what I was focused on while watching as well. But what I'm saying is that Blanche is not just a Southern Belle but rather a particular Southern Belle who has been woefully unsuccessful in executing her trope in her home setting. She's neurotic, lacking self-esteem, and obsessed with her fading looks. A different Belle personality may have handled her finances better and been able to network for help without turning to prostitution, though none of them would have likely hit it off with Stanley lol. I'm open to her personality being an inevitable consequence of her culture, and that being the target of the real condemnation here, but that seems a little ambitious of a connection to make. There could also be historical events in background like the gradual impoverishment of the American South that I'm not especially informed about.

I dunno, theoretically I seem to hit a stumbling block when it comes to accepting representations of abstract concepts (ex. marriage) from abnormal characters (George and Martha). Maybe it's the post hoc ergo propter hoc scientist in me making too many distinctions.

 

[Joseph Budden]

It sounds to me like you're accepting everything Refn gives you as perfect in-and-of itself without imagining other possibilities. My criticism is entirely conceivable without reducing his films to Transformers. I know you've admitted to fanboy-ism already but you're now indulging in some of the black-and-white thinking that comes from that.



I liked the setting, which is why I criticized the lack of use of it.



Reductionism again. I know what the film's about, I'm saying it was unsatisfying. Going further, I'm saying it likely could have been more satisfying yet fundamentally about the same thing.

We can agree to disagree here.

What other possibilities? You are criticizing, but there is no substance to your argument. "More plot" is missing the point of the film, there is an entire history laid out of the main character on top of symbolism and sequences that put us inside of his thoughts and conscious, so what are you looking for? I do think he captured the mood of the film in a very mesmerizing way, and I enjoyed it, so even if 'perfect' isn't the word I have a great appreciation for the aesthetics and the unconventional story telling. If you're gonna fall back on 'fan-boy' as your rebuttal, then don't bother, thats weak.

OK fair enough. He captured it in his own way, I guess you were expecting more of Bangkok? Idk.

Idk, I still don't really get your arguments. How would it have been more satisfying yet about the same thing? Unless i'm off on my interpretation so far your reasoning is not as much Bangkok as you wanted and not a black and white protagonist who has clearly established motives. If thats what you wanted, so be it, but it just seems like unfulfilled expectations rather than any reasonable argument against the film. Its not a film built off the narrative outlines a majority of others are, so expecting such things is a guaranteed letdown.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Unless i'm off on my interpretation so far your reasoning is not as much Bangkok as you wanted and not a black and white protagonist who has clearly established motives.

Yea, no.

We're clearly talking past one another here so I'm going to call it quits for now. Lookout for my thoughts on The Neon Demon once I make it to a viewing

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

All About Eve was very well done, though straightforward. Loved the incisiveness of the Shere Khan-motherfucker and was almost convinced myself that Eve was too cute to be up to anything nefarious. Other than Eve I really felt as though each of the characters had a properly defined role and purpose, which made it an effortless watch. Delineating their contributions to the theater culture in the beginning likely contributed to that. I also appreciated some of the more genuine intentions shown by Karen and especially Billy, who was a boss (and whose demeanor brought Harrison Ford to mind, for some reason). I would have been pissed if Margo had continued to refuse his bid for marriage and I was pleased that her acceptance marked an entire paradigm shift for her character. That's how cool guys are supposed to roll.

I caught a bit of the homosexual vibes Wikipedia discussed in some scenes from later in the film, but I suppose it's difficult to experience that presence as threatening with the movie plucked out its sociopolitical context. I prefer to think that Eve and DeWitt just had different priorities than sex. I did like the implicit discussion of female values and especially the line about how every female must play the role of a woman. Though I don't think it's much different for men, this film in particular put competition between women on display and gave us a more in-depth look at the trials and tribulations of that. The dialogue was entertaining though still had nothing on Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, but thanks for the recommendation anyway @europe1.

Another weird one I found on some list was Roman Polanski's Carnage, which I put on just to see the quartet of John C. Reilly, Jodie Foster, Christopher Waltz, and Kate Winslet go at it. I wasn't disappointed, but while the film had a few lines and one or two guffaws I didn't find much more to it than that. One thing I have to compliment is the camerawork and positioning that constantly imply the visiting couple is going to leave - not to mention the escalating "PC" dialogue that has the audience begging them to please just do it already. But they stick around half-convincingly for some coffee and then we get one of the most unfortunately realistic puking scenes of recent memory. Gross.

I just finished Primer now and I don't have much to say about it other than that the representation of scientific-slash-technological discovery was refreshing, as was the commitment to a subdued, step-wise methodology of the main characters. There's no "eureka" moment in this and, more noticeably, not even a single exclamation of "time travel!" Understated from the scenery to the soundtrack and utterly mind-boggling, I can see why people got attached to it.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

BTW for those counting along that's 37/100 for the year and on pace for.. a lot this month.


...I'm very sad and this serves well as a coping tool.

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

BTW for those counting along that's 37/100 for the year and on pace for.. a lot this month.


...I'm very sad and this serves well as a coping tool.

Movies are good coping mechanisms! Here for you buddy

 

[Flemmy Stardust]

The problem with something like Only God Forgives is a) that it's fucking boring. The pace and the hyper-attention on cinematography is nothing refreshing to me at this point, so standing on that alone...which it does for so many...it falls well short for me.

B) it's not actually saying anything "bigger picture" and the story points don't make up for it.

So if we take Ricky's reading...why should i care about any of that when it's not speaking toward real experience? Further...what the fuck is God even forgiving in relationship to you and i? It's nonsense when taken out of the context of the very specific world of Only God Forgives.

It's the equivalent of "be sure to drink your ovaltine." A riddle with no payoff beyond the actual solving of it. There is nothing productive to think about, and without a strong story behind it....no thank you.

 

[Joseph Budden]

The problem with something like Only God Forgives is a) that it's fucking boring. The pace and the hyper-attention on cinematography is nothing refreshing to me at this point, so standing on that alone...which it does for so many...it falls well short for me.

B) it's not actually saying anything "bigger picture" and the story points don't make up for it.

So if we take Ricky's reading...why should i care about any of that when it's not speaking toward real experience? Further...what the fuck is God even forgiving in relationship to you and i? It's nonsense when taken out of the context of the very specific world of Only God Forgives.

It's the equivalent of "be sure to drink your ovaltine." A riddle with no payoff beyond the actual solving of it. There is nothing productive to think about, and without a strong story behind it....no thank you.

The problem with people who make criticisms like you are is that a) it being boring is subjective. Go watch Marvel movies where you're force fed simple humor and get your action fix through generic as fuck plot outlines. I'll take the visually and intellectually engaging art film

b) People get overly drawn to the fact its an art film and make retarded criticisms like there is no 'big picture'. Like, what? This is just as absurd as Caveat's 'I want more plot' criticism

It speaks toward real experience just in an extreme way. You've never felt like you've been dealt a hand that you want to get out of but can't find a way to? You've never loved your parents and felt they wanted something from you and you felt obliged to do it cause they are your parents, even if you know its wrong?

Sorry bud, but what a dumb fucking post.

 

[Flemmy Stardust]

The problem with people who make criticisms like you are is that a) it being boring is subjective. Go watch Marvel movies where you're force fed simple humor and get your action fix through generic as fuck plot outlines. I'll take the visually and intellectually engaging art film

The entirety of art is subjective. The problem with you is that you think liking Refn is a reflection of your profundity, where the truth is, you read some dude's analysis and waited for Ricky to put words in your mouth.

b) People get overly drawn to the fact its an art film and make retarded criticisms like there is no 'big picture'. Like, what?

"Bigger picture" is having a point. It's inspiration instead of lamentation. Observing the world and existence, REAL existence, and having commentary of some kind on it.

So, for example...the most fundamental point of Mad Max Fury Road, stripped all the way down is to face your demons instead of running from them.

What's the point of Only God Forgives, buddy? To beg for forgiveness? What does Refn actually say?

He chooses a style where it is so easy to say anything he wants...there's few rules...and he chooses to essentially masturbate.

It speaks toward real experience just in an extreme way. You've never felt like you've been dealt a hand that you want to get out of but can't find a way to? You've never loved your parents and felt they wanted something from you and you felt obliged to do it cause they are your parents, even if you know its wrong?

If i did, why would i want to indulge in these self-pity parties?

The ultimate shortcoming of art house that I've experienced is that most of them don't have the balls to take any kind of stand on a matter. They have no guts.

Weep, pine, and thrash about in their sorrow.

Sorry bud, but what a dumb fucking post.

A complement coming from you.

 

[Joseph Budden]

The entirety of art is subjective. The problem with you is that you think liking Refn is a reflection of your profundity, where the truth is, you read some dude's analysis and waited for Ricky to put words in your mouth.



"Bigger picture" is having a point. It's inspiration instead of lamentation. Observing the world and existence, REAL existence, and having commentary of some kind on it.

So, for example...the most fundamental point of Mad Max Fury Road, stripped all the way down is to face your demons instead of running from them.

What's the point of Only God Forgives, buddy? To beg for forgiveness? What does Refn actually say?

He chooses a style where it is so easy to say anything he wants...there's few rules...and he chooses to essentially masturbate.



The ultimate shortcoming of art house that I've experienced is that most of them have the balls to take any kind of stand on a matter. They have no guts.

Weep, pine, and thrash about in their sorrow.



A complement coming from you.

Completely off base but sure bud, whatever makes you feel better

There is a point. You just missed it. Clearly. All movies have commentary on 'REAL existence', right? lol

Whats the point? Funny you say that, and then go on to ignore the relatable subject matters of the film I pointed out.

Arthouse films have no guts lol that might be the dumbest shit i've ever read. Guess going against the grain of formulaic film making doesn't equate to having guts in your world.

I've been diplomatic, but at this point its clear you just have no reasonable interpretation for the film at all. Not even close. So just go on your way instead of posting real dumb shit.

 

[Flemmy Stardust]

All movies have commentary on 'REAL existence', right? lol

Not that one. "Cry with me"?

Whats the point? Funny you say that, and then go on to ignore the relatable subject matters of the film I pointed out.

No, i took them and drew attention toward actually offering something instead of purging sadness. My point all along is that it doesn't have a point.

It's temporary catharsis. What's he crying about in Neon Demon?

Arthouse films have no guts lol that might be the dumbest shit i've ever read. Guess going against the grain of formulaic film making doesn't equate to having guts in your world.

Given surrealist literature before it and the abundance of avant-garde filmmakers leading up to Refn, sorry...I'm not impressed by the abstract in and of itself. I don't think it's especially daring, and i've seen it done much better than Refn will likely ever come close to.

I've been diplomatic, but at this point its clear you just have no reasonable interpretation for the film at all. Not even close. So just go on your way instead of posting real dumb shit.

It bored the shit out of me...just like your defense of it.

 

[Joseph Budden]

Not that one. "Cry with me"?



No, i took them and drew attention toward actually offering something instead of purging sadness. My point all along is that it doesn't have a point.

It's temporary catharsis. What's he crying about in Neon Demon?



Given surrealist literature before it and the abundance of avant-garde filmmakers leading up to Refn, sorry...I'm not impressed by the abstract in and of itself. I don't think it's especially daring, and i've seen it done much better than Refn will likely ever come close to.



It bored the shit out of me...just like your defense of it.

Oh, so then any movie that doesn't have commentary on 'REAL existence' is shit to you I suppose?

So because its a sad movie, there is no point now? Are you reading this shit back to yourself? lol there is a point and I pointed out two of them. Just because they are 'sad' doesn't give you the right to deem them unqualified.

This isn't surrealist literature, so what kind of comparison is that? I'd love to know what you deem as 'daring' as far as film making is concerned.

 

[Flemmy Stardust]

Oh, so then any movie that doesn't have commentary on 'REAL existence' is shit to you I suppose?

Like i said, without strong story telling, yes i do.

So because its a sad movie, there is no point now? Are you reading this shit back to yourself? lol there is a point and I pointed out two of them. Just because they are 'sad' doesn't give you the right to deem them unqualified.

You pointed out two sad experiences that Refn lost himself in. I dare you to find what Refn so brilliantly offers about having those experiences. Anything even approaching advice.

On your own, intellectual movie guy. Explain to me, guy with caveman taste.

This isn't surrealist literature, so what kind of comparison is that? I'd love to know what you deem as 'daring' as far as film making is concerned.

I think it's daring to have an opinion and stand behind it. I think it's daring to wrap an intricate plot around it and to work artistically within the limitations created by it.

I think that is the much more challenging endeavor.

I think it's daring to try to write compelling dialogue.

 

[europe1]

Loved the incisiveness of the Shere Khan-motherfucker

I was going for "dat voice" but yeah... incisiveness, thats...a fitting word for describing him too.

But everyone on that cast was working like a field-mule to make it their most iconic performance ever.

was almost convinced myself that Eve was too cute to be up to anything nefarious

One of the thing that is so good about that movie is that it's so obvious that Eve has hidden motives yet the film plays it so smoothly that you are lulled into a sense of complacency towards her.

I caught a bit of the homosexual vibes Wikipedia discussed in some scenes from later in the film, but I suppose it's difficult to experience that presence as threatening with the movie plucked out its sociopolitical context. I prefer to think that Eve and DeWitt just had different priorities than sex.

Honeslty, that flew over my head.

I did like the implicit discussion of female values and especially the line about how every female must play the role of a woman. this film in particular put competition between women on display and gave us a more in-depth look at the trials and tribulations of that.

The best review of All About Eve I've ever seen is this.

There are two kinds of women. Those who think All About Eve is the best movie of all time and those who have never seen All About Eve.

though still had nothing on Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, but thanks for the recommendation anyway @europe1.

Careful young grasshopper, the All About Eve cult is prosperous and powerful. You'll find many-a-cultists who will proclaim that it's the greatest script ever written.

but thanks for the recommendation anyway @europe1.

So it appears that my clever ploy to dethrone Virginia Woolf didn't work.

If you're still up for suggestions -- In a Lonely Place is one of my personal favorite movies and among those which gave me the strongest emotional reaction. It seems just as good a hitman as any to nominate for elimination of Caveat's Woolfatocracy (I had it up for nomination in my Sherdog Movie Club Week). If you're ready to delve into the existentialist arthouse pool though, Stalker is the movie which I lured Huntermania into seeing, aiming to topple Black Swan off his favorite movie list by showing him it. It almost succedeed. (though, considering how feverently Hunter loves that movie I guess that's a feat in-and-of-itself.). And incidently it's likewise one of my favorite films.

BTW for those counting along that's 37/100 for the year and on pace for.. a lot this month.


...I'm very sad and this serves well as a coping tool.

Man this year I'm probably averaging two movies a-day.

Nothing wrong with me though! I meet my sanity yesterday at the barbers shop and he said I was an alright kid!

 

[ufcfan4]

All About Eve was very well done, though straightforward. Loved the incisiveness of the Shere Khan-motherfucker and was almost convinced myself that Eve was too cute to be up to anything nefarious. Other than Eve I really felt as though each of the characters had a properly defined role and purpose, which made it an effortless watch. Delineating their contributions to the theater culture in the beginning likely contributed to that. I also appreciated some of the more genuine intentions shown by Karen and especially Billy, who was a boss (and whose demeanor brought Harrison Ford to mind, for some reason). I would have been pissed if Margo had continued to refuse his bid for marriage and I was pleased that her acceptance marked an entire paradigm shift for her character. That's how cool guys are supposed to roll.

I caught a bit of the homosexual vibes Wikipedia discussed in some scenes from later in the film, but I suppose it's difficult to experience that presence as threatening with the movie plucked out its sociopolitical context. I prefer to think that Eve and DeWitt just had different priorities than sex. I did like the implicit discussion of female values and especially the line about how every female must play the role of a woman. Though I don't think it's much different for men, this film in particular put competition between women on display and gave us a more in-depth look at the trials and tribulations of that. The dialogue was entertaining though still had nothing on Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, but thanks for the recommendation anyway @europe1.

Another weird one I found on some list was Roman Polanski's Carnage, which I put on just to see the quartet of John C. Reilly, Jodie Foster, Christopher Waltz, and Kate Winslet go at it. I wasn't disappointed, but while the film had a few lines and one or two guffaws I didn't find much more to it than that. One thing I have to compliment is the camerawork and positioning that constantly imply the visiting couple is going to leave - not to mention the escalating "PC" dialogue that has the audience begging them to please just do it already. But they stick around half-convincingly for some coffee and then we get one of the most unfortunately realistic puking scenes of recent memory. Gross.

I just finished Primer now and I don't have much to say about it other than that the representation of scientific-slash-technological discovery was refreshing, as was the commitment to a subdued, step-wise methodology of the main characters. There's no "eureka" moment in this and, more noticeably, not even a single exclamation of "time travel!" Understated from the scenery to the soundtrack and utterly mind-boggling, I can see why people got attached to it.

I really liked Carnage. Thought all four actors were great. One of the things I respect about it was the way that you'd have switching of allegiances throughout- so at one point Reilly hits a jab at Waltz and he and Foster celebrate it privately, but then you have Waltz and Reilly sort of relating to one another and bemoaning their wives, and so on and so forth.

Also liked how Waltz was like explicitly a dick from the get go pretty much while the others had that veneer of civility that just gradually wore away until the moment where Foster explodes toward the end. Definitely an interesting film.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

I really liked Carnage. Thought all four actors were great. One of the things I respect about it was the way that you'd have switching of allegiances throughout- so at one point Reilly hits a jab at Waltz and he and Foster celebrate it privately, but then you have Waltz and Reilly sort of relating to one another and bemoaning their wives, and so on and so forth.

Also liked how Waltz was like explicitly a dick from the get go pretty much while the others had that veneer of civility that just gradually wore away until the moment where Foster explodes toward the end. Definitely an interesting film.

Haha, I should have mentioned Waltz's shit-eating grin as one of my favourite parts of the movie. The only way he could have been better is if he had shrugged his shoulders at the phone going in the water, but that may have raised him above the other three too noticeably.

The allegiances were fun to follow but got a little slovenly toward the end to really entertain me.

Careful young grasshopper, the All About Eve cult is prosperous and powerful. You'll find many-a-cultists who will proclaim that it's the greatest script ever written.

Really? It was pretty great but I'll have to keep that in mind as I rank other ones.

So it appears that my clever ploy to dethrone Virginia Woolf didn't work.

I don't think it's going to happen man. The only comparably effortless combination of wordplay and subtext I can recall is in the dialogue between Will and Hannibal in Hannibal. It just gets me excited. In the pants.

If you're still up for suggestions -- In a Lonely Place is one of my personal favorite movies and among those which gave me the strongest emotional reaction. It seems just as good a hitman as any to nominate for elimination of Caveat's Woolfatocracy (I had it up for nomination in my Sherdog Movie Club Week). If you're ready to delve into the existentialist arthouse pool though, Stalker is the movie which I lured Huntermania into seeing, aiming to topple Black Swan off his favorite movie list by showing him it. It almost succedeed. (though, considering how feverently Hunter loves that movie I guess that's a feat in-and-of-itself.). And incidently it's likewise one of my favorite films.

Bring it! Those sound like good suggestions, thank you. Existentialism is one of my philosophical jams (*ahem* Beauvoir > Rand *ahem*) and Tarkosvky has been a long time coming.

 

[europe1]

I don't think it's going to happen man

Challange accepted

Bring it! Those sound like good suggestions, thank you. Existentialism is one of my philosophical jams (*ahem* Beauvoir > Rand *ahem*) and Tarkosvky has been a long time coming.

Tarkovsky is much more Keirkegaard than any Sartes chums though. Theistic variant and all that. Hell, in some manners, he's more like Dotstorjevski if anything.

And I don't really think Rand can be classified as Existentialism.

EDIT: though, whay you wrote doesnt necesarily imply that though

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Tarkovsky is much more Keirkegaard than any Sartes chums though.

And I don't really think Rand can be classified as Existentialism.

Boo. But I meant to compare them only generally.

 

[Joseph Budden]

Like i said, without strong story telling, yes i do.



You pointed out two sad experiences that Refn lost himself in. I dare you to find what Refn so brilliantly offers about having those experiences. Anything even approaching advice.

On your own, intellectual movie guy. Explain to me, guy with caveman taste.



I think it's daring to have an opinion and stand behind it. I think it's daring to wrap an intricate plot around it and to work artistically within the limitations created by it.

I think that is the much more challenging endeavor.

I think it's daring to try to write compelling dialogue.

There is strong story telling in OGF, idk why we keep going back to this. You simpletons can't seem to grasp a film maker doesn't have to follow the build-conflict-climax, transparent narratives most films go by to have a strong story. Where does the story trying to be told falter in complexity or point? Are you gonna give me some duntz answer like Caveat with the "need more Bangkok, need protagonist I can cheer for" retort? This is nonsensical. Like what you want, but your criticisms are off base. Period.

What you're asking makes no sense. Refn presents two themes (neither of which you understood before I pointed them out), and now the film is still shit unless I tell you what he offers through them? What does that even mean......

OK so based off what you are saying, like him and the film or not, Refn and OGF are most certainly 'daring' lol its funny you can't even see that though.

And no, its not 'daring' to try to write compelling dialogue. Daring by definition is taking risks. You're not taking risks by trying to write compelling dialogue lol