Pan's Labyrinth

Posted:
in AppleOutsider edited January 2014
Okay, so I just watched that Pan's Labyrinth movie. It blew my mind. Has anyone else seen it? If not I highly recommend you do so.



Here's the trailer:



http://www.apple.com/trailers/pictur...rinth/trailer/

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Yes, a beautiful, horrible movie.



    I heard it compared to Dave McKean's _Mirrormask_, but while that was a film of a fairy tale, Pan's Labyrinth is a film *about* fairy tales. It's also very mature in tone, and quite violent. Brutal, gorgeous, serious, and it hits hard.
  • Reply 2 of 14
    Amazing cinematography. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Go see it. I got used to the subtitles after about 5 minutes. Some scenes are quite violent, not for the faint of heart!
  • Reply 3 of 14
    Saw it today: a few things I didn't like.



    It was visually lush, and the subtitles were a problem. It's a pain in the ass to have to read subtitles when you want to look at the rest of the picture, which is usually not subtitles. I would have been OK watching it dubbed. Preferably, unless I were to learn Spanish, it would be the best to see it once dubbed and once with subtitles.



    El Capitan was way too one-dimensional. Not even Darth Vader was that one-dimensional. There's about three seconds worth of self-loathing during a shaving scene, but other than that, there's no reason for me to believe that he's actually a human, or for that matter someone that any woman would want to have sire their child.



    The message below the surface regarding the moral superiority of the communist guerillas was disturbingly revisionist as well as contrived and trite.



    But overall I liked it. I thought the idea to build it into a historic setting -- which could have been a movie on its own -- made it good where it wouldn't have been noteworthy otherwise. The scene composition was very well done. I don't think it will win best picture, however, because it's a little bit too lightweight in the handling of the characters.
  • Reply 4 of 14
    marcukmarcuk Posts: 4,442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post


    Saw it today: a few things I didn't like.

    It's a pain in the ass to have to read subtitles when you want to look at the rest of the picture, which is usually not subtitles.



    shouldn't that be pan in the ass (no pan intended)?
  • Reply 5 of 14
    One of the best most powerful movies I've seen in a long time. The best movies I've seen in the last few years have all either been South American or Spanish. It's like America has forgotten how to make good movies. I just saw Little Miss Sunshine and I can't even believe it is up for awards. Not a terrible movie, just not very good either.
  • Reply 6 of 14
    Actually the subtitles didn't bother me after the first five minutes or so. I just got used to reading them, and barely noticed it wasn't in English for the rest of the time.
  • Reply 7 of 14
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post


    I thought the idea to build it into a historic setting -- which could have been a movie on its own -- made it good where it wouldn't have been noteworthy otherwise.



    I quite agree.
  • Reply 8 of 14
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post


    It was visually lush, and the subtitles were a problem. It's a pain in the ass to have to read subtitles when you want to look at the rest of the picture, which is usually not subtitles. I would have been OK watching it dubbed. Preferably, unless I were to learn Spanish, it would be the best to see it once dubbed and once with subtitles.



    Wow, I can't disagree more. Dubbing of an action film is fine, but for a movie where I am watching the characters for subtle things I find myself constantly wondering about the tone of voice and sound. I know that much of the dialogue is studio dubbed these days in the original language too, but it doesn't draw me out of the movie if it is the same person's voice.



    Quote:

    El Capitan was way too one-dimensional. Not even Darth Vader was that one-dimensional. There's about three seconds worth of self-loathing during a shaving scene, but other than that, there's no reason for me to believe that he's actually a human, or for that matter someone that any woman would want to have sire their child.



    I think that El Capitan was intentionally hard and cold. Intentionally in that the actor was playing a character who was himself playing a character--he believed that he had to be cold and tough and hard and would not allow himself to ever show weakness.

    Therefore it would have been out of character for him to appear more than two dimensional. Instead the director had to find other ways to portray his humanity. Maybe I was reading too much into it, but I saw the pocket watch as the main vehicle for that.

    *His father broke the watch in his dying act for his son. The watch is his constant companion.

    *He repaired the watch and *lovingly* keeps it up. A private expression of devotion?

    *He publicly denies the watch story, yet he reaffirms it in his last passionate plea. His dying thoughts were with his father, his son and his family legacy.



    In regards to the shaving scene, this is an iconic scene in Latin American literature. Traditionally, it is the violent leader being shaved and another with the power and the desire to kill him with the blade. The self loathing you saw could then might indicate that he was doubting himself and even considering playing the role of the barber thus considering suicide. Maybe this is a stretch but I am certain that the director and a Latin American audience would see more in this scene than is apparent to the watcher from elsewhere in the world.



    Finally, I'm not sure at all that anyone wanted him to sire their children. I saw the mother as desperately trying to survive the hard postwar years as a poor single parent and attempting to make the best of things as they were. I didn't see any indication of affection from either for the other. We didn't really get any indication of their "courtship" beyond what she said at the party which I took to be her trying to put the best face on things. In her mind, I believe, he represented food, safety and security for her and her daughter...



    Quote:

    The message below the surface regarding the moral superiority of the communist guerillas was disturbingly revisionist as well as contrived and trite.



    Agreed. But can you imagine how dismal this movie would have been without good guys?

    The only rationale I can come up with for why the guerillas were portrayed so simplistically was if we were seeing things through the lens of the little girl. The story revolves around her and her perception of reality. Perhaps her biases bleed through everything we see. Or perhaps DelTorro is a partisan himself...



    Quote:

    But overall I liked it. I thought the idea to build it into a historic setting -- which could have been a movie on its own -- made it good where it wouldn't have been noteworthy otherwise. The scene composition was very well done. I don't think it will win best picture, however, because it's a little bit too lightweight in the handling of the characters.



    Yes. Without the setting of the Spanish Civil War (or its aftermath) this would not have been the movie it was. I am wondering if there wasn't a ton of symbolism that I missed related to that era.

    I also agree that I don't think it will win best picture.
  • Reply 9 of 14
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post


    Wow, I can't disagree more. Dubbing of an action film is fine, but for a movie where I am watching the characters for subtle things I find myself constantly wondering about the tone of voice and sound. I know that much of the dialogue is studio dubbed these days in the original language too, but it doesn't draw me out of the movie if it is the same person's voice.



    I usually get this speech from people who think they know what they're talking about: some of them really do, most don't.



    I don't know Spanish, and the vocal expressionism is mostly lost on me. It's nice to hear the native language, but for the maiden viewing I'd rather watch the movie than watch subtitles. The visuals, whether they are landscapes or close-ups, do a lot more for me than the timbre of the dialog, and I argue that a viewer can pick up more from the facial details on the actor than he can from hearing the native language while missing the facial details.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Don't know Spanish (much), but count me in with the folks that prefer subtitling. The trick is not to sit so close you're craning your neck. Sit a bit further back, and you can watch the facial expressions and read the text at the same time quite easily. No big deal to multitask.
  • Reply 11 of 14
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,755member
    Well, I can't argue with you on this one. I understand that this issue is wholely objective--if trying to read the subtitles takes away from your viewing of the movie then you will prefer dubbing and if dubbing takes away from my viewing of the movie then I will prefer subtitles.

    Simple.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post


    I usually get this speech from people who think they know what they're talking about: some of them really do, most don't.



    'Course now I can argue.

    If its a personal opinion, how can you judge who knows what they are talking about?

    This implies your opinion is valid while most of those who disagre with you are talking out their [email protected]@...

    Quote:

    I don't know Spanish, and the vocal expressionism is mostly lost on me. It's nice to hear the native language, but for the maiden viewing I'd rather watch the movie than watch subtitles. The visuals, whether they are landscapes or close-ups, do a lot more for me than the timbre of the dialog, and I argue that a viewer can pick up more from the facial details on the actor than he can from hearing the native language while missing the facial details.



    If its an either/or situation (either watching the movie or reading the subtitles) then I agree--I probably would not want to see the movie that way. For me, it does not feel like that is the choice...
  • Reply 12 of 14
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by segovius View Post


    Imho, the simplistic portrayal of guerillas is intentional and also true; the point is that when fighting fascism everything becomes reduced to its basic constituents.



    I can understand this, but communism isn't exactly the civil alternative. Let's not kid ourselves: it's extremely doubtful that the communist opposition took the "higher ground" as they were portrayed to have done. That's why I call it "revisionist." As used as a plot device, I don't see any problem, but when you decide to tread into real history, I'm not a fan of glorifying things that don't deserve glory.
  • Reply 13 of 14
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    For anyone interested in the spanish civil war, I strongly recommend George Orwells documentary book "Hoamage to Catalunia". It just might be his best book, and describes the civil war, and the struggle between the different factions on the republican side, the communist, democrats, anarkists, syndicalist and so on, who were supposed to fight together against the facists.
Sign In or Register to comment.