Under The Silver Lake, Starring Andrew Garfield

Looks terrible. Youtube conspiracy vidoes are put together better than that.

Why'd they stick girls in a movie with Andrew Garfield and Topher Grace?

r1 I thought that was the point; to parody conspiracy theories?

r2 Heh, exactly. Also, I would very much like to see this classic noir set-up of a guy falling for a girl and the girl going missing upended just once, and have the girl be the lead. Wouldn't that be nice to see for a change?

[quote][R1] I thought that was the point; to parody conspiracy theories?

No, they want to sell it to an audience that hasn't watched them

[quote]Wouldn't that be nice to see for a change?

No. No girls would be nice to see for a change.

I watched this trailer for Jimmi Simpson and now I'm so disappointed. Pass.

r4 Really? Are you part of their marketing team? Or perhaps the director himself?

Sorry, completely forgot to include the release date, which is 22 June in the US.

I was going to post a reply, but then I watched the trailer and have decided not to bother.

If it has Andrew nude I’m sold but I’m sure it will be no Ingrid Goes west.

You know I had no idea this was pushed to December? Apparently the filmmaker is going to re-edit it after mixed reception at Cannes.

Does Andrew do his now patented trademark shriek when he learns that putatively "alluring" Riley Keough mysteriouly disappears?

I'm sure the movie is crap but just had to say that Elvis' granddaughter is really cute.

Holy crap it’s finally being released.

It's a shame the script sucks because Andrew gives a really good performance. And Dat Ass.

Yes, it's finally being released in select theatres April 19 and on streaming (MUBI?) April 22.

This A- review by the AV Club is a bit of an outlier; other reviews are more lukewarm.

The best thing he was in was The Red Riding trilogy.

Never Let Me Go is very good, but he was the weakest one in it.

He looks like the singer in Elastica

I'm sure no one else has seen this since it's only playing in about 3 theaters across the country but good lord what a steaming pile of shit. Two thirds of the way through the movie there is actually a closeup shot of a dirty, shit-filled toilet. That should have been the movie poster.

Why does it suck, R18; tell us!

This isn't my review but I agree with pretty much all of it. It was too long to paste the whole thing but I'll link the imdb page:

[quote]Just like Mulholland Drive. Except really, really, really awful - Bertaut 26 March 2019

[quote]Under the Silver Lake is a pretentious, self-indulgent, convoluted, overlong mess. Positioning itself as equal parts neo-noir and genre subversion, it is essentially a cross between David Lynch's Mulholland Dr. (2001) and Thomas Pynchon's Inherent Vice (2009). With the major difference being that it's absolutely, unrelentingly terrible. As with Mitchell's previous films, Silver Lake works as both an example and a subversion of genre - it's a mystery noir à la Kiss Me Deadly (1955), The Long Goodbye (1973), and Chinatown (1974), but is also at pains to undermine and critique many of the generic markers found in such films. A 140-minute labyrinthine, paranoia-laden shaggy-dog story full of MacGuffins, false leads, narrative dead ends, and unexplained details, the film relocates the detective stories of Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett to the chaotic postmodern era of cognitive semiotics where the relationship between signifier and signified is now so arbitrary that meaning-making itself has become a protean commodity. However, it is easily the most self-important piece of garbage I've seen in a long time; a philosophically juvenile rumination thoroughly convinced of its own portentousness. Fundamentally misogynistic, it's at least 45 minutes too long, with an unfocused narrative, poorly thought-out metaphors, and an insipid protagonist. The cinematography is pretty though.

What is a "shaggy dog story"?

Sorry it's gonna suck. 15 years ago, Andrew and Topher could have played Sutherland and Malone.

Thanks, R20/R18! Sounds pretty bad :(

That is very disappointing as—in addition to “noirs”—I also like Los Angeles set stories...

^I’m, R19

That's a pretty damning review right there, r20. "Pretentious, self-indulgent, convoluted, overlong" is everything I hate about a movie.

The critics seem to be more divided on it, though very good reviews like the one at r16 are rare.

it's the new Southland Tales. Never give too much creative control to Young directors who had a fluke with their debut movie. NEVER.

I think studios think that with every “young director with a first film that’s a hit” they might be looking at the next Tarantino...

I absolutely agree with R20. Saw it last year at the Egyptian. To say the plot takes the scenic route is a massive understatement and it is kind of gross the way the film treats women. Think season 1 GOT.

The sad thing is that if someone in power had put the director on a leash, it could've been something. Andrew Garfield is really good in the role, and has no problem showing off his cute ass several times.

You can't say you're "critiquing the male gaze" when every woman in the film takes her top off the second they meet him and most of them don't have names.

LOL it is on Prime now, it makes absolutely no sense but the scene where Andrew beats up the children is fucking hilarious!

Also never trust a neonoir where the main character has posters of other film noir in his apartment. “Ooooh I’m so meta!” Fail.

Apparently even gay guys want to get hold of Elvis' granddaughter.

I wonder if I was r22.

I just watched this. Honestly, I’m gonna watch it a second time because there was so much going on, almost two films, one layered atop the other — like the mario magazine and the map transparency, that I feel like I missed a lot of visual information while tagging along with the plot.

R34 what plot?

R35, a guy mourning the loss of his job, girlfriend and self-worth falls down a paranoid rabbit hole while searching for something to give meaning to his life.