Drive (2011, dir. Nicolas Winding Refn)

I posted my same review at IMDB and someone said that's one of the Harshest movie review they'd ever read!!

:cheers: :lol!:

j7wild wrote:

I posted my same review at IMDB and someone said that's one of the Harshest movie review they'd ever read!!

:cheers: :lol!:

And they would be right. :roll:

j7wild wrote:

A CAPER movie that had a good intention with its story but it's poorly executed, incompetently written, filled with cliches and out of place scenes, sloppy acting, unnecessary violence that doesn't add anything to the substance of the film and uninteresting narrative.

Sloppy acting? Incompetent writing? I'd call it minimalism.
Tell me, why was the violence unnecessary? It was the focal point of the film.

j7wild wrote:

This movie also lacks identity: it wants to be Gone In 60 Seconds One Minute, The Transporter the next minute, Reservoir Dogs the next, than back to The Transporter again and then Pulp Fiction and when it tries to imitate the early 80s Michael Mann films with the nighttime photography, that's when you want to scream in pain.

It's been described as a tribute to Bullitt . I'd say it's more in the vein of The Getaway, in tone at least. Nothing wrong with paying tribute to older films in my book.

j7wild wrote:

The dialogue is boring and unmemorable; the characters uninteresting; the acting is shallow and empty, especially Gosling's and Mulligan's, both actors who shouldn't have any business whatsoever attempting to play any dramatic roles requiring depth and drama.

The driver's opening monologue? Every other line uttered by Albert Brooks? Hardly unmemorable.
Drive reflects on the innocence of love, how we'd like it to be. Both Gosling and Mulligan were pitch perfect. Their performances are minimalistic. Their roles hardly required 'depth' or 'drama' as you put it.

j7wild wrote:

This movie was hailed by many critics as a cinematic masterpiece but you know critics; half of them don't know what the **** they are talking about three quarter of the time.

What makes your opinion of any more worth?

j7wild wrote:

I can make a list of movies that should never have won Best Picture and Best Director but had and in today's Hollywood, it's not talent and quality that wins awards most of the time; it's money and who you know and whose ass you can kiss.

Not sure what your point is here, other than modern-day Hollywood is shit, but Drive hasn't won best picture - it hasn't even been nominated.

j7wild wrote:

If you like a movie where you can sit for almost 2 hrs waiting for something to happen and nothing happens and you like to waste your time doing it; then this movie is for you.

I like a film that is given time to breath.

j7wild wrote:

my lowest rating of any movies I've seen in 2012 so far;

lower than the previous two films I've seen this year that I'd previously rated the lowest

Trust (2010) 1.25/5 on 01-05-2012

and

The House of the Devil (2009) 2/5 on 01-11-2012

Good for you.

G section:

Drive was nominated for Best Picture by BAFTA and Critics Choice Awards and Chicago Film Critics Association Awards and Dallas-Fort Worth Film Critics Association Awards and Independent Spirit Awards (Feature) and London Critics Circle Film Awards (Film of the Year) and Online Film Critics Society Awards and Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards and San Diego Film Critics Society Awards and Satellite Awards and Washington DC Area Film Critics Association Awards

It won Best Picture with Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards (Action Film) and Central Ohio Film Critics Association and National Board of Review, USA (Top Films) and Robert Festival (Best American Film)

The Academy Awards is not the only Film Awards out there now!!'

You like a film that is given time to breath?

Almost 2 hours of nothing?

You must like to spend $$$$ on a movie ticket to get nothing back!

How is this even a Tribute to Bullitt?

Bullitt was about Police Corruption, Organized Crime, the Mob and Politics.

I didn't see any of that.

Just because there was a Mustang in Drive, a tribute to Bullitt it does not make.

If that was true, then every Ford Mustang TV commercial is a tribute to Bullitt!!

j7wild wrote:

Almost 2 hours of nothing?

You must like to spend $$$$ on a movie ticket to get nothing back!

How is this even a Tribute to Bullitt?

Bullitt was about Police Corruption, Organized Crime, the Mob and Politics.

I didn't see any of that.

Just because there was a Mustang in Drive, a tribute to Bullitt it does not make.

If that was true, then every Ford Mustang TV commercial is a tribute to Bullitt!!

The whole performance by Gosling was a tribute to McQueen's character in Bullitt. I thought this would be glaringly obvious to anyone who has seen this film and Bullitt. Although Gosling's character is on the wrong side of the law, his acting style in this is very reminiscent of McQueen's portrayal.

And 2 hours of nothing???? So nothing happened in 2 hours? No actions scenes or car chases or character development between the main characters?

Are you here just to troll?? :x

j7wild wrote:

The Academy Awards is not the only Film Awards out there now!!'

Thank you, I am well aware of that. But since you put that "I can make a list of movies that should never have won Best Picture and Best Director but had", naturally, I assumed that you meant the academy awards and felt inclined to point out that Drive has not been nominated. I don't expect you to make a list of movies that should never have won Best Picture and Best Director (in your mind), at every bloody awards ceremony on the planet, but I wouldn't put it past you.

j7wild wrote:

you like a film that is given time to breath?

Almost 2 hours of nothing?

Was the projector broken at your local cinema? Or perhaps the DVD was scratched?

j7wild wrote:

You must like to spend $$$$ on a movie ticket to get nothing back!

It's rare that I go to the cinema. Drive wasn't on at my local cinema but £10 was reasonable for the DVD.
And I got a lot out of my first viewing, actually.

j7wild wrote:

How is this even a Tribute to Bullitt?

Wasn't me that said that. I compared Drive to The Getaway.

Now, seeing as you like being selective, would you care to adress my other points? Please be more civil next time.

G section wrote:

j7wild wrote:

The Academy Awards is not the only Film Awards out there now!!'

Thank you, I am well aware of that. But since you put that "I can make a list of movies that should never have won Best Picture and Best Director but had", naturally, I assumed that you meant the academy awards and felt inclined to point out that Drive has not been nominated. I don't expect you to make a list of movies that should never have won Best Picture and Best Director (in your mind), at every bloody awards ceremony on the planet, but I wouldn't put it past you.

j7wild wrote:

you like a film that is given time to breath?

Almost 2 hours of nothing?

Was the projector broken at your local cinema? Or perhaps the DVD was scratched?

j7wild wrote:

You must like to spend $$$$ on a movie ticket to get nothing back!

It's rare that I go to the cinema. Drive wasn't on at my local cinema but £10 was reasonable for the DVD.
And I got a lot out of my first viewing, actually.

j7wild wrote:

How is this even a Tribute to Bullitt?

Wasn't me that said that. I compared Drive to The Getaway.

Now, seeing as you like being selective, would you care to adress my other points? Please be more civil next time.

G Section, I don't know why you are bothering with this troll. It's obvious J7 is here to make as many enemies as possible, and is doing a very good job at it.

G Section wrote:

It's been described as a tribute to Bullitt . I'd say it's more in the vein of The Getaway.

THE GETAWAY had a lot of comedy in it, and despite being a fairly minor Peckinpah film, it towers above DRIVE.

DRIVE feels like a assignment from a hipster film student who's spent far too much time watching 80s Michael Mann and listening to New Wave.

Minimalist? Perhaps. Pretentious? Definitely.

Sharky wrote:

Pretentious? Definitely.

Well, I certainly don't cohere to that "violence is sex" idea or whatever the hell it was that Refn plugged in interviews leading up to and after the film's release, but I wouldn't call Drive pretentious, thematically at least.

G section wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Pretentious? Definitely.

Well, I certainly don't cohere to that "violence is sex" idea or whatever the hell it was that Refn plugged in interviews leading up to and after the film's release, but I wouldn't call Drive pretentious.

When I mean pretentious, I'm referring to a film that has a pretense of being more artful and "important" than it really is. Making a mountain out a mole hill, basically. DRIVE is filled to the brim with a kind of artifice and "look how clever I am" attitude that puts me off as a viewer.

Sharky wrote:

G section wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Pretentious? Definitely.

Well, I certainly don't cohere to that "violence is sex" idea or whatever the hell it was that Refn plugged in interviews leading up to and after the film's release, but I wouldn't call Drive pretentious.

When I mean pretentious, I'm referring to a film that has a pretense of being more artful and "important" than it really is. Making a mountain out a mole hill, basically. DRIVE is filled to the brim with a kind of artifice and "look how clever I am" attitude that puts me off as a viewer.

Main reasons why I liked it -

1) Gosling doing an excellent Bulitt McQueen impersonation, while managing to also making the audience feel sorry for him at the same time. Cool, yet vulnerable.

2) Superb action sequences.

3) The 80's soundtrack feel to it.

Pretentious? Maybe, but I was too busy enjoying it to notice....

jet set willy wrote:

1) Gosling doing an excellent Bulitt McQueen impersonation, while managing to also making the audience feel sorry for him at the same time. Cool, yet vulnerable.

Gosling's got nothing on McQueen or Rourke. He just spends the film chewing tooth picks with a smug smirk on his face. Unlike McQueen, I never felt that this guy loved his car, had any serious thoughts about the world and business he was in, or had a sense of humour. The Driver's just a sociopathic machine who walks through life semi-awake. That's where I found more in common with POINT BLANK, except that Ryan Gosling is not even a 100th of the man Lee Marvin was.

jet set willy wrote:

3) The 80's soundtrack feel to it.

That approach worked in BRONSON, but totally fails in DRIVE.

jet set willy wrote:

2) Superb action sequences.

I thought the opening was really good.

I wish the mask had a better payoff. Doesn't he use it just to peer through a window? More could have been done with that mask.

I liked the vibe of the film, I just felt underwhelmed and basically wanted more to happen. More driving for one.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I liked the vibe of the film, I just felt underwhelmed and basically wanted more to happen. More driving for one.

Well, Winding Refn is considering a sequel:

Quote :

"The character is born, he's out there, he transforms himself completely into what he's meant to be, he was always meant to be this… He goes on to more and new adventure. What's interesting in the book is that he sees his own death, but I didn’t use any of that because I wanted him to be mysterious, I wanted him to be an enigma. If there is to be a Drive 2, it would be with 2 drivers—maybe there's a driver from his past , (heroes) always need their Lex Luthor… Moriarity."

FieldsMan wrote:

She was outstanding in Never Let Me Go! Watch An Education - she's incredible in that. Admittedly though, I can't remember her in Public Enemies, but I can't remember much of that dire film anyway.

I only made it about 40min in on PE - the story may have been okay, I dunno, but the visuals were ... BLECH! Almost as bad as Abrams' lens flares., but this looked like VHS at times.

Harmsway wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I liked the vibe of the film, I just felt underwhelmed and basically wanted more to happen. More driving for one.

Well, Winding Refn is considering a sequel:

Quote :

"The character is born, he's out there, he transforms himself completely into what he's meant to be, he was always meant to be this… He goes on to more and new adventure. What's interesting in the book is that he sees his own death, but I didn’t use any of that because I wanted him to be mysterious, I wanted him to be an enigma. If there is to be a Drive 2, it would be with 2 drivers—maybe there's a driver from his past , (heroes) always need their Lex Luthor… Moriarity."

DRIVE TO.

I would vote against a sequel. It would probably end up crap and kill any allure that the first one has.

I have to say, while I'm not enthralled by the flick I don't get the more negative opinions. I wouldn't call the film "bad" or anything. May even take another look at some point.

The director understands nothing. Minor characters are pulped in CU yet in the confrontation between Gosling and Perlman the camera pans away. Nice waves, though. :|

Harmsway wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I liked the vibe of the film, I just felt underwhelmed and basically wanted more to happen. More driving for one.

Well, Winding Refn is considering a sequel:

Quote :

"The character is born, he's out there, he transforms himself completely into what he's meant to be, he was always meant to be this… He goes on to more and new adventure. What's interesting in the book is that he sees his own death, but I didn’t use any of that because I wanted him to be mysterious, I wanted him to be an enigma. If there is to be a Drive 2, it would be with 2 drivers—maybe there's a driver from his past , (heroes) always need their Lex Luthor… Moriarity."

:roll:

Erica Ambler wrote:

The director understands nothing. Minor characters are pulped in CU yet in the confrontation between Gosling and Perlman the camera pans away. Nice waves, though. :|

If I watched it again, that would be something to look for. I don't even recall many shots.

Salomé wrote:

This forum is depressing on the best of days.

Indeed. Five female members and I've not had so much as a sandwich.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Salomé wrote:

This forum is depressing on the best of days.

Indeed. Five female members and I've not had so much as a sandwich.

is that supposed to be a sexist remark?

:lol!:

It's a factual statement.

Santa's blowjobs are all very well, but I'd kill for a ripe camembert.

You've had quite a bit more than a sandwich. I gave you a whole five course meal, you fucking ingrate.

A few Smarties in a McFlurry is pushing the definition of a five-course meal. Still, at least your nipples perked up.

Santa wrote:

You've had quite a bit more than a sandwich. I gave you a whole five course meal, you fucking ingrate.