The Artist - General - Facepunch Forum

Why on earth isn't there a thread about this already? [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f3/The-Artist-poster.png/220px-The-Artist-poster.png[/img] The Artist (2011) is a mostly silent film directed by Michel Hazanivicius with a multi-national cast which majestically won 5 Academy Awards and 5 Oscars. Starring Jean Dujardin, Bérénice Bujo, John Goodman, James Cromwell, Malcolm McDowell and Penelope Ann Miller. Trailer: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK7pfLlsUQM[/media] It's a wonderful film - I just saw it last night. It's a nice antidote to the multiple films which have missed the point of cinema completely in the last few years. I'm not sure why there is a thread on this film already. Has anyone seen it? If not, do you want to see it? If not, what are your reasons for this? I'd love to hear what other users thought of this film.

I've seen it and it's absolutely fantastic. Dujardin is crazy good in this and totally deserved his oscar. He's so likable even though he is essentially a completely silent character, and I'm really interested in seeing some of his and Hazanivicius's other stuff.

No responses? Surely some people have opinions on this film.

Because it was a pretty good film, but nothing more. Definitely doesn't deserve an Oscar. It was a really cool premise and it was executed fairly well, but it had a pretty lackluster and uninteresting story. I just wasn't feeling it, at the end of the film it felt so forgettable. [editline]3rd March 2012[/editline] Felt a little too much like oscar bait too. same with hugo. homages to classic film, but with piss poor stories themselves.

saw it, liked it

the soundtrack was pretty good too

I liked it, it was a great homage to the silent era of film. Also, Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bujo were pretty amazing, I especially loved the parts with the [sp]Bang![/sp] and the [sp]whole dream sequence where there is suddenly sound.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Zuimzado;35071600]the soundtrack was pretty good too[/QUOTE] The track from the last scene was from Vertigo though.

[QUOTE=Cl0cK;35113422]I liked it, it was a great homage to the silent era of film. Also, Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bujo were pretty amazing, I especially loved the parts with the [sp]Bang![/sp] and the [sp]whole dream sequence where there is suddenly sound.[/sp][/QUOTE] the [sp]dream sequence[/sp] was just great.

It was good but I don't get why [sp]they had to end it on the character's talking, would've been better if it was just them panting and a cut to the credits IMO (unless I am missing something)[/sp]

[QUOTE=Captain Forever;35117405]It was good but I don't get why [sp]they had to end it on the character's talking, would've been better if it was just them panting and a cut to the credits IMO (unless I am missing something)[/sp][/QUOTE] Panting isn't talking [editline]13th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Publius;34947130] 5 Academy Awards and 5 Oscars[/QUOTE] Academy Awards are Oscars...

[QUOTE=Captain Forever;35117405]It was good but I don't get why [sp]they had to end it on the character's talking, would've been better if it was just them panting and a cut to the credits IMO (unless I am missing something)[/sp][/QUOTE] do you have to nitpick?

[QUOTE=AK'z;35119268]do you have to nitpick?[/QUOTE] Because I like reading and viewing critically. I don't really see the point in following a thread unless there are opinions being thrown around. Apart from that, how the film felt in the footage (how it was graded, etc), the music and the performances made it feel really authentic. I especially like how it was formatted in 4:3.

[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;35115978]the [sp]dream sequence[/sp] was just great.[/QUOTE] but the movie broke the fourth wall on two occasions. it was so unnecessary and really detracted from the film.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;35119543]but the movie broke the fourth wall on two occasions. it was so unnecessary and really detracted from the film.[/QUOTE] not illegal, this is also nitpicking.

what? who said anything about it being illegal what ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT it worked to the films detriment. thats not nitpicking. it was a just okay movie that did a lot of things wrong and that was one of the things. it also had a story i couldn't empathize with and characters i wasn't made to care about. is that nitpicking too? [editline]13th March 2012[/editline] the protagonists plight was so nothing. it really made no emotional impact on me at all. i have nothing against the silent film thing, but a) they broke the fourth wall, diminishing the impact of the whole homage thing, and b) the plot was shit.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;35119716]what? who said anything about it being illegal what ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT[/QUOTE] You cry about menial things and call them "DETRIMENTAL" to the experience. You overreact to the slightest theme/character that you don't like rather than just dealing with your issues and looking at the movie for what it was.

[QUOTE=AK'z;35119825]You cry about menial things and call them "DETRIMENTAL" to the experience. You overreact to the slightest theme/character that you don't like rather than just dealing with your issues and looking at the movie for what it was.[/QUOTE] If anything you're the one crying

[QUOTE=AK'z;35119825]You cry about menial things and call them "DETRIMENTAL" to the experience. You overreact to the slightest theme/character that you don't like rather than just dealing with your issues and looking at the movie for what it was.[/QUOTE] um im pretty sure the things i pointed out arent menial unless a films plot, characters and themes are no big deals

I like how you called it 'your issues' like this is personal, which is pretty ironic, considering you're the one out on a passionate vendetta against anyone who doesn't blindly praise the film

It doesn't hold a candle to the likes of "City Lights" and such, but the things people nitpick about are things that have [I]happened[/I] in movies during the silent era.

[QUOTE=AK'z;35120311]It doesn't hold a candle to the likes of "City Lights" and such, but the things people nitpick about are things that have [I]happened[/I] in movies during the silent era.[/QUOTE] what does that have to do with anything the things i nitpick about modern films happen in other modern films to it's not like boring plots and uninteresting characters is specific to silent films

[QUOTE=Rusty100;35119543]but the movie broke the fourth wall on two occasions. it was so unnecessary and really detracted from the film.[/QUOTE] For me it actually fit pretty fine. This goes well with old fashioned style kind of a movie

[QUOTE=Kero_;35123129]For me it actually fit pretty fine. This goes well with old fashioned style kind of a movie[/QUOTE] The majority of their commentary is what most movies in the silent movie era contained. Are those movies "just okay"?

[QUOTE=Rusty100;35119543]but the movie broke the fourth wall on two occasions. it was so unnecessary and really detracted from the film.[/QUOTE] that's weird because i didn't get that feeling about it at all about the fourth wall breaks I actually liked them

[QUOTE=AK'z;35124418]The majority of their commentary is what most movies in the silent movie era contained. Are those movies "just okay"?[/QUOTE] I don't understand this at all. My point and Rusty's point are pretty much derived from the film's self reflexivity. How can silent films made during the era even do that? My complaint about the film's meta stuff was really just about how it felt really unnecessary [sp](especially at the end)[/sp]. I don't think the film should have to rely on moments like that to illustrate the theme of the film. It felt like a really awkward book end highlighting something already obvious.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;35119716]what? who said anything about it being illegal what ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT it worked to the films detriment. thats not nitpicking. it was a just okay movie that did a lot of things wrong and that was one of the things. it also had a story i couldn't empathize with and characters i wasn't made to care about. is that nitpicking too? [editline]13th March 2012[/editline] the protagonists plight was so nothing. it really made no emotional impact on me at all. i have nothing against the silent film thing, but a) they broke the fourth wall, diminishing the impact of the whole homage thing, and b) the plot was shit.[/QUOTE] Silent films back in the day broke the fourth wall all the time, just like a lot of stage productions do. It was to make an emphasize or get the audiences attention. I don't think you're nitpicking so much as bashing a good film.

I'm not bashing it at all. I didn't think it was bad. It just wasn't great.

The whole 'silent movies did it so that makes it perfect' thing is really weak. I could make a film about any period and including things in it that just don't work but are from the period doesn't absolve it of criticism.

I didn't say it was perfect, just that's why they did it. [editline]14th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rusty100;35134780]I'm not bashing it at all. I didn't think it was bad. It just wasn't great.[/QUOTE] Ok, I misunderstood you then. From what you were saying I got the impression you straight up hated it.