Megalopolis (Francis Ford Coppola, 2024) • Page 13

Personally, I don't like movies that are more 'art' based than narrative based. Example, I don't really like David Lynch movies. I get why some people do, but they are not for me. He's basically said on record that he forgoes plot and just wants to 'paint' an emotional journey and let people fill in the gaps regarding the narrative but he does want to 'plot out' how people feel during it (fear / happiness / sadness etc).

I enjoy a lot of movies that tow the line with heavy symbolism / allegories etc, but I think there's very few movies that I would say I 'liked' that didn't have a somewhat traditional narrative backbone.

 

Agreed

Agreed

not agreed that this is wholly “original.” Honestly feels like Shakespeare meets The Fountainhead.

 

That is infinite creativity

 

Totally get it. David Lynch is often the entry gate for a lot of people into that style of filmmaking (probably including myself), so I get why you call him out, but honestly he is not as out there once you wrap your head around his style. There's definitely a narrative to all his movies, even the most experimental ones, just not in a strictly linear sense. Maybe I'm biased though because I actively seek out the artsy fartsy shit.

I can't speak to this movie yet but from everything I've heard I get the sense it probably falls into the "art over narrative" camp.

 

yeah this one might not be totally your thing but it's still worth checking out. I think art like this, and David Lynch films, can expand your mind and enrich your soul even if you don't fully love watching them.

 

another amazing uninhibited artistic choice!

 

he's right

 

This was wild and a lot of fun. There were people audibly groaning in the audience and laughing during parts that I don’t think were meant to be comedic, but overall I didn’t think it was all that weird or incoherent. It almost made me wonder if people missed that it’s literally subtitled as a fable at the start. It reminded me of Baz Luhrman with Shakespearean anime vibes, at least in the dialogue and dream logic—and the wonderful montage sequences. The visuals were fantastic. A lot of baffling choices that I respect being kept in the film.

 

After thinking about it, it’s really a shame that folks seemingly came to my showing in bad faith, prepared to hate-watch it as if it were a modern equivalent of The Room. As if anything that’s nontraditional and doesn’t ring familiar to them should be rejected and mocked.

 

Even if you like or at least respect this movie, I don’t think it’s fair to get annoyed at the general public for thinking it’s comically bad. It is truly bizarre, and nearly impossible to follow, and has at least a couple scenes that *do* genuinely verge on Room-level bad, e.g. the arrow killing.

All of that may be a big part of its charm for some, but it’s not like this is exactly a critical success that only the plebs misunderstand

 

the bow and arrow looked like shit they give you in cub scouts

 

I think it’s fine to laugh, but people were making it more about themselves and their own bafflement than the movie. It’s distracting when people are loudly groaning next to you and you’re trying to sincerely get something out of the movie.

 

One my way to this now. Concerned about the baz comparisons.

 

It’s like a surreal Baz Luhrman - a touch of old Jodorowski in there too. It’s heavy-handed in its symbolism, all the characters are archetypes, and the characters speak openly to the philosophies they represent—a completely heightened reality that the film asks you to buy into. Genuinely believe there’s a lot of intention to the silliness. I understand people will laugh at this film (I did several times) but I walked away from it feeling that there’s value in embracing it as a serious work of art, or at the very least, the final brain-dump of a serious artist.

 

Sometimes people are so weird and easily confused when a filmmaker’s clearly just being silly for a minute. Which, I just don’t get, lol.

 

Audiences are confused because they are used to reading absurdist art through the lense of satire, done with the intention of mocking the subject, pointing out underlining incoherencies to strip it of meaning. Coppella is challenging that, hes doing very absurd and silly things but hes asking us to still take it's message seriously.
The movie is about human civilisation, philosophy, love, art, politics and these things do not fit together coherently and are full of absurdities. Life is stupid serious, funny beautiful, and it doesnt lose value because of that. Infact its better.

 

Fuck it’s kinda true

 

The Linkin Park video was dope though, so it's actually a compliment.

 

Great article — "Megalopolis" and "Joker: Folie à Deux"; or, The Virtue of Burning Money | Features | Roger Ebert

 

I kinda went insane in my letterboxd review but I made a similar point lol

https://boxd.it/7uMdl9

 

you went off and I agree with every single word