Birdman (2014) starring Michael Keaton

I believe that the marching band and Spider-Man were from Times Square, when he walked through it in his underwear. So when they show up on stage it's a manifestation of his broken psyche. The dead animals may have been as well. Just a theory, though.

 

>>>

 

Really? I missed that

 

Weren't the dead animals on the beach a reference to the story of jellyfish that he got stung by, but said it was sunburn to his ex wife?

 

When were the dead animals?
I don't remember that.

 

This movie grows on me the more I think about it, and I'm starting to feel this is the best score of the year. At the very least, it's the one that's made the biggest impression on me personally.

 

At the start of the movie after the opening credits there is a brief image of a jellyfish on the beach, a reference to the story Riggan tells his ex wife. At the end of the movie there is again a scene with jellyfish in the montage of different images - one of the few bits that are 'edited' i.e. not a continuous sequence.

 

The film was fantastic, particularly the cinematography, the music and the acting, and I didn't dislike anything at all.

It was ironic in that my son and I were originally going to see Whiplash but still ended up watching a movie with so much good drumming in it!

 

I really enjoyed the movie, but for the most part I don't think the magical realism elements added much, and the ending wasn't totally satisfying. Still, I look forward to giving it a re-viewing when it's available for home viewing (or maybe I'll see if I can download a screener later tonight ).

Also, I think the all-drums OST was inspired, it really complemented the energy of the performances and dynamic camerawork well.

 

Not to troll, but I'm in the minority on this one. The "one take" was relentless and made it very hard to watch. A lot of the dialogue was overbaked. I liked the soundtrack and am glad it's given Michael Keaton's career a second life (although I'd much rather watch "Night Shift" than one of his dreadful Batman movies). Hollywood loves a comeback, look what it did for Robert Forster.

 

It's not trolling when one isn't being a jackass. So to each their own, it's what art discussions are all about. I loved the camera work and thought the dialogue was excellent. It gave all of the characters depth regardless of how much screen time they actually had, and NONE of the characters were throwaways. It's such a complete work to me.

 

Interesting…I'm not sure which dialogue you considered 'over baked', but having spend a decade as an actor and director in the theatre world, I found the dialogue between the actors, and the general narcissistic bent entirely accurate.

 

I've spent a lot of time around theater folk in NYC and I guess it is accurate, if not something I want to spend 2 hours listening to. And as far as the camerawork goes, knowing it's all basically a computer trick that makes it seem continuous just made it feel artificial to me. I guess I was more impressed by something organic like the long takes of Hitchcock's "Rope" or even the long digital video takes of "Timecode" (which was much more technically impressive, as flawed as that film might have been).

 

"Hello, this is Chuck to remind Bill to SHUT UP!"

 

Rope takes place in one room, correct?

 

I thought Birdman was the best thing I had seen all year....haven't seen Boyhood yet though....
I loved it, at least it was different !!!!

 

In an apartment, not just a single room.

 

I haven't seen Grand Budapest Hotel yet, and I have a date to watch Boyhood on Thursday, but tonight I rewatched Birdman (via a screener a friend loaned me) and it's just as much fun the second time, maybe even more so. Acting, directing, camerawork, music -- it all contributes to the whole effect.

 

So, what the frak was that? A film about insanity? Sure, it was well acted and produced, but...meh!

Also, Emma Stone should never try to be blond! She's awesome just the way she is.

 

Best film of the year.

 

Maybe, but I can't think of any other 2014 movies (including this one) that I would consider adding to my personal archive (haven't seen Interstellar yet, which is a candidate).

 

Stone's natural hair color is actually blonde. Not sure if her hair in the movie represented her hair "as nature intended" - it could be a different shade of blonde - but she's not a natural redhead.

She does look "weird" without red hair, though - it may not be her natural hue, but it's the way we're used to seeing her!

 

I find that difficult to believe. Whether her natural coloring is red, or auburn or brown, it is definitely not blond. Her complexion, eyebrows and eyelashes are not consistent with blond coloration. If I'm wrong, I'll eat my hat!

 

Get out the salt - time for a meal!

 

The first hour almost put me to sleep, then it got better. There is quite a bit going on in this movie. I think I have cracked the meaning. You have to really pay attention throughout the movie but especially for the first few minutes and the last few minutes. It is like "Inception" to some degree. This is one you definitely have to see more than once. The movie is better in the rear-view mirror than while I was watching it.