What am I in for?

What am I in for?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=21QK87jzwkQ
twitter.com/AnonBabble

You're going to learn what the bill of Rights are

i wish viggo was my dad

Hipster's Wet Dream.

Half Hour Too Long.

Cute Girls.

Cries.

Annalise

Wasted potential and a hippie's wet dream about how bad capitalism is and how much smarter hippies are then everyone else
You think the film might actually be making a point about how stupid this ideology is when they start stealing and it becomes obvious that the kids have no social skills, but this is brushed over by a let-down of an ending

It's well-made for what it is though

commies in need of a RWDS

a movie made by hooli

In reality it's a good story, but sometimes I think they take it too far. Not enough subtlety to make it greatly effective. There is some grey area, and a lot of heartfelt moments, but not quite GOAT.

>Spoon-feed me

>brushed over

It's literally the center conflict of the entire film. Or maybe I misunderstood your post. I think the stealing stuff is benign enough that you don't criticize it too much, but then the weapons make you raise an eyebrow, but then the Bill of Rights things takes you back. It tugs you back and forth just enough.

>hippie's wet dream about how bad capitalism is
I'm convinced that anyone who says this only saw the trailers.

I was a bit mad at this part since I thought It was too unbelievable and ham fisted, then my friend showed me a video of college students not knowing what a civil war is.

fuck off
never once did i say anything like that
it pretends to explore deep issues, but it's portrayed in a painfully childish way
>look how smart my six year old daughter is by teaching her outside of the traditional education system while your kids play videogames all day

It is the main point, but they don't adequately resolve it. Rather than accepting that his methods are flawed, the only compromise is that they start going to school
And the eldest kid goes off to travel around Europe
I can't remember who said it, (might have been Armond), but there's an irony in the funeral where they sing a commercial hair-metal song acoustically after spending the entire film demonising capitalism
The teenager that hates him has a random and sudden change of heart for no reason too

It's not a bad film, it's just very pretentious

Namibia is not in Europe

Should I watch this? Its on on-demand

The movie's about how neither side is objectively correct, idiot. Calling it a hippie's wet dream is juvenile of you.

It's worth a watch, but it's not essential-Viggo

>The movie's about how neither side is objectively correct
It brings up all the flaws of their ideology and then ignores them while lamenting on the supposed flaws of capitalism
I suppose if you're already a socialist, or just euphoric then the film probably speaks droves to you

Like seriously, fucking Noam Chomsky day?

>Let’s have a discourse” is the funniest line in Captain Fantastic, a family road movie in which neo-progressive widower Ben (Viggo Mortensen) teaches his brood of six kids (grief-stricken by their hipster mother’s recent suicide) how to be survivalists and non-conformists. However, the basic social unit does not conform to progressive discourse so easily.

>“We don’t make fun of people — except Christians,” Ben instructs his kids. Instead of Christmas, the vagabonds celebrate Noam Chomsky’s birthday. This ought to be a sharp satire about progressive egotism, caricaturing how one generation imposes its politics on the next. But Captain Fantastic stays shy of true discourse when it sentimentalizes Ben’s hypocrisy. Cédric Kahn’s 2015 Vie Sauvage (Wild Life) made a similar premise genuinely unsettling, and Louis Malle’s autobiographical memoir of his class-privileged youth, Murmur of the Heart (1971), was livelier and less smug.

>Director Matt Ross handles the road-movie genre more gracefully than did the makers of the 2006 Little Miss Sunshine, yet congratulating Ben on his moth-eaten “Jesse Jackson ’88” T-shirt is mere sit-com. So is the nostalgic sentiment teaching teens such antiquated slogans as “Power to the people” and “Stick it to the man.” This is how the film (vibrantly lit by Stéphane Fontaine) forsakes satire and fails to talk back to the new progressive patriarchy. The dead wife/mother who intones “We’ve created paradise out of Plato’s Republic” remains spooky.

Just because you got triggered by the anti capitalism in the movie doesn't mean they ignored the protagonists' flaws.

>responds to literally nothing I've said
>just hurls insults
>apparently I'm triggered
Spotted the pleb unable to back up his meme-opinions

What the fuck do you have against Noam Chomsky?

>There’s a meaty whiff of phoney-baloney in this fatuous and tiresome movie, replete with forced emotional crises and wrong notes, topped off with an excruciatingly unearned, sentimental ending. It’s a low-cal version of Peter Weir’s 1986 movie The Mosquito Coast, starring someone who is essentially a cross between Charles Manson and Captain von Trapp.

>Ben (a blandly conceited performance by Viggo Mortensen) has taken his six children away from America’s soul-rotting consumerist nonsense to live a tough, pure survivalist lifestyle in the forests of the Pacific Northwest – drilling them to athletic perfection and teaching them about Chomsky and Dostoyevsky. But his uncompromising demands have taken their toll on the children’s mother, who is now in hospital, and causes a terrible confrontation with Ben’s reactionary father-in-law, Jack (Frank Langella).

>So is Ben a creepy authoritarian cult leader or quixotic countercultural hero? Perhaps we are supposed to believe he’s a charismatic mix of the two. But it’s fudged, and there is something wildly and unintentionally pompous and preposterous about Ben, who is against “organised religion” but appears to think Buddhism is somehow ethically and intellectually superior to Christianity. This is a macho story of men’s intellectual development: Ben’s son, Bo (George MacKay) is the putative academic star; the sisters aren’t important and, in this film, women are either irrelevant, saintly or dead.

All you brought up is that you personally can't grasp hipocrasy and subtlety unless a character specifically brings it up.

No, I never said that
Stay mad that you're socialist wank doesn't get a free pass just cause it agrees with you politically

You specifically said the word ignores, so you did bring it up. I'm not a socialist, and neither are the protagonists. Stay mad, brainlet.

>Stay mad that you're socialist wank doesn't get a free pass just cause it agrees with you politically
Not him, but you clearly didn't see the film. You saw the trailer.

I watched the film
It was alright but underwhelming for its childish portrayal of these issues that it pretended to be so informed about
I feel sorry for you that you think it's impossible for anyone to have a different opinion of the same experience

You'll grow out of it one day when you're older

>'m not a socialist, and neither are the protagonists
>they just hate capitalism, live on a commune, steal when they lack money and celebrate Noam Chomsky as one of the greatest living intellectuals

So either you didn't watch the film or you don't know what socialism is

>childish portrayal
You keep saying that but not explaining what it means even when directly asked to. That is why I don't think you saw the film.

>let-down of an ending
They accomplished the mission. Also, the ending would have been a cop out if Viggo had just left the kids with their grandparents. It was the logical conclusion but that would feel like a cop out since it puts the kids in the same suburbia their mom grew up in and rebelled against. The family moving back to the farm in Oregon and going to public school was a satisfying compromise between the forest home and the grandparents' home. Bo going to Namibia randomly was a lot more likable than if he had just went to college (though we the audience can assume he will go to one of the schools he was accepted to when he's done seeing the world for himself). Overall, I liked it.

My gf at the time and I spent the night in the cabin set where the family lived in the movie. The set people even out the Joy of Sex on the shelf where the dad and mom would sleep. Was especially funny to me after watching the movie recently and seeing the book be a part of an unrelated scene.

>Commun
Or a family unit, whichever one suits your agenda
They also, to my memory, bring up that property should be owned by the community. They seem pretty anti government and society actually. Anyway, this is bikeshedding and it ends here.

*Never bring up

I already mentioned it. It brings up criticisms and then fails to resolve them. The teenage son that hates him goes on a long-ass rant about everything wrong with his ideology, he agrees and leaves them alone and then the kids sneak back to live with him
Ignoring the appalling nonsensical character development there, all that changes is the move to the farm
They don't examine why living in communities is good. They don't examine the benefits of capitalism or why socialism isn't widely adopted

The intelligence level is childish "lol my kids are all super-geniuses and extreme athletes"
It's a power-fantasy for hippies, plain and simple
It's fitting that they never get punished for robbing the store, because that would break the illusion

I understand why they did it, but it's bad story-telling. They should have resolved the situation more amicably rather than just fucking off without telling the grandparents and seemingly having learnt very little. I agree that Bo travelling was a good ending for him, but we don't see a proper ending for the rest of the kids other than that they attend school now.
The film is a fantasy world where actions have no consequences and all his kids are child-prodigies because of his revolutionary parenting style. I guess I was expecting a more balanced portrayal and a look at the effect that the social isolation was having on the kids

What's this from?

youtube.com/watch?v=21QK87jzwkQ

what the heck is Viggo's problem

>then fails to resolve them
He literally gives up the lifestyle that he loves because it is bad for his kids.
>They don't examine the benefits of capitalism or why socialism isn't widely adopted
The mother literally dies and kicks off the whole movie because they were not prepared to handle something like postpartum depression. Its a huge indictment of their way of life right in the beginning.
>It's a power-fantasy for hippies, plain and simple
You don't even have to live in the woods to raise kids that are highly intelligent. The whole point of the film was that these benefits only seemed that way until they have to interact with other people.
> I guess I was expecting a more balanced portrayal and a look at the effect that the social isolation was having on the kids
The filmed literally showed the good and the bad of the his parenting style. In the end the bad outweighed the good so he gave it up.

The other one was cuter.

I don't think it's really about or trying to argue different philosophies. It's really a character-based drama, with that quirky, hipster, "indie" spin.

>He literally gives up the lifestyle that he loves because it is bad for his kids.
No he doesn't? They already mentioned that they lived on a farm before
Very little changes
His lifestyle is practically identical

>The mother literally dies and kicks off the whole movie because they were not prepared to handle something like postpartum depression. Its a huge indictment of their way of life right in the beginning.
Yeah and they accept her criticisms of the lifestyle at first and then write them off as the rants of a crazy person at the end
"She was unwell. She didn't know what she was saying"

>You don't even have to live in the woods to raise kids that are highly intelligent. The whole point of the film was that these benefits only seemed that way until they have to interact with other people.
Yeah except there's one scene of this and every other scene portrays the kids as literal prodigies, including the laughable doctor scene "OMG your daughter has the muscle mass of a professional athlete"

>The filmed literally showed the good and the bad of the his parenting style. In the end the bad outweighed the good so he gave it up.
But he didn't give it up. He just reluctantly sent them to school after they ran away from their grandparents

I agree, it's much better if you look at it like this
The problem for me is that the philosophy and ideology in the film was too prominent and felt preachy

>OMG your daughter has the muscle mass of a profession athlete
You mean "for a girl her age she's unusually strong". Confirmed for projecting.

>His lifestyle is practically identical
In what way?
> they accept her criticisms of the lifestyle at first and then write them off as the rants of a crazy person
Yeah but the audience does not and it is obvious this is why the grandfather hates Viggo and blames him for her death.
>But he didn't give it up. He just reluctantly sent them to school after they ran away from their grandparents
How is this not giving up?

Its pretty clear is what you wanted is for the character to look into the camera and say "Our way of life was complete bullshit" and then the kids go fuck off shitposting on Sup Forums

The film was very obviously about reconciling the perfect vision you have for your children with the reality of how the world works. This was an extreme example but that is what film is for. They weren't wrong and they weren't right.

You want them to be wrong, and that's fine! Its meant for both sides to examine their own arguments for the flaws we brush over in our own idealism.

But you can't blame the film because it didn't demonize character's for things you personally don't agree with.