|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 17, 2009 23:24:16 GMT
As you can see from the above, my reaction was much more analytical than emotional. Not that I didn't enjoy the emotions of the romance, that was pretty much my favorite aspect of the film, but I found myself thinking a lot. (Hate when that happens.) I think it was due to the aforementioned confusion, which I think was intended to disorient. When I'm confused, rather than go with the flow, my default position is to try to figure things out. I tend to be sort of rigid, I guess you'd call it, rather than relaxed.
I wish I had been swept away, because I think that is an appropriate response to the themes and emotions. It'll give me another excuse to watch again, though!
and
You are both entirely correct in this. Of course, you couldn't focus on the story of that time and place without the war. I was just confused and therefore overthinking.
The feeling is mutual (I hope).
And here we have found our new definition for "free framing."
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 17, 2009 23:29:01 GMT
my turn to be confused. i dont quite get the free framing definition. you got me again. you are COnfused, i am french, and so we have to explain things to each other LOL
I LOVE READING YOUR POSTS!
|
|
|
|
Post by peach on Feb 18, 2009 0:58:37 GMT
Yes, it is true that this board is quite literate indeed. I too look forward to reading everyones posts, most especially, Tip and Rueful. It took me three tries to really get into the film. It was a bit slow going in the beginning, but gradually leads you in to each characters story, and you want to know more about each one.
Ruf never looks like he's acting, so effortless and completely believable. In one instance he's full of bravado and in the next he's the caretaker with a heart of gold. I don't think this movie would have worked if not a period piece. The romance was realistic, in that the coming of WW2 and the uncertainty of what lies ahead brings these two people together.. The ending for me is satisfactory, I hate the term closure but it brings everything full circle. I was hoping for more and what happens to each of them next, but I think we can surmise or hope that they do end up together.
Please Tip and Rueful, and you too GE2, wonderful writings from all of you and please keep your literal feeling and thoughts coming. You are an inspiration.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 18, 2009 1:56:55 GMT
Thanks, everybody. I'm glad we have an outlet for our inner Roger Eberts here. You're right, Peach, the pre-war and World War II settings were very important in terms of who the characters were in the beginning as well as how they changed. I was just thrown by some of the sudden changes in tone from scene to scene, but I think now that that was my problem, not the movie's. I agree. I would have liked to see at least a few minutes more of their reunion, but I can live with what it was. Really lovely. I definitely want to watch it again in a few days or a week to see if I can just let myself feel it without analyzing so much. Sorry, I didn't quote you far enough. I meant that you obviously had stopped it long enough to notice not only where Mick kissed, but the spit he left behind. Don't worry, sometimes my jokes are like that--obscure and not the least bit funny. But I crack myself up  |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 18, 2009 2:03:20 GMT
Thanks, everybody. I'm glad we have an outlet for our inner Roger Eberts here. Sorry, I didn't quote you far enough. I meant that you obviously had stopped it long enough to notice not only where Mick kissed, but the spit he left behind. Don't worry, sometimes my jokes are like that--obscure and not the least bit funny. But I crack myself up if you are not funny, then i might as well be raving mad, since i laugh at your "unfunny jokes"!!!! but i still wonder what is the worst, not getting the joke, or admitting i dont get the joke !!! quite a team, indeed. over to you, roger!!! |
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 18, 2009 2:17:37 GMT
Well thanks, you give me a lot of laughs too.
Oh, never be afraid to admit you don't get it--it might be one of those "the emperor has no clothes"* things, where no one gets it but no one will say it!
*Talk about being ashamed to admit something. I'm not trying to be funny here: Is that a fairy tale that French Canadian children would be told? I mean, I know it's originally a European story, but I know so little about your region. With US schooling, I'm lucky I know there is a country above us.
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 18, 2009 2:57:08 GMT
oh yes, i remember hearing that story quite early on. i always found it quite amusing, and to be honest i hear it repeated quite often at work, under various "disguises"!!! LOl
we had the whole set of tales, the grimms, perreault of course!!! everything.
although i had a soft spot for lafontaine's fables... i still know some by heart.
anyway, as for the kind of culture found here, you can say that what we have in quebec is quite a juncture of both worlds, american and european. i do beleive we have more input from europe (because of the languages - both french and english) than most americans, and most englo-canadians, actually do.
i dont want to sound cocky or anything, i think its only a fact, because of the cultural melting pot here.
at least, that is what i found out when i started chatting online. i discovered that i often had to explain my sources, otherwise some of my jokes fell totally flat.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 18, 2009 4:45:41 GMT
As a child, I was a very big fan of Aesop, so I'm ashamed to say I'd never heard of lafontaine, which I think is good evidence of your point that you have more european influence there. When I was growing up, my education didn't include a lot of multiculturism, although I live in a ridiculously ethnically diverse city. I'm pleased to say that the situation's improved quite a bit in the last decade or two, although I think the US still lags far behind other nations in the study of languages, cultures, geography, etc. So I just looked lafontaine up, and there's a translation of some of fables on Google books. I'm pleased to find something new to try. Thanks! books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=CDSEvJ41PpMC&dq=lafontaine+fables&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=3vgoy3mPDg&sig=t84uTxTxh24cVIyWPEP4JeDt0Po&ei=2I2bSY-cDaSwmQeT68DsBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPP1,M1 |
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 19, 2009 1:01:25 GMT
I just wanted to add that I had NO IDEA that Mick was supposed to be an American until the very, very end, when Evelyn runs out to look for him and she asks the bus lady and describes him as such. I was momentarily floored, and then tried to wave it out of my mind so I could enjoy the ending, which I did.
I had some trouble with the dialogue (as I said, the lack of captions was hard for me). I remember being confused when the district magistrate guy (or whatever he was) told Mick about the bombing of Pearl Harbor and said, "We're allies now." I then reasoned that he just meant the US and Australia.
To me, Mick's accent throughout sounded not at all American but vaguely Brit-Irish, and I thought he was supposed to be some ex-pat whose accent had sort of faded after years in PNG. I mean, he told her that her husband had "DIS-in-tree" not "dis-in-TARRY." So I guess that kind of thing was a slip, and not supposed to be his normal accent.
Anyway, I wondered if others were similarly surprised, or if it was just be being clueless.
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 19, 2009 1:26:30 GMT
I just wanted to add that I had NO IDEA that Mick was supposed to be an American until the very, very end i'm not big on accents, but i watched the movie thinking he was aussie.. |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 19, 2009 1:29:39 GMT
As a child, I was a very big fan of Aesop, so I'm ashamed to say I'd never heard of lafontaine, that's ok, in fact, lafontaine took most of his ideas from aesop, i believe, updated them, so to speak. i would say that you have a pretty good basis to read lafontaine. |
|
|
|
Post by lizap on Feb 19, 2009 1:48:30 GMT
To me, Mick's accent throughout sounded not at all American but vaguely Brit-Irish, and I thought he was supposed to be some ex-pat whose accent had sort of faded after years in PNG. I think I'd been forewarned about the accent through reading the older movie thread. I can't remember if I was aware of Mick being an American while watching the movie; I think I also thought of him as seeming Australian for some reason. I think the idea of his accent -- whatever it might have originally been -- being indistinct after years in PNG dealing with all sorts of internationals kind of made sense to me. |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Feb 19, 2009 1:50:28 GMT
hehehe... i dont know why i also taught he "looked australian"...
|
|
|
|
Post by lizap on Feb 19, 2009 2:05:14 GMT
I think there is a stereotypical image of Australian men out there, as being kind of rugged, laid back and outdoorsey, and Mick fits that image to a tee (T? -- wonder where that expression comes from?).
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Feb 19, 2009 6:00:46 GMT
Yes, I could definitely see Australian too. Quoll would be a better source, but I was there once, and "rugged, laid back and outdoorsy" is a pretty good description. American just never occurred to me, and it was sort of unnecessary, so, now that I figured it out, I wonder why they made that choice. I guess it doesn't really matter. Just one more thing for my little brain to ponder.
|
|
