Black Swan

delbertgrady

Barbara Hershey should get an award for her brilliant impression of Piper Laurie in Carrie.

mikhail

seadnamac wrote: »

So the Kunis character wasn't

a fight club esque alter ego representing her internal struggle as she decended into madness

?

Only when she was

imaginary

.

Mark Hamill

wurzlitzer wrote: »

Is it a psychological thriller or is it about a ballerina going insane?

It cant be both?

Mr. K

Saw this the other day. Good film, quite unsettling in places! Can't really add much the comments above!

The Mad Hatter

seadnamac wrote: »

So the Kunis character wasn't

a fight club esque alter ego representing her internal struggle as she decended into madness

?

At times, definitely. At other times, probably not. Often, it's open to interpretation.

johnny_ultimate

There's occasionally films that give you a good kick in the nether regions and shake you for two hours to make sure you're damn well paying attention. You might get one every year, but more likely a handful a decade. Black Swan is one of those films.

You can insert your own hyperbolic ramblings here, because I can only let the film speak for itself and restress what everyone else has said. It may well be Aronofsky's masterpiece, and Natalie Portman is simply radiant, the melodramatic Mansell score sublime. Only a few films can pull off a final line like

"I was perfect"

. Black Swan makes a damn good argument for that.

Black Swan

Portman's personal best wins Golden Globe, Critics Choice, and nominated Tuesday morning for best actress Oscar.

The Black Oil

Good film, felt really caught up in it. My only other reference point for Aronofsky was Pi and Vincent Cassel was certainly a world away from La Haine in this. Thought it was well-paced, though the once or twice I wasn't sure what time/place we were in so maybe the editing was occasionally choppy. Could be just my imagination, though. Portman was quite composed considering what was happening to her character, better than going for all out loonery. Really good work from her.

A very good start to the year.

Orizio

Keno 92 wrote: »

Thought it was good not great. I dunno why but I found Portman to be extremely annoying to watch in this.

Portman's characters is entirely dislikeable - that is not to say her acting wasn't excellent. I also find Aronofsky's direction style leaves me a little too cold (similar problem with 'The Wrestler') - nonetheless, good film.

pocketvenus

Wow have to say I was blown away by this film. Excellent in all regards and Portman really deservess all her acting awards and I hope she wins the Oscar. Even her dedication to going on a crash diet to drop the weight, I mean at one point when she was strertching you could see all her ribs so clearly, awful.

I love a film that, after you have left the cinema you are still thinking about it and Black Swan is that sort of film. It keeps you hooked all the way through and gave you an extra slap in certain scenes.

One point I do make was I was glad I went to see this on my own, my mum was considering going but did not in end. Certain scenes, anyone who has seen it know what I am talking about, are not something you want to watch with your mum sitting beside you.

youcancallmeal

Wonderful acting, brilliant directing and visually stunning but the storyline did nothing for me. Quite similar in a way to The Fountain. If someone had told me beforehand it was essentially a psychological thriller about a ballerina slowly losing her mind then I probably wouldn't of even bothered watching it. It was all very predictable, I guessed from watching previous Aronofsky films that it was building to a dramatic finale (Just look at Pi, Reqiuem for a Dream, The Fountain, The Wrestler). The final dance scene was indeed amazing but to be honest I was kind of glad when it was over because overall it really was quite dull.

Luckycharm

I did not like it at all - probally would have enjoyed it more if it had not been built up so much

ziedth

^ that is the problem. At a certain point the hype does build it up to much. Look at slumdog millionare a great little film but it was evetually ruined by the hype.

Anyway, I truly enjoyed it. Portman again was great in it and I didn't actually really rate her before this. I'm looking forward to seeing it again down the line.

MagicMarker

Incredible movie, incredible performances, incredible choreography.

Incredible.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Thought the ending was absolutely brilliant, definitely the highlight for me. Not film of the year IMO, but it was exceptionally good.

Zapp Brannigan

Just in from seeing this.

Really liked it, which is odd because I didn't really like The Wrestler.

Also, to the guy sat beside me who kept laughing at inappropriate moments, piss right off!

bnt

Zapp Brannigan wrote: »

Also, to the guy sat beside me who kept laughing at inappropriate moments, piss right off!

Sorry! OK, I wasn't next to you, but I did find myself laughing at certain points, when the melodrama was cranked up to 11, but that took nothing away from it. This was never going to be an intimate "kitchen sink drama". I liked how Nina called called her mother "Mommie", which is surely a nod to Mommie Dearest. When we finally get to see the Black Swan in actuality, it's incredibly powerful, and even more so when we realise what was happening at the time.

If I have one complaint, though, it has to be with the casting of a movie star - any movie star - since it compromised the ballet. Portman was excellent, but she's no ballerina, e.g. there are understandably no shots where it's clearly her going en pointe - a core ballet skill. (The occasional long shot is obviously a double.) Or maybe I've just been spoiled by The Red Shoes, which cast an unknown Scottish ballerina (Moira Shearer) and made a movie star out of her.

The Mad Hatter

bnt wrote: »

If I have one complaint, though, it has to be with the casting of a movie star - any movie star - since it compromised the ballet. Portman was excellent, but she's no ballerina, e.g. there are understandably no shots where it's clearly her going en pointe - a core ballet skill. (The occasional long shot is obviously a double.) Or maybe I've just been spoiled by The Red Shoes, which cast an unknown Scottish ballerina (Moira Shearer) and made a movie star out of her.

I don't think a ballerina could have played the part as well as Portman, given the psychological extremes she had to go to. To be honest, it was more a film about obsession than a film about ballet anyway - the ballet just provided a vehicle for the obsession. In a film like this, I'd rather see a good actress doing ballet badly (though she didn't) than a good ballerina playing the part badly.

MagicMarker

I thought she did a fantastic job with the ballet, enough for me not to notice any body doubles or heads CGI'd onto other bodies!

The Mad Hatter

MagicMarker wrote: »

I thought she did a fantastic job with the ballet, enough for me not to notice any body doubles or heads CGI'd onto other bodies!

I think it's one of those things where if you're very familiar with the subject you probably pick up on it more. I remember watching a review by Mark Kermode about a film which featured a jazz band. Kermode, who's also a double bassist, added at the end of the review that it was also the first film in which he'd seen someone playing bass and not looking like they were faking it.

As to en pointe, though, if I remember correctly, the film opens with a close up of a ballerina's feet en pointe, and pans up to Natalie Portman's face in a single take, so I wouldn't be sure she didn't do it.

MagicMarker

Well she trained pretty much every day for 10 months so I wouldn't be surprised if she did it.

The Mad Hatter

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well she trained pretty much every day for 10 months so I wouldn't be surprised if she did it.

Sorry, that was more directed at bnt.

johnny_ultimate

Yeah I don't really get the non-professional dancer criticism myself. Natalie Portman simply owns the role. I read or heard some dancers complaining about how the ballet wasn't great in the film - so what IMO! Fair enough, if you love something enough you are obviously going to be searching for faults. And while the illusion was never broken for me, considering I know sweet FA about ballet, perhaps it would be a concern for the ballet fanatic. But this is a film about far more than simply choreographing pretty dance routines. It's a perfect example of an actress dominating the psychological and physical demands of the roles she's playing. If her ballet isn't up to scruff - and how could it be? She isn't a professional dancer, but I personally never doubted the character's skills in the context of the film - fair enough but for the majority of an audience it won't matter. We can simply appreciate the other serious strengths of this film. I also think that casting a known actress was an integral element of the success - Portman's roles have indeed tended to veer towards the innocent, virginial princess thus far and seeing the typecast completely subverted was a vital piece of Aronofsky's puzzle. Frankly, Portman was nigh on perfect IMO. Casting a professional dancer may have had more authentic ballet sequences, but probably at the cost of great depth and intertextuality.

L'prof

I loved this film and Portman was absolutely amazing. There were a lot of very good performances and Mila Kunis surprised me, although

when she said "Did you have some sort of lezzie wet dream about me? Was I good?", I couldn't help picturing her as Meg Griffin and that was unfortunate, but maybe unavoidable.

billymitchell

Just saw the film yesterday, thouroughly enjoyed it as much as you can enjoy a film like this. Very in your face, unsubtle kind of film, like much of Aronofskys work.

But there was a few things that that bugged me after the film, just wondering what other peoples thoughts were on one of the the issues I had:

The mother/daughter relationship was extremely uncomfortable to watch on screen, up there brutal mother/daughter relationship portrayed "Precious".

But there were times that I thought that there is something more than the mother just infantising, there were times I felt that there may have been a sexual abuse element to the relationship. Examples would be the mother feeding the daughter the cake with her finger and the mother appearing at the door in a lacy number asking Mia "Are you ready for me?"

bnt

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yeah I don't really get the non-professional dancer criticism myself.

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well she trained pretty much every day for 10 months so I wouldn't be surprised if she did it.

My criticism, if you can call it that, is related to what I said about The Red Shoes, and if you haven't seen that film it might not make sense. You might say it's unfair to make the comparison, but since both films have so much in common thematically (stressed ballerina, subjected to emotional blackmail by charismatic impresario, goes off the rails), it can't be avoided and I'm not the only one making it.

I used en pointe as an example only: as is shown in The Black Swan, it imposes stress where it's never meant to go (the toenail!) and permanently deforms the feet. Non-ballerinas can do it occasionally e.g. Kate Winslet in Titanic, but can't keep it up the way ballerinas do - but that's not a criticism. It's just an acknowledgement that ballet requires serious long-term commitment from a young age, for it to meet the required standards.

I hope it's clear that none of my "criticism" detracts from Portman's achievements here, and if she wins the Oscar, I'll think it's fully deserved. (I started this thread - because I've wanted to see the film from the moment I read about it, and am not disappointed.) I just wanted to point out that we already have evidence that you can cast a non-actress ballerina in a similar role, and get good acting and dancing from her.

johnny_ultimate

bnt wrote: »

My criticism, if you can call it that, is related to what I said about The Red Shoes, and if you haven't seen that film it might not make sense. You might say it's unfair to make the comparison, but since both films have so much in common thematically (stressed ballerina, subjected to emotional blackmail by charismatic impresario, goes off the rails), it can't be avoided and I'm not the only one making it.

I used en pointe as an example only: as is shown in The Black Swan, it imposes stress where it's never meant to go (the toenail!) and permanently deforms the feet. Non-ballerinas can do it occasionally e.g. Kate Winslet in Titanic, but can't keep it up the way ballerinas do - but that's not a criticism. It's just an acknowledgement that ballet requires serious long-term commitment from a young age, for it to meet the required standards.

I hope it's clear that none of my "criticism" detracts from Portman's achievements here, and if she wins the Oscar, I'll think it's fully deserved. (I started this thread - because I've wanted to see the film from the moment I read about it, and am not disappointed.) I just wanted to point out that we already have evidence that you can cast a non-actress ballerina in a similar role, and get good acting and dancing from her.

I do admit I haven't seen the Red Shoes, and the frequent references to it I've heard in discourse about Black Swan does indeed make me want to track it down. I'm not ruling out the possibility that there likely is a professional ballerina out there who would have the chops to pull off a role of this magnitude - there probably is, whether any casting director could find them is another thing :pac:

But I just would stress that Portman was perhaps the only acceptable choice for the role. There's an interview with Aronofsky in this month's Sight & Sound saying how he had met with Portman eight years ago about the project, and that Portman herself is somewhat of a ballet fan and got lessons in it back in her childhood / teens. Her casting is very deliberate, as I mentioned above a subversion of her typecast role (as an aside I would argue that Portman has proven herself quite a capable actress to avoid typecasting, but none of her roles thus far have dived into the twisted psychological depths of Black Swan). Her perfect casting (I would go that far) is what makes this film so refreshing (Aronofsky's inspired direction helps of course!). I see your point, and can't disagree with your general points. But I think the general argument put forward by some - not you now, I forget where it was that ballet dancers were criticising the choreography as dancers as opposed to film viewers - that a real dancer would have someway enhanced the film and role are missing the central elements of what makes Portman's performance so extraordinary. Aronofsky has had the good sense to be discussing this film with Natalie Portman for the best part of a decade - I think he'd agree with me and plenty of others that she pretty much is the Black Swan of the title.

xalot

Just wondering did anyone else pick up on

the love scene. when they were getting it on, lily said to nina 'you're such a sweet girl' which is what her mother called her. I wondered was it her mother that she had the encounter with?

Richard Dower

I strongly feel this movie, while good, is highly overrated....the story is truely simplistic.

MagicMarker

Richard Dower wrote: »

I strongly feel this movie, while good, is highly overrated....the story is truely simplistic.

What's wrong with simplicity?

Richard Dower

^ for the rave reviews i'd expect a more complex storyline, while you've got the acting chops, the cinematography, a more depth of storyline would be welcome.

Iwannahurl

Richard Dower wrote: »

I strongly feel this movie, while good, is highly overrated....the story is truely simplistic.

I agree that BS is over-rated. Donald Clarke gave it five stars in the IT, which surprised me as I would tend to rely on (some of) his recommendations.

IMO BS is a lot like Phantom of the Opera. Not my scene at all.

That said, the film had some memorable moments, and Natalie Portman was excellent (especially as so many of her intense scenes were filmed close up).

For a cinematic masterclass in depicting mental breakdown, check out Repulsion by Roman Polanski (1965). I'll bet Darren Aronofsky watched that one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTLAlBnoRlA

MagicMarker

So do you not like simple films in general or what?

Richard Dower

MagicMarker wrote: »

So do you not like simple films in general or what?

^ no it's not that, but which such praise i'd expect more depth from the actual story, yes the characterisation of the lead is well fleshed out, but the basic premise is very simple. Let's just say it's no Inception, a thinking man's movie....with Swan is not.

MagicMarker

Richard Dower wrote: »

^ no it's not that, but which such praise i'd expect more depth from the actual story, yes the characterisation of the lead is well fleshed out, but the basic premise is very simple. Let's just say it's no Inception, a thinking man's movie....with Swan is not.

Bizarre.

Richard Dower

MagicMarker wrote: »

Bizarre.

You don't like movies that make you think?

Renn

Seriously guys, don't go there...

MagicMarker

Richard Dower wrote: »

You don't like movies that make you think?

I clearly didn't say that.

I do think that putting a movie down because it isn't smart enough is kinda stupid.

johnny_ultimate

Richard Dower wrote: »

^ no it's not that, but which such praise i'd expect more depth from the actual story, yes the characterisation of the lead is well fleshed out, but the basic premise is very simple. Let's just say it's no Inception, a thinking man's movie....with Swan is not.

Oh dear. This coming from a fan of Disney Channel films!

This film is melodrama to the extreme. It's meant to be simple, a descent into nightmare. But it's filmed with such an intensity that you're just glued to the screen. I know it's futile arguing, but it's pure cinema, and your complaint of simplicity is ignoring the stylistic complexities of the film as well as the performances, intertextual references and all kinds of other strengths.

Hate to tell you but Inception is also quite a simplistic action film wrapped up in a deceptively linear structure. That's not taking away from it. If you want complex go watch Persona or Stalker. But most films are simple. Winter's Bone is a simple thriller drenched in atmosphere. King's Speech is a simple biopic with a pleasanty playful delivery and dominating performances. Toy Story 3 hides it's complexity under a simple narrative about toys. All these films are simplistic in some way, their greatness stemming from delivery. I know I'm arguing for no particular reason, but simplicity isn't always a valid complaint. In this case, the melodrama is extremely intentional.

S.M.B.

Watched this last night. Still undecided on how much I liked it but it certainly had a massive impact.

It could do with another viewing to try dissect it a little bit more.

Richard, why are you judging the movie based on they hype it's getting? Can you not form your opinion based solely on what's in front of you? You clearly don't like movies of this nature so can you not just leave it at that without poking at it? I actually thought it wasn't THAT highly rated anyway.

Richard Dower

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Oh dear. This coming from a fan of Disney Channel films!

This film is melodrama to the extreme. It's meant to be simple, a descent into nightmare. But it's filmed with such an intensity that you're just glued to the screen. I know it's futile arguing, but it's pure cinema, and your complaint of simplicity is ignoring the stylistic complexities of the film as well as the performances, intertextual references and all kinds of other strengths.

Hate to tell you but Inception is also quite a simplistic action film wrapped up in a deceptively linear structure. That's not taking away from it. If you want complex go watch Persona or Stalker. But most films are simple. Winter's Bone is a simple thriller drenched in atmosphere. King's Speech is a simple biopic with a pleasanty playful delivery and dominating performances. Toy Story 3 hides it's complexity under a simple narrative about toys. All these films are simplistic in some way, their greatness stemming from delivery. I know I'm arguing for no particular reason, but simplicity isn't always a valid complaint. In this case, the melodrama is extremely intentional.

Actually i said some of them can be good, but clearly you've never even tried to watch a DCOM to make valid observation, i have. And the fact i can watch alot of different genre movies gives me a better understanding and feel.

But like you i have my tastes and dislikes, but unlike you i don't rubbish someone's opinion BECAUSE they watch a certain type of movie, invalidation someone's opinion for watching a Disney movie is pathetic.

Richard Dower

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Oh dear. This coming from a fan of Disney Channel films!

This film is melodrama to the extreme. It's meant to be simple, a descent into nightmare. But it's filmed with such an intensity that you're just glued to the screen. I know it's futile arguing, but it's pure cinema, and your complaint of simplicity is ignoring the stylistic complexities of the film as well as the performances, intertextual references and all kinds of other strengths.

Hate to tell you but Inception is also quite a simplistic action film wrapped up in a deceptively linear structure. That's not taking away from it. If you want complex go watch Persona or Stalker. But most films are simple. Winter's Bone is a simple thriller drenched in atmosphere. King's Speech is a simple biopic with a pleasanty playful delivery and dominating performances. Toy Story 3 hides it's complexity under a simple narrative about toys. All these films are simplistic in some way, their greatness stemming from delivery. I know I'm arguing for no particular reason, but simplicity isn't always a valid complaint. In this case, the melodrama is extremely intentional.

Not true!...i have commented on the acting, cinematography + the directing, none of which i said was negative. Those are artistic elements but a movie is much more then these (albeit important core parts) parts....my point is i expected more complextity, yes some some movies can be genius in their simplicity, but with the hype and praise in an overall context i don't belive the movie deserves the accolades it's been getting.

johnny_ultimate

Richard Dower wrote: »

Actually i said some of them can be good, but clearly you've never even tried to watch a DCOM to make valid observation, i have. And the fact i can watch alot of different genre movies gives me a better understanding and feel.

But like you i have my tastes and dislikes, but unlike you i don't rubbish someone's opinion BECAUSE they watch a certain type of movie, invalidation someone's opinion for watching a Disney movie is pathetic.

I'm not invalidating your opinion. But it's hard to accept your justification of simplicity when you are willing to watch other simple movies and not complain about their simplicity and have little to offer besides that. You admit that Black Swan is well filmed and acted. Surely you can see that these are a central part of the acclaim, even if the melodrama isn't to your taste?

Richard Dower

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm not invalidating your opinion. But it's hard to accept your justification of simplicity when you are willing to watch other simple movies and not complain about their simplicity and have little to offer besides that. You admit that Black Swan is well filmed and acted. Surely you can see that these are a central part of the acclaim, even if the melodrama isn't to your taste?

Because as i've said sometimes simple movie can be entertaining, but the story and tone of Black Swan, imo, does not befit the simplistic nature of the overall story of Black Swan, despite it's positives.

S.M.B.

How exactly is the film simplistic?

It may be somewhat melodramatic (mainly due to

natalie portmants mental state

and the plot could be boiled down to a quite a simplistic level if needs be but that doesn't mean the film itself is simple in any way.

After looking at it last night I'm very undecided on the

nature of the mother daughter relationship. On first viewing there seems like there is evidence to support a number of angles and each one could result in quite a different outlook on how things proceed. Straight away I thought it could be:

a) your typical mom trying to live out her failed attempt at success vicariously through her daughter
b) underachieving mom afraid to let her daughter succeed where she hadn't
c) over protective mom dealing with a mentally ill daughter
d) messed up mom who's sexually abusing her daughter

Trying to digest the movie I don't see how it's so simplistic then. I get the idea that some people just equate a complex movie with a fragmented storyline or set of rules/clues or just a complex plot which can't be summarised in 2 sentences.

johnny_ultimate

Richard Dower wrote: »

Because as i've said sometimes simple movie can be entertaining, but the story and tone of Black Swan, imo, does not befit the simplistic nature of the overall story of Black Swan, despite it's positives.

I'm happy to agree to disagree, even if I'm not sure what you mean by the bolded sentence above. In general I see where you're coming from, and I'm not doubting it could be perceived as simplistic, but as a psychological horror film about one person's descent into insanity I think it is tonally perfect. Simple films can most certainly be entertaining, but only if they have the competence to tell their story well. Darren Aronofsky's films are all relatively simple narratively (Requiem for a Dream is one of my favourite films, and even then I'd happily admit the storyline rarely pushes past 'drugs are bad, m'kay!' territory) but he's a master of contemporary cinema, creating visceral, endlessly engaging films out of material that with a lesser director may indeed be considered bland. His ability to inject simple stories with life, and totally pull you into the world he creates is second to none.

If you want complex films - and as I said, if you think Inception is complicated (as good as it is, it really isn't complicated in anything other than structure) there's a **** tonne of vastly superior mind melters out there - I'm happy to recommend a few But for now, I accept your opinion, but retain mine that Black Swan in no way suffers as a result of narrative simplicity. It's the problem with hype, excessive praise can sometimes raise expectations too high, or occasionally give you the wrong expectations. I watched Black Swan as a melodramatic psychological horror, and in no way did it disappoint.

bnt

S.M.B. wrote: »

How exactly is the film simplistic?

Well, I think it's simple, but not simplistic. Inception, by comparison, seems to me to have scored because it offered an accessibly complex plot: audiences knew in advance that the plot was complex and that they had to stay awake. But it wasn't so complex it turned people off - just complex enough to award repeat viewing. I agree with Dr. Kermode that it showed the movie bosses that mass audiences can handle complexity if it's done right.

Like Tarantino's Kill Bill movies, the plot of Black Swan doesn't need to be any more complicated than it is - but that just tells me that details are important to the film and its maker. Details such as the apartment that Nina shares with her mother, and the questions of privacy that come up.

Lucky for Nina her mother was sleeping in the chair while she was playing with herself ... but what if her mother had woken up? Exactly what would have happened?

We're invited to use our imagination to fill in this kind of detail where it's not given - and given the complex unpredictability of the characters, you could ask ten people and get ten different answers!

Renn

Doctor?

Sad Professor

Renn wrote: »

Doctor?

You mean Kermode? Yeah, he has a PhD in English apparently.

mossyc123

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Only a few films can pull off a final line like

"I was perfect"

. Black Swan makes a damn good argument for that.

She was!

Reminded me of Daniel Day's final line in There Will Be Blood....

"IM FINISHED!!!"

And he was!

( ... and fair ****s to him for an epic performance )