So it was a meta-commentary on his own films right?

so it was a meta-commentary on his own films right?

general thoughts?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OvUJsu5w8IU
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>so it was a meta-commentary on his own films right?
no, the movie came to him after reading about Elizabeth Bathory. he got the setting and the characters from living in LA with his wife and becoming inspired by Ellle Fanning.

Shill detected. Into the garbage this thread goes.

i believe refn drew some parallels to criticisms of his own works

>style // substance

I thought it had quite a bit of substance. all of the female characters were incredibly nuanced.

You can take it as a meta-commentary on the place of his actresses in the film. Elle is basically Jesse, she is just less introverted. Jena is a washed up and unremarkable, just like Ruby. Abbey is trying to get into the film industry like Sarah in the Fashion world.

But Refn most analyzes (and deconstructs) feminity in the modern world. He did the same with OGF and masculinity. I'm still convinced that he's deep down a reactionnary.
Pute autism.

So how many more years till Refn goes full on Lynch and makes his own Inland Empire?

It's a false dichotomy. Film is a visual medium. Style is an extension of substance and substance cannot be without style.

I really loved the shlock-ness of the ending. Gave me a real old school horror vibe that I honestly wasn't expecting from this.

Refn isn't a hack so he certainly won't.

Why did Ruby make blood come out of her under the moon? And why did the other girl throw up the eye ball and kill her self?

pleb

>And why did the other girl throw up the eye ball and kill her self?

Because she actually ate Jessi and the guilt was quite literally eating her from the inside.

she was period'ing

the real beauty was destroying her false beauty.

why was Keanu's character dropped so randomly?

his character took a left turn out of nowhere then just disappeared

I think just to make things more shocking but idk I'm not really good at reading into anything.

the part where he holds the knife down her throat is a dream. him raping Lolita shit was real.

She was overwhelmed by Jesse's virginal youth. The moon is almost universal symbol of feminity and menstruations

Refn knows his shit and seems well read.

the fashion show sequence was one of the most beautiful sequences in recent memory

I think it was more of a psychic vision. There were definitely some supernatural aspects to the movie.

I don't know. The murder and consumption of Jesse seemed like her idea. The models seemed to had never done anything like that before. Did those tattoos have any occult symbolism?

yfw food or sex?

Just got home from viewing.

This is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It had exactly everything I enjoy in a movie. I was glued to the screen.

Before, I really liked Refn. Now I believe in him and his vision.

You my man, are smarter than the average bear

Also I feel like the fashion mogul with the mustache was Refn's voice box and he really believes that 'beauty is not everything, it's the only thing'

Much more memorable than Only God Forgives. Not as strong narrative-wise as Drive.

Still, Refn continues to outshine his own cinematography. The man knows style and knows it better than anyone else currently making movies. Undoubtedly the best of a generation.

witches man, not even once

...

Seen it yesterday. It's very self-indulgent, the pacing is horrible. It so wants to portray the emptiness of the fashion world that it feels very empty as a movie also.
The visuals are really awesome though, but the story is not original at all until it starts to become surreal.
Also some scenes were completely unnecessary, or dragging for too long.
The acting is very good overrall, nothing to say there.
I like it a tad little more than Only God Forgives which i didn't like, but Drive for me is his best so far.

Guys guys guys. I went ton highschool with the model who sits next to the gay guy at the table in the scene where the white knight Beta tells the gay guy beauty is on the inside!

The longer I go since watching it, the more I like it. It's sitting with me really well, and I feel like it's worth rewatching. It goes without saying that the visuals and music were great.

I personally found the script to be fine, as well as the acting. As has been mentioned in the thread, there's some nice symbolism going on, but the story itself was enough to keep me captivated. I love how Refn said it wasn't a critique. It was a glamorization of shallowness and material beauty as much as it exposed it's negative sides. In that sense, it almost could be seen as mega; his films are often seen as shallow, and while I disagree, and I'm sure Redn does too, he's saying, "hey, that's not always a bad thing though".

A cool movie with interesting characters and great moments, Neon Demon is Refn at his most "Refn" and is a film I greatly enjoyed

better watch it soon lads, my local theater stops showing it thursday and yours probably will too

box office: 940,509 USD
budget: 7 million USD

so what happened in room 214

I meant "overjoyed", not "overwhelmed". Of course it was her idea.
She's a narcissist and tries to reach Jesse's beauty through a sexual relationship. Jesse is afraid of penetration (remember her dream with Hank and his knife used as a phallic symbol) because she's instrinctively aware that her beauty comes from her virginity, she also rejected Dean because of that. A narcissist like Ruby couldn't accept rejection, she therefore decided to reach Jesse's virginal beauty through ritualistic cannibalism.

Refn's films are usually more successful in Europe - espacially in France. Don't worry.

"some real lolita stuff. real lolita"

sad thing Elle Fanning would be considered too "fat" to actually model if she was some unknown, even Victoria Secret type modeling where they're supposed to look healthier

>visit my theaters website
>switch to Friday

Uh oh...

well i'm french, and i thought Refn was jerking off on his film a little too long.
"Oh look at dat slow motion there, oooooh i'm such a filmmaker, aren't i? Oh yeeaaah fiiiiiilllmmmmm maaaaaakkerrrrrrrrrr"

oh god. Wowwwwwwwwww, did not think of that till now.

What does this mean?

It's a quote from the movie that will spoil it if explained.

I can't believe people think directors actually do this, and use it as a criticism of the film

it's an Italian horror film - the plot is paper thin and it's pretty. only thing it was missing is bad dubbing.

I found it very interesting that Refn used the trope of using virgin sacrifice
old school pagans would sacrifice virgins to please the Gods who ruled their world
but in a post-modern world, it is "i" the individual, who rules in each of our own worlds (or at least, that's how we see it now)

Each of the girls used the sacrifice for personal gain

Just too bad that not everyone can stomach it

I've seen it but have shit memory.

woooooaaaaahhhhhhhhhh

just got that now

Well not actually. But it's very self indulgent.

just answe this question

does she show her tits?

wow so deep man, you are like so intelligent dude. what are you gonna study in college, brah?

no

This, people criticize the film, use the style/substance false dichotomy, but so many of them have not even seen the works of Argento or Bava

a lot of it did feel like a weird mix between Suspiria and Mulholland Drive

>used the trope
yeah. i'm sure he thought to himself "oh fuck that shit, i'm gonna use some tropes in there! *shoots ropes"

What are you trying to say?

Blood and Black Lace yo

I saw it once last week, but I just bought another ticket for a screening tomorrow night with a free fandango ticket I got.

Not even sure that I'll go but I want this movie to make more money so studios will give refn more money to make more movies.

Also, yes the movie was very meta. And jena Malones tattooed boobies were pure heaven

Solid opinion. I liked it, but his indulgence ruined aspects of the film

womyn's studies

Please. Argento and Bava used style excessively, but always in a concised thriller/horror genre.
The problem of Refn imo is that at some point he is just so fascinated by visuals themselves that he starts to forget the story.
To me, it's a problem. Either you try telling a story or you just go full arty mode and focus only on visuals and symbolisms.

When all four of them are in the bathroom at the beginning of the film. Jesse is asked, "are you food or sex?" and literally reused to have sex and they ate her in the third act.

I think they're attributing the quote to Ella's character. Is she food or sex?

The only slow moments I didn't like were when there was dialogue, too stilted and made the actors look bad which they aren't.

Was the movie good or should I just wait for all the webms of the boobs?

It works as a whole, you idiot. We're not talking about a music video, it's a film. The visuals convey narrative and the narrative conveys symbolism. The story was perfectly constructed and managed to set the themes in an intelligent way without being too allegorical. Refn was certainly influenced bu Brava and Argento but he has a better eye for visuals than them, it is reflected through the mise en scène, the photography, the artistic direction and the script.

>Refn was certainly influenced bu Brava and Argento but he has a better eye for visuals than them

ehhhhhhhhhhh, wouldn't go that far

>Better eye than Bava and Argento
>reflected through the mise en scène
who are you kidding seriously. You probably piss on any pre-90's directors just because they're old.

The script? It's always been the problem of Refn. Shit stories but great visuals don't make a good film.

>You probably piss on any pre-90's directors just because they're old.
And you're probably projecting a little bit too much.

The script's never been a problem for Refn. Inspired by the narrative structure of Greek Tragedies and Elizabethan plays, he wrote the most accurate depiction of the Scandinavian underworld when he was just a 24 year old upper middle class guy. Pusher II has been critically acclaimed for its script. Nobody ever complained about Bronson's script. OGF received negative reactions mostly because of its violence,"misogyny" and slow atmosphere.

Don't get me wrong, there isn't a gap between them but Refn definitely reached new heights with TND.

Not the guy you're arguing with, but you're trying to hard

Scripts are his weakest area, but he can still write better scripts than 95% of other filmmakers and writers.of our time.

Who gives a shit

I never said he wrote deep and complicated scripts, I'm saying he's been criticized for his scripts but that it isn't a valid objection. He's definitely a competent writer.

I've only seen Valhalla Riaing, Drive, and Neon Demon.

Definitely going to check out his other stuff now.

So who was The Neon Demon?

Came here to post this.

Have a well-deserved (You).

>went ton highschool with the model
Ok, fuck off.

Still best scene imo.

Is Keanu into loli. He is a weeb.

>general thoughts?

>She doesn't show tits
>I didn't watch movie
>the end

>Just too bad that not everyone can stomach it
Ayyyyy

It was a e s t h e t i c
If that tickles your fancy, then yes.

youtube.com/watch?v=OvUJsu5w8IU

Could listen to for weeks,

bump

>Meta-commentary
No, just that you don't know what metacommentary is.

Refn will save vidya kino

The soundtrack was definitely awesome.

>watching Mission Impossible - Rogue Nation
>suddenly Refn shows up

What?

The villain looked like Refn (with a jaw).

80s synth music should make a comeback, it sounded great for the it follows soundtrack as well

It's already coming back. Don't you know the New retro style?

I loved the visuals (the party scene with the strobe lights was one of the best things he's ever done, so was the runway scene) but the story and tone just didn't work. There was nothing leading up to the incredibly sudden part where they turn on her and kill her in the same scene, just made it feel very jarring since the previous stuff had been fairly slow-building. There was a feeling of "that was it?" when it happened, we never got to see anything of Jesse becoming consumed by the soulless industry other than that ludicrous monologue she gives. After that it feels like a cheap horror sendup with the eyeball scene, the movie had been dark and serious and that just seemed campy and made the "they're literally cannibal witches" twist seem absurd and the movie ended on that weird note that didn't fit with how things started out. I felt like it could have been a good deal longer with more exposition of Jesse's transformation and her relationship with the other models, and it would have worked a lot better, it would be immeasurably better if Refn had focused more on that and cleaned up the third act.

I don't know, I just wasn't feeling it. There's some great symbolism and potential, it's just not executed as well as I think it could be.

why didn't refn show the drugs they were all clearly on?

Now that the fucking retard Americans like the above have watched it. I guess we can't have any intelligent discussions about the movie anymore. It was foreshadowed throughout the whole movie and the reason Ruby drew on the mirror was to notify the others that she was meat.

Yeah, nothing at all. Nothing at all. Not like it was build-up for ages. Jesus christ. You're a moron. Movie is not even subtle. And there was nothing supernatural about the movie.

The rest of the movie took place the same night of the rape... and then he next day at the photo shoot, where would you put keanu in that scenerio?

There was foreshadowing and it was clear that they were starting to turn on her, but there was almost nothing in between her transformation on the runway (aside from telling the bf to fuck off, something fairly minor) and a full-on egotistical rant followed by her being murdered by three people almost immediately after refusing sex a single time, the first time her virginity being the key was suggested

>post yfw real lolita shit
Was that real, or was she dreaming? I want to think he wasn't a bad guy in reality. Was Dean the only truly good guy in the movie?

So why'd Ruby fuck herself on top of a corpse?

>Was Dean the only truly good guy in the movie?
No, the fashion designer was a real human bean.

Are you on a windows phone?

The one who calls Gigi 'fine?' He was a straight ass hole. Unless you mean the Jake guy, think that's what his name was?

And yes, why?

He didn't rape Jesse but he did the other girl, that's why she went to Ruby's place.

Kind of weird that a landlord would rape and sell out his tenants though, can't be good for business.

Yeah that scene just felt rushed. "Oh quick we have to find something extreme to happen!".

That kind of sucks. I really liked his character up until that point.

It's basically Nicolas Refn's Showgirls, right down to the campy and shitty, vapid dialogue, (though with a much less deft hand than Verhoeven) until the third act where it becomes something much more bizarre and interesting. It's kind of shallow and traffics in simple ideas, but it executes them very effectively. If you're a fan of Refn, you'll like it; if you're not, you won't.

>He was a straight ass hole
Nah, he wasn't straight. And he was honest. Gigi was a spoopy alien looking bitch.

Because I too use that app and my filenames always get changed to 1 and I was curious if it was the same for anyone else.