Darren Aronofsky's new film 'Mother'

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Ghostworld, Aug 13, 2017.

  1. Ah well a The Fountain is one that I did like quite a lot and the allegory of the story still allowed for a well developed narrative.

    I felt "Mother!" Was interesting as allegory but there wasn't enough story there and watching Jennifer Lawrence get pissed off at visiting strangers for two hours was too much upset and screaming Lawrence and not enough story development.

    The allegory that Aronofsky intended can be taken a couple of ways including the way that he and Lawrence explain it. I took HIM not as God but as Satan (all add in the burned out house being restored) and, yes, there is the temptation of Adam and Even but HIM is the serpent. The burning of the house was Lawrence (as God) laying waste (like the flood) to the followers of HIM.

    That's certainly not how the director sees it but i could be taken a couple of different ways. As an allegory, I suppose it is interesting but not at two hours. The narrative is too underdeveloped to sustain such an ambitious allegory and it honestly wasn't all that complex to interpret.
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2017
  2. The Counselor is ne of the worst films Ridley Scott has made.
     
    alexpop likes this.
  3. vince

    vince Stan Ricker's son-in-law

    The other day, I saw a DIFFERENT ad for "mother!" on TV.
    The voice over had something along the lines of :
    "LOVE IT! HATE IT! See the film everyone's talking about!"
     
    Gavinyl likes this.
  4. I thorougly enjoyed another Aronfsky ride...
     
  5. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    Great scot, crap indeed.
     
  6. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    US
    Watching it for the second time and appreciated it it more --- than last night! Watched it for the first time last night and really enjoyed it. It sort of real dark comedy, in a way. When it turns to surrealism and becomes avant-garde I really had to smile. It was great surreal fun. My 22-year old daughter thought it was "stupid" but she didn't get the leap to pure fantasy. Horrific, too? You bet. I really liked it and the second time through I'm enjoying the artistry of the script and performances more. A solid five stars.
     
    SandAndGlass and Gavinyl like this.
  7. Splungeworthy

    Splungeworthy Forum Rezidentura

    Location:
    Jersey Shore
    Wall of text incoming.
    I hate it when people threadcrap (so, I guess you know what's coming...), and it seems as though the overwhelming opinion in this thread is favorable towards this movie, but if I may let me just chime in with a dissenting view. First off, I am an English major. I am fully aware of the works of Polanski, Fellini, Antonioni, Pasolini, and yes, DeMille (I'll explain in a moment) that this film seems to reference. I am aware of the concepts of metaphor, symbolism, and fantasy. All that being said, and full disclosure, I did read many reviews and was aware of the controversial nature of this movie (how could you not?), I had many emotions coursing through me as I watched.

    Spoilers Ahoy!

    The first emotion? Boredom. After a dollop of fiery foreshadowing the first half of this movie is, for lack of a better word, tedious. I get that Aronofsky and Lawrence are a couple, so I shouldn't be surprised that we get a constant running extreme closeup of her throughout (a less beautiful actress would have frankly made this unbearable). But nothing happens. They get visitors, then more visitors, we see her plastering the wall, we listen to Ed Harris cough, we get some cheap jump scares. I know this is Aronofsky's version of exposition (how much of it is real? how much do I care?), but give me something. We do get the Cain and Abel fight, and then by divine intervention Bardem's writer's block is unblocked.

    The next emotion: Confusion. Things start to get really weird really fast, as Bardem's acolytes descend on the house en masse in a orgiastic frenzy, and we see a now very preggers Lawrence trying to deal with it all. This is a poet who induces this Beatlemania? Then: Disbelief, as the previously adoring fans have now turned into something from the Isrealites' fall from grace sequence in the Ten Commandments (told ya I'd get to DeMille). They're tearing up the house, tearing up each other, Kristen Wiig joins in the fun-and Bardem seems to be simultaneously enjoying it and trying to tend to Lawrence, who's about ready to pop-until she does, and then:

    Revulsion. I'm not going to get into the last 20 minutes of this movie, because anything I say will not do justice to the level of truly gruesome imagery going on here, but suffice to say it's very difficult to watch. Yet I did, and now I've got it in my head right now, and it still makes me a little sick to my stomach. It just seemed so out of place given what went on previously, as bat s**t crazy as that all was. I don't really care what the message Aronofsky was trying to send with this final sequence, but it might have been "We got you in to see J-Law, but this ain't no Hunger Games!" Which, if you know the sequence, is a bit of a play on words.

    So, yes, this movie was Biblical. It was Biblically incoherent, schizophrenically paced, inorganically acted, and claustrophobically shot. Which metaphor are we going for here? The rape of the earth? The inequality of the sexes? Bad form at cocktail parties? The cult of personality taken to extremes (I wonder who that's referring to?).

    You should also know that I am a fan of some of Aronofsky's work. I was one of the few that actually enjoyed Noah. I thoroughly loved The Wrestler. Pi was audaciously brilliant. And I can appreciate those here who are rapturous about this movie. I'm just not sure we saw the same one.

    And about the marketing for this movie: Paramount was in a no-win situation here. The movie Darren Aronofsky delivered could not have been marketed effectively in any case, except for one: word of mouth. They had to know the critics were going to savage this, except for the few who did like it, so they were hoping to get the Jennifer Lawrence fans in, get em' talking, and hope for the best. Sorry OP, I know you liked it (your username is one of my favorite movies of all-time BTW).
     
    mrjinks likes this.
  8. rjp

    rjp Senior Member

    Location:
    ohio
    is there a DVD release date for this yet?
     
  9. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    December 19...
     
  10. rjp

    rjp Senior Member

    Location:
    ohio
    :targettiphat:
     
  11. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    I have a package from Paramount due Monday - not sure if it's "Mother!" or the 4K for "Interstellar".

    Gonna be interesting to see "Mother!" a second time!
     
  12. Scotian

    Scotian Amnesia Hazed

    Location:
    North of Gilead
    Well the joke was on me with this one. I like watching a movie without knowing anything about it going in. I got the biblical references but thought they were way too obvious so I figured it was an allegory about the cult of celebrity. So after I watched it, I started reading reviews & watched a couple of interviews with the director. So it was based on the bible. Ok. As entertainment, it didn't work for me. Confusing, dull at times & some really vile imagery, especially toward the end. I like Darren Aronofsky in general. I really liked Requiem for a Dream. That worked for me but this one didn't.
     
    DHamilton and bopdd like this.
  13. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    I really think it's both. Obviously I see the Biblical allusions, but I also find it impossible not to see it as a commentary on the treatment of celebrities.

    That theory gets a boost given the inclusion of Jennifer Lawrence since she's become a tabloid darling in recent years...
     
  14. DHamilton

    DHamilton Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Earth
    If you are thinking about watching this movie and haven't yet, don't.
     
    teodoro and Deesky like this.
  15. fishcane

    fishcane Forum Resident

    Location:
    clay,ny
    the older i get the less I want to watch movies that make me feel bad
     
    DHamilton and SandAndGlass like this.
  16. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Can't speak for others, but "mother!' didn't make me "feel bad". It's an unusual experience, but not one that left me depressed or whatever.

    I like to see movies that cover a wide range of emotions. I guess I get why some people view movies solely as "escapism" and want everything to end on a happy note, but I think that'd get boring. I need variety! :)
     
  17. fishcane

    fishcane Forum Resident

    Location:
    clay,ny
    It doesn't need to be a happy movie or end on a happy note for me to enjoy but there are many things that I just dont need to see anymore. Im also way over modern war films, pretty much all horror and most cgi. I dont understand the current trend toward excessive graphic depiction of violence in any way shape or form so pretty much just avoid it now. Used to love it, just dont need to see it anymore.... Weirdly If Requiem( a movie I enjoyed at the time) were released today, Id turn it off. Not sure Ill ever get to this one, tho. Who knows, tho, maybe, I did like Pi.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  18. Deesky

    Deesky Forum Resident

    I agree. I watched mainly for Jennifer Lawrence and not knowing anything else about it. Early on I was intrigued by the somewhat off-kilter behavior from the characters, but as it went on, it became increasingly and frustratingly bizarre. When the credits rolled, I had absolutely no clue what just happened. I had to DuckDuckGo the plot for this movie to get any idea. Argh, when I learned what it was about, I felt even worse for watching it, Jennifer Lawrence or no (though she did put in a good performance).
     
    DHamilton and SandAndGlass like this.
  19. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Did you see the sequel with Tom Selleck - "Magnum Pi"? Ha ha ha - ugh...
     
    SandAndGlass and Rasputin like this.
  20. rjp

    rjp Senior Member

    Location:
    ohio
    'mother!"

    in a word - bizarre.

    if there was ever a movie that went someplace that you never ever imagined it would go, this is it.

    great cast........just really f***ing strange.

    i am not sure whether i liked it or not. but i certainly was intrigued.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  21. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    US

    I think it’ll go down among the classics of surrealist cinema. I enjoyed this much more and I think it’s a much richer, greater work of art than Requiem for a Dream. It’s a more mature work, certainly. He’s in Bunuel territory here. I’m betting this is the start of a very rich phase of Aranofskys career. I actually, strangely enough, I think it’s a more coherent and stronger film than The Fountain. When I watch a film twice in two days = I really liked it.
     
    DHamilton likes this.
  22. dougotte

    dougotte Vague Waste of Space-Time

    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Biblical? I didn't get that, but now that I read about it, I can see it. Here are my thoughts:

    1) It certainly was audacious of Aronofsky and the entire cast and crew to pull off such a huge, strange production. The last section was very disturbing, but then I did chuckle a few times throughout at the sheer creativity. Well done!
    2) Meaning:
    Although the entire film is from her viewpoint, I thought she was not a real person. She was completely manipulated by the Poet. He didn't care about her per se; he was only concerned about her as his Muse and what he could get out of her. The baby was just another of his creations, and thus he let his fans consume it. The crystal was a symbol of her as a creative Muse. Did the original one come from her, too? I think so. They implied that it's a cycle. She is even seen as the Create force which brought the dead home back to life. But, only the women (Pfeiffer, Agent) saw her as a real person; the men (Poet, Harris) barely even registered that she was speaking.
     
    Ghostworld likes this.
  23. 93curr

    93curr Senior Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    With only a couple of days to go in 2017, I'm pretty confident in solidifying 'mother!' as my #2 favorite film of the year. Right behind 'Personal Shopper' at #1 and in front of 'Get Out' at #3. And it's the only film this year I went to see twice in the theatre. (Though I might go see 'Phantom Thread' one more time in January)

    If you want to make a list of "most fun movies of 2017", I'd put it at #1, right in front of 'Baby Driver.'
     
  24. dougotte

    dougotte Vague Waste of Space-Time

    Location:
    Washington, DC
    We saw Personal Shopper on cable and I enjoyed it, but I'm more confused about what it meant than mother! Anyway, Stewart's naturalistic acting style is very engaging. She's also very attractive, but her default facial expression makes me think she just smelled something bad.

    The only thing that bothered me about Personal Shopper is that long sequence of texts in the middle. It exhausted me trying to read them all - Bzzz - clickclick - read - Bzzz - clickclick - read...etc.
     
    Deesky and 93curr like this.
  25. LEONPROFF

    LEONPROFF Forum Resident

    Just watched Mother and I think I will be watching it again before returning it. I went in thinking it was horror. I tend to ignore everything when I want to see something. I even go so far as quitting trailers in the middle when I have seen enough.

    Spoiler
    when I saw the cross shape made by the moles on her neck I wondered if this was going to be more than the normal horror. I completely had forgotten who the director is. Should have been able to guess but couldn’t. I think Bardem is God, Lawrence is Mother Earth. Funny how oil destroys the house and her. tI
    as others have brought up “how do you market this film?”. Marketing as much as we hate to admit it is to sell as many tickets as possible. If you walk out of a movie because it is too Aronofsky or Cronenberg for you I don’t have much sympathy.
     

Share This Page