Trilobit
Member
Booked a ticket. My theater only seems to have one showing for it on tuesday and I'm so far the only one who has reserved a seat lol. I might smuggle some whiskey with me if I'm going to be completely alone.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Megalopolis | Rottenwatch
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
Booked a ticket. My theater only seems to have one showing for it on tuesday and I'm so far the only one who has reserved a seat lol. I might smuggle some whiskey with me if I'm going to be completely alone.
DKehoe
Member
Hope you have fun! I’m not promising an amazing film, although personally I enjoyed it. But like I said above it’s one that I think is worth checking out to see what you think of it. And it will also benefit from being seen on the big screen.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
This movie... holy shit. This is going to be a midnight movie classic where people show up in costume and yell at the screen and throw shit.
This is absolutely on the same tier of bad as The Room, a movie that feels naive in its insanity, like how could anyone ever think this would work? It's gut-bustingly funny to watch at times, and a fascinating train wreck at others.
It's not just opaque and artsy -- though it aspires to be -- it's incompotent. The performances are all over the place, every actor feels like they're in a different movie, story elements are introduced and then resolved immediately with no bearing on the plot at all, it's easy enough to follow but none of it ever really develops into a meaningful central conflict. It's ugly as hell, the CGI is super bad, the setting is wildly inconsistent in a way that reads as comical, characters flail around and swoosh their capes with cartoony flair.
It's all so... camp. I have see people suggest it's intentional parody but it clearly isn't. It has too many moments where it tries to be real art and fails. Apologists will pretend that whatever childish message the movie is trying to make about love and art somehow redeems it, but these elements are just laughably banal too. Everything here is just so, so incredibly bad.
So the thing to know after watching this clip: that's baseline for this movie, the whole thing is like that and some of it quite a lot worse.
Don't go see it because you like Ayn Rand, though, see it because you think Ayn Rand is funny. If you like Ayn Rand, you should probably just stop doing that, it's embarrassing.
This is absolutely on the same tier of bad as The Room, a movie that feels naive in its insanity, like how could anyone ever think this would work? It's gut-bustingly funny to watch at times, and a fascinating train wreck at others.
It's not just opaque and artsy -- though it aspires to be -- it's incompotent. The performances are all over the place, every actor feels like they're in a different movie, story elements are introduced and then resolved immediately with no bearing on the plot at all, it's easy enough to follow but none of it ever really develops into a meaningful central conflict. It's ugly as hell, the CGI is super bad, the setting is wildly inconsistent in a way that reads as comical, characters flail around and swoosh their capes with cartoony flair.
It's all so... camp. I have see people suggest it's intentional parody but it clearly isn't. It has too many moments where it tries to be real art and fails. Apologists will pretend that whatever childish message the movie is trying to make about love and art somehow redeems it, but these elements are just laughably banal too. Everything here is just so, so incredibly bad.
So the thing to know after watching this clip: that's baseline for this movie, the whole thing is like that and some of it quite a lot worse.
Yeah, I agree with the Ayn Rand influences here, not so much the political ideology but just the way it's about some great genius inventing fantasy bullshit to save society wrapped around a lot of weird horny shit and corny melodrama, and characters with the dumbest imaginable names like Wow Platinum. And the general terribleness.
Don't go see it because you like Ayn Rand, though, see it because you think Ayn Rand is funny. If you like Ayn Rand, you should probably just stop doing that, it's embarrassing.
Last edited:
ForAcademicPurposes
Member
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Yeah this movie is super horny. Aubrey Plaza there for eye candy but we also get a lot of girls lezzing out in the club and talk about Jon Voigt's dick (which has an Incredible pay off I won't spoil), and a flamboyant gender-fluid Shia Labouf running around with his balls out.
Really, this movie is a treasure.
Really, this movie is a treasure.
Last edited:
Meh, Audrey and Natalie played hide and seek with them boobies too much.
Trilobit
Member
I enjoyed the art deco style or what you call it. I love that style especially in sort of futuristic media. But the movie itself felt very disjointed and hollow. Barely any of the characters intrigued me and it had that sort of blasé Californian not-taking-stuff-really-seriously vibe. Sort of what Wes Anderson does, except he does it wonderfully and still manages to put some heart into it. Guys in red caps acting like thugs and trash was also quite on the nose and made the movie feel even more Hollywood-elitist, if that was even possible. Adam Driver was the best thing and he's what kept my interest going throughout as he seemed to enjoy his role. The American-Roman juxtaposition was also fascinating and I hope some other directors will make a truly depressing and bleak Fall-of-Rome-but-USA movie someday.
Last edited:
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Yeah that's the thing, it tackles big subjects but then doesn't have anything interesting to say about them, because fundamentally Coppola just doesn't have anything smart to say about any of it. The conservatives are corrupt and the liberals are hedonists, and the only real ideology it espouses is elitism. But unlike Rand he doesn't acknowledge the narcissism and self interested nature of elitism. It talks about dreams and idealism for humanity but it shows the rabble as stupid and easily manipulated.
Arty movies like The Fountain and Mr. Nobody, they might be challenging and they might rely on theme and message more than narrative but they ultimately have a perspective that is resonant and meaningful, they argue for their point of view and earn it in the end.
This movie doesn't really have a coherent perspective to even articulate. Coppola's thoughts about society and banal and muddled, so there's simply nothing underneath it all.
Trilobit
Member
When the movie was coming to its end I actually thought to myself that I wished I was watching The Fountain instead on the big screen. Because while it also is very metaphorical and artsy, it actually makes you feel and has astounding visuals. I can sort of see what Coppola was going for, it's not a very "brainy" movie despite it tossing around classic quotes. But the execution isn't something I expected from an experienced director as him. The scale was very bad for a movie with these themes, there were at most 20 people on the screen at the same time even in bigger scenes, which was detrimental to a story about a whole city. The green screen was too apparent and I wish he would have consulted cinematographers on the level of Matthew Libatique or Ellen Kuras as it could have allowed the film to actually feel epic and have an astounding visual language throughout. If you look at movies like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind the cinematography flows like a long and beautiful melody. Megalopolis was a staccato in comparison.
I'm still glad I saw it as I enjoyed the themes of a civilization stagnating/regressing into status quo and forgetting that people don't only need housing and food, they need to be able to dream of something bigger. And that is something I've, with my limited European view, seen about USA. It's a country that has the mentality that their glory days are behind them and it can't agree on where to go next as a nation. I personally saw Driver's character having more in common with Elon Musk's space dream than with Coppola himself creating movies. So I hope this theme can be explored more in depth in the future.
Last edited:
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
If Coppola's name wasn't attached to this film, it would be mentioned alongside The Room as one of the most naive and incompetent films ever produced. And I think it's difficult for some people to accept that an experienced master is capable of making real, genuine shit of that sort, but it's important to understand that a movie like this are born of hubris and unchecked ego, and they can only exist as a vanity project for someone with resources and access.
Like, there are a million bad screenplays out there. The thing that makes The Room so extraordinary is that this weirdo got access to a studio and the millions of dollars needed to produce a movie, and that there was no one to really stop him or help him improve it.
With Coppola, resources and access are a given, and yet we still have a script that was rejected by every single studio in the industry for decades, and a final movie that he couldn't even sell to a single distributor or streaming service, forced to pay Lionsgate to put the movie out and required to pay for advertising himself.
So imagine the sort of mind that faces this level of rejection and negative feedback, continuously for 40 years, but still remains not only committed to the vision, but convinced that the movie will be in conversation at awards season. That fortress of ego, completely immune to outside feedback, is the only place where a movie this bad can gestate. It's only because Coppola has all this credibility with the industry and with himself that it's even possible to make a movie this bad. It's what happened when man becomes so successful at his craft that he loses the self doubt and reflection needed to create.
Megalopolis deserves its place alongside The Room, and Plan 9 from Outer Space. It's a once in a lifetime bad movie of the sort that requires the aligning of stars to even get made. The apologetics or attempts to analyze it as flawed art only get in the way of appreciating what a true piece of shit it really is. The only way to watch this movie is to lean in and laugh your ass off.
Like, there are a million bad screenplays out there. The thing that makes The Room so extraordinary is that this weirdo got access to a studio and the millions of dollars needed to produce a movie, and that there was no one to really stop him or help him improve it.
With Coppola, resources and access are a given, and yet we still have a script that was rejected by every single studio in the industry for decades, and a final movie that he couldn't even sell to a single distributor or streaming service, forced to pay Lionsgate to put the movie out and required to pay for advertising himself.
So imagine the sort of mind that faces this level of rejection and negative feedback, continuously for 40 years, but still remains not only committed to the vision, but convinced that the movie will be in conversation at awards season. That fortress of ego, completely immune to outside feedback, is the only place where a movie this bad can gestate. It's only because Coppola has all this credibility with the industry and with himself that it's even possible to make a movie this bad. It's what happened when man becomes so successful at his craft that he loses the self doubt and reflection needed to create.
Megalopolis deserves its place alongside The Room, and Plan 9 from Outer Space. It's a once in a lifetime bad movie of the sort that requires the aligning of stars to even get made. The apologetics or attempts to analyze it as flawed art only get in the way of appreciating what a true piece of shit it really is. The only way to watch this movie is to lean in and laugh your ass off.
Last edited:
I wonder what the vision of Megalopolis really was. What we see on screen is definitely a massively truncated version, I think, but is there an actual storyboarded version we could see as a reference? Novelizations used to be good ways to gauge the initial vision versus the on screen product because the author was typically working from a late stage script but had access to discarded drafts and additional information that could never work for a film but could in a novel.
Unless Coppola has just stroked out, the film we see has to be the "well, it's all I can do" version, nothing like what he saw in his head. I mean, he had an ENTIRE TEAM of folks working with him on this, elaborate sets and VFX, whole crews doing this stuff. You'd think the very first read-through with the cast would have revealed the glaring flaws with the films structure or any of the acting LEGENDS he got to do it would have said "Hey, Francis, this whole sub-plot goes nowhere and I die off screen. What's going on here?"
Then again, I suspect a large number of films get pitched and filmed with NO ONE really groking what the end product is gonna be and it's just "get 'er dun and fingers crossed", which again is where you'd think all the experience in the room would have reigned it all in before they committed MONTHS to filming stuff they just had to know was garbage and lacking any interstitial tissue to hold it together.
Unless Coppola has just stroked out, the film we see has to be the "well, it's all I can do" version, nothing like what he saw in his head. I mean, he had an ENTIRE TEAM of folks working with him on this, elaborate sets and VFX, whole crews doing this stuff. You'd think the very first read-through with the cast would have revealed the glaring flaws with the films structure or any of the acting LEGENDS he got to do it would have said "Hey, Francis, this whole sub-plot goes nowhere and I die off screen. What's going on here?"
Then again, I suspect a large number of films get pitched and filmed with NO ONE really groking what the end product is gonna be and it's just "get 'er dun and fingers crossed", which again is where you'd think all the experience in the room would have reigned it all in before they committed MONTHS to filming stuff they just had to know was garbage and lacking any interstitial tissue to hold it together.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
There are early drafts of the screenplay out there and... Honestly I think Coppola made the movie he had in his head. All the problems and weird choices are there on the page, and then some.
Coppola was hoping to sell this to an "awards-focused" distributor because he thought it was going to win Oscars. He's proud of the movie and how it came out. Just like how Tommy Wiseau wanted to submit The Room for Oscars before he embraced it as unintentional comedy. It's just the product of a delusional mind.
P:axMagellanic
Member
I'm usually quite partial to a mess of a film. I enjoyed Refn's Neon Demon and Lynch's Dune is one of my top 5 films. But fuck me, that acting is up there that abysmal Atlas Shrugged from years back. Will deffo watch when it hits streaming. 
I'm usually quite partial to a mess of a film. I enjoyed Refn's Neon Demon and Lynch's Dune is one of my top 5 films. But fuck me, that acting is up there that abysmal Atlas Shrugged from years back. Will deffo watch when it hits streaming.
Oh come now, say what you will about the ACCURACY of Dune '84 vs the book, but you CAN NOT deny that the film itself holds together, flows from plot point to plot point, explores discrete and abstract themes well, manages the "inner voice" better than anyone has since, and takes the viewer on an emotional journey through music and visuals. It's a swing for the fences that landed, while not a home run, at least a solid triple play (even more so for the extended version) while Megalopolis was 2 fouls and a bunt to the pitcher at best
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Yeah it's campier and more laugh out loud absurd than Atlas Shrugged, which is just unwatchably boring.I'm usually quite partial to a mess of a film. I enjoyed Refn's Neon Demon and Lynch's Dune is one of my top 5 films. But fuck me, that acting is up there that abysmal Atlas Shrugged from years back. Will deffo watch when it hits streaming.
I don't know if that makes it a "better" movie, or if it just means it crossed the threshold of so bad it's good. Like I really love this movie and I want to watch it again but only because it's the worst thing I've ever seen.
The worst a movie can be is boring, dull, and uninteresting. Megalopolis is engaging all the way through and has something to say. Are its points a bit sophomoric and oddly fixated on venerating high school summer reading? Yeah, but they’re still the classics, and I’m not complaining when a movie expresses love for Marcus Aurelius, Siddhartha, and Shakespeare. Unnatural line readings are an aesthetic choice, so I didn’t get hung up on it. The intent was probably capturing the feel of a stage play from antiquity, with its moral arguments, narrator, talk of the gods and allegorical magic, etc.
I’m glad it exists.
I’m glad it exists.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Yeah it's definitely going for "theatrical" as an aesthetic choice but in practice it's just campy.
I think "having something to say" is pretty generous. I think this movie wants to have something to say but it doesn't ever find it, it's messages are muddled by self contradiction or incredibly banal.
It's art in search of a message instead of art in service of a message. The point here is just vanity, it's Coppola trying to prove he can make something artsy like Fellini and not realizing his musings on life and art are shallow and dumb.
I am also glad this movie exists but I think it's better to approach it as a mad disaster than anything heartfelt.
Last edited:
NecrosaroIII
Ultimate DQ Fan
I saw it. I loved it. Felt good seeing something made with passion and heart. Does it hit everything out of the park? No. But i appreciate the attempt.
I disagree that it doesn't have a message. It's pretty simple. Society needs creativity, innovation and idealism, but these forces are at odds with the realism that need dictates. The future is built on the marriage of the two. There are other statements, like the threat of populism. The only thing I'm not really sure about was the part about the vestal virgin? Maybe the hypocracy of those that would worship purity while secretely wanting to corrupt it themselves? Not sure. That part was muddy.
Was it perfect? Absolutely not and that's okay. I would take 100 Megalopolises over 1 Disney Marvel movie. It made me realize that maybe I should start exploring indie films instead of just consuming mass appeal four quadrant trash.
Strong performances from Driver, Labeouf, and Aubrey Plaza. Giancarlo was pretty good (usually I find him sort of stiff). Okay performances from that Game of Thrones chick (I forgot her name). Only weak performance was Jon Voight, but he was fine for what he was.
I disagree that it doesn't have a message. It's pretty simple. Society needs creativity, innovation and idealism, but these forces are at odds with the realism that need dictates. The future is built on the marriage of the two. There are other statements, like the threat of populism. The only thing I'm not really sure about was the part about the vestal virgin? Maybe the hypocracy of those that would worship purity while secretely wanting to corrupt it themselves? Not sure. That part was muddy.
Was it perfect? Absolutely not and that's okay. I would take 100 Megalopolises over 1 Disney Marvel movie. It made me realize that maybe I should start exploring indie films instead of just consuming mass appeal four quadrant trash.
Strong performances from Driver, Labeouf, and Aubrey Plaza. Giancarlo was pretty good (usually I find him sort of stiff). Okay performances from that Game of Thrones chick (I forgot her name). Only weak performance was Jon Voight, but he was fine for what he was.
Last edited:
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
Coming to streaming services on November 12 
www.forbes.com
Francis Ford Coppola’s ‘Megalopolis’ Gets Digital Streaming Date
“Megalopolis”—Francis Ford Coppola’s big-budget sci-fi epic—is coming soon to digital streaming. Find out when and where you can watch it at home.
www.forbes.com
SirKicksalot
Member
That sequence where they visit the bad part of town is extraordinary. Unbelievable visuals. I fucking love Coppola's little movie magic tricks, like when you see Cesar and Julia reflected in the camera lens while they're in separate cars.
All movies follow dream logic, but this one feels like a recorded dream.
Costume designer at work:
All movies follow dream logic, but this one feels like a recorded dream.
Costume designer at work:
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
The rumor is tomorrow!
Hrk69
Member
Last edited:
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
Kraz
Member
Is there lot of Tits And Ass?
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Not a lot, but it's very horny all the same. And the clearest display of Aubrey Plaza's assets you're going to see.Is there lot of Tits And Ass?
Last edited:
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
Finally watched the whole thing and thought it was one of the most pretentious trash I seen in a long time. One of the many reasons why Hollywood is dying
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
I know, right? You don't seem as happy about it as me, though.
Hollywood spent 40 years trying to explain to FFC why his script sucked before he decided to make itself. Don't blame Hollywood, they fought valiantly and lost to FFC's winery fortune.
I am going to watch this with my 10 year old daughter tonight because I'm a terrible parent.
Last edited:
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
I know, right? You don't seem as happy about it as me, though.
Hollywood spent 40 years trying to explain to FFC why his script sucked before he decided to make itself. Don't blame Hollywood, they fought valiantly and lost to FFC's winery fortune.
I am going to watch this with my 10 year old daughter tonight because I'm a terrible parent.
Don't give her repressed childhood memories
Last edited:
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Nah my kid totally gets ironically watching crap, this was her favorite thing ever. She started pulling out her stop watch so she could time how fast conflicts were resolved immediately after they were introducedDon't give her repressed childhood memories
Doom85
Member
I know, right? You don't seem as happy about it as me, though.
Hollywood spent 40 years trying to explain to FFC why his script sucked before he decided to make itself. Don't blame Hollywood, they fought valiantly and lost to FFC's winery fortune.
I am going to watch this with my 10 year old daughter tonight because I'm a terrible parent.
That’s how the Weekly Planet podcast discussed this. About how FFC pitched his “revolutionary” movie idea for decades, everyone said it would fail, and then he manages to fund it, and this movie is about a guy with a “revolutionary” idea, all the other characters say it will fail, and then he succeeds and proves them all wrong.
I’m not saying plenty of his original pitch wasn’t in this film, but it’s hard to look at that and not see this film made with a good deal of spite behind it which rarely makes for a good film. Reminds me of Lady in the Water by M. Night Shyamalan, particularly the character that is a critic and is conveniently obnoxious and stupid (I say “conveniently” due to critics not liking his prior film) and another character, played by himself, who is told by a kid who can see in the future that his character will write an incredible story that challenges humanity so much that they can’t take it and will kill him for it. Like, goddamn, Shyamalan, stroke your ego a little more, why don’t you?
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Yeah the fact that this movie is essentially FFC writing an obvious Mary Sue character to tell a story about his own greatness is both obvious and deliciously cringe. In early drafts written when Coppola has a lot of debt Cesar also had a lot of debt.
It's hilarious that his "artistic ambition" is just to self aggrandize but this is exactly the movie he deserved to get out of that.
I think that was always the concept, to be honest, like he came up with this movie after the failure of One From The Heart that pretty much bankrupted him. There's an early draft kicking around on Internet Archive and it has some notable differences but what's more striking is just how much of the ponderous mess we got is there on the page all those years ago.
NecrosaroIII
Ultimate DQ Fan
I disagree. Its definitely pretentious, but this audacity is what Hollywood needs. Actual flavor instead of sterile trash.
No major studio wanted anything to do with this though
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
No major studio wanted anything to do with this though
Well he's still part of the Hollywood system. And like any other movie in current year, this movie was especially preachy as all hell too..
Yeah but Aubrey Plaza saying she's "oral as hell" though.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Lol stooooop. There are plenty of daring and original films that are actually good. The existence of mediocrity alone does not impart this very silly, very stupid, very poorly made movie with any more artistic merit.
It's like praising a shit sandwich because at least it's not fast food. Like I guess that's true but what are you left with?
No minor studio eitherNo major studio wanted anything to do with this though
. Hell even the Lionsgate distro deal put Coppola on the hook for screening and marketing costs, they fronted nothing and just took a percentage.
Last edited:
kurisu_1974
Member
Well it was certainly something. The bad acting and ridiculous dialogue combined with that piss filter reminded me also of Cloud Atlas or Jupiter Ascending, while I was hoping for a new Brazil.
Worth watching though, just for how weird and misguided it all is.
Worth watching though, just for how weird and misguided it all is.
Last edited:
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
After seeing it (in a not very good cinema with pretty small screen) I stand by this comment.
Will definitely try to see it again on a bigger and better screen.
There's something about this kind of cinematic experimentation that I simply adore.
Last edited:
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
There are certain scenes I would hope a ten year old girl doesn't watch...Nah my kid totally gets ironically watching crap, this was her favorite thing ever. She started pulling out her stop watch so she could time how fast conflicts were resolved immediately after they were introduced
Last edited:
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
There's really nothing explicit in the movie. I don't really care about language or innuendo.
As with all questions of parenting, you just gotta know your kid. I wouldn't show this to a classroom full of 10 year olds but my kid was ready for it and had a blast.
Last edited:
Not by a long shot!
The Little Hours, not actually a half bad little film, is the one to watch.
Yep! As I mentioned earlier, the film calls itself a fable, so it is obviously stylized for effect, more like a stage play from antiquity with a narrator guiding you through the morals of the tale.