Control (Anton Corbijn, 2007)

Discuss specific films and franchises
Message
Author
User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:31 pm

#1 Post by dadaistnun »

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:58 pm

#2 Post by Matt »

I was hoping it would be shot in black and white; I'm glad to hear that it was.
Nothing
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:04 am

#3 Post by Nothing »

Ag, not another over-hyped pop biopic :(
zombeaner
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 6:24 pm

#4 Post by zombeaner »

I'm really looking forward to seeing this.
yoshimori
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:03 am
Location: LA CA

#5 Post by yoshimori »

Every shot looks great. Nice compositions, beautiful lighting. Still, it somehow drags. My second or third favorite out of 16 or so films I've seen at Cannes so far.
User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:31 pm

#6 Post by dadaistnun »

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 7:59 pm

#7 Post by Barmy »

Being released at Film Forum in New York this fall.
User avatar
miless
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:45 am

#8 Post by miless »

Wait... do people like this?
because the last I heard, Biopics suck.
am I to think that this film, a biopic, will be good?
portnoy
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:03 pm

#9 Post by portnoy »

last i heard, any movie playing at Film Forum is being 'dumped'
User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 11:24 pm

#10 Post by zedz »

It's a far better film than I expected. Looks great, excellent performances, generally dodges the stations-of-the-cross trap of such biopics (though gets closer to that towards the end). And pretty balanced and non-hagiographic.
User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

#11 Post by flyonthewall2983 »

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#12 Post by MichaelB »

zedz wrote:It's a far better film than I expected. Looks great, excellent performances, generally dodges the stations-of-the-cross trap of such biopics (though gets closer to that towards the end). And pretty balanced and non-hagiographic.
I'd generally agree with this - in fact, Corbijn arguably takes completely the opposite tack to any kind of glorification of Curtis, and even the obviously symbolic final shot is fairly matter-of-fact. Arguably a failing of the film is that there is not the faintest hint of an explanation of how four pretty nondescript individuals managed to produce such extraordinary music - you're just expected to take it for granted.

I'm also guessing that Corbijn is assuming (probably correctly) that most of his audience will have seen 24 Hour Party People, so scenes that were highlighted there (for instance, the band's relationship with Martin Hannett) barely register in Control - Andy Serkis's Hannett was the comic highlight of Winterbottom's film, but here the mantle has passed to Toby Kebbell's Rob Gretton, who single-handedly rescues Control from the gloompit it might otherwise have been.

But I really do urge people to grab this on the big screen while you can - the black-and-white Scope photography will be immeasurably diminished on DVD.
Last edited by MichaelB on Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
denti alligator
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:36 am
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

#13 Post by denti alligator »

Sort of off-topic, but are those new (VERY expensive) Joy Division reissues worth double-dipping on? Is the remastering that much better? Anyone get them?
User avatar
Scharphedin2
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:37 am
Location: Denmark/Sweden

#14 Post by Scharphedin2 »

MichaelB wrote:But I really do urge people to grab this on the big screen while you can - the black-and-white Scope photography will be immeasurably diminished on DVD.
Thanks for the advise, Michael. I am sure the film looks great, and I really look forward to seeing it (on the big screen). Unfortunate that Denmark will not see this film until next year, and no opening date is even set for Sweden yet (as far as I know).
Last edited by Scharphedin2 on Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GoldenPilgrim
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:43 pm
Location: California
Contact:

#15 Post by GoldenPilgrim »

At least if you go to see this movie, and you think it's terrible, and you hate the actors, it won't be so hard to sit through knowing he kills himself in the end.

Besides, their Peter Hook doesn't look half bad.
User avatar
miless
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:45 am

#16 Post by miless »

denti alligator wrote:Sort of off-topic, but are those new (VERY expensive) Joy Division reissues worth double-dipping on? Is the remastering that much better? Anyone get them?
where were they re-released? I have the boxed set (and the BBC recordings and the Warsaw bootleg in order to fill the holes from the boxed set) but I had no idea they had re-realeased the JD stuff.
User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:58 pm

#17 Post by Matt »

miless wrote:
denti alligator wrote:Sort of off-topic, but are those new (VERY expensive) Joy Division reissues worth double-dipping on? Is the remastering that much better? Anyone get them?
where were they re-released?
I have the box set, too, and I think these individual releases are just the same remasters from that set plus a bunch of previously unreleased live tracks to get people who already bought the box to buy the individual discs too. Live performance never seemed JD's strength to me, so I'm not interested at all.
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#18 Post by MichaelB »

Matt wrote:Live performance never seemed JD's strength to me, so I'm not interested at all.
Interestingly, the film suggests otherwise - the performances are overwhelmingly live (and usually performed by the actors rather than overdubbed), and the albums and other non-live recordings are barely mentioned. If you didn't know otherwise, you could watch the film and emerged convinced that Joy Division were fundamentally a live band that only occasionally dabbled in studio recordings.

In fact, the use of the studio recording of 'Love Will Tear Us Apart' is by general consent the weakest part of the film - a trite accompaniment to Curtis's own marriage breakup that's arguably based on a misreading of the lyrics.
User avatar
denti alligator
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:36 am
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

#19 Post by denti alligator »

Matt wrote:
miless wrote:
denti alligator wrote:Sort of off-topic, but are those new (VERY expensive) Joy Division reissues worth double-dipping on? Is the remastering that much better? Anyone get them?
where were they re-released?
I have the box set, too, and I think these individual releases are just the same remasters from that set plus a bunch of previously unreleased live tracks to get people who already bought the box to buy the individual discs too. Live performance never seemed JD's strength to me, so I'm not interested at all.
So does the box collect the singles? Curious that those aren't on the individual releases.
User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:58 pm

#20 Post by Matt »

denti alligator wrote:So does the box collect the singles? Curious that those aren't on the individual releases.
It does.
MichaelB wrote:
Matt wrote:Live performance never seemed JD's strength to me, so I'm not interested at all.
Interestingly, the film suggests otherwise - the performances are overwhelmingly live (and usually performed by the actors rather than overdubbed), and the albums and other non-live recordings are barely mentioned. If you didn't know otherwise, you could watch the film and emerged convinced that Joy Division were fundamentally a live band that only occasionally dabbled in studio recordings.
It may be that Corbijn felt that a) JD in the studio had already been covered adequately in 24 Hour Party People and that b) live performance is more visually and dramatically interesting. He's probably right on both counts. But now that I think about it, what I really want is a Martin Hannett biopic.
User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:48 pm

#21 Post by thirtyframesasecond »

It's good rather than great. Pretty unengaging but maybe that's the point. I'm unsure you learn as much about Curtis as you might, and as the screenplay is based on the biography by Deborah Curtis, we learn very little about his relationship with Annik, which is a crucial oversight I feel. The live performances are easily the highlight of the film, but it's not quite the masterpiece some critics have suggested, in my opinion. And this is from a Joy Division fan who wants the film to be great.
LeeB.Sims

#22 Post by LeeB.Sims »

Hmmm, this one must have come in under my radar. Never a Joy Division fan myself so I'm not sure I would be able to stay interested. I am however a big fan of Corbijn's photography, particularly his extensive portfolio of Tom Waits portraits. They're exquisite. I wonder if that's enough to make me sit through the whole film…
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#23 Post by MichaelB »

LeeB.Sims wrote:Hmmm, this one must have come in under my radar. Never a Joy Division fan myself so I'm not sure I would be able to stay interested. I am however a big fan of Corbijn's photography, particularly his extensive portfolio of Tom Waits portraits. They're exquisite. I wonder if that's enough to make me sit through the whole film…
Well, the photography is overwhelmingly the reason to see the film, so I'm guessing the answer's yes. And it's largely the hardcore Joy Division fans who seem to be objecting to it - the film's more about Ian Curtis (or, more specifically, his wife's image of him) than about the band per se.
User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 8:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#24 Post by colinr0380 »

The latest Film Forum podcast is a Q&A session with Sam Riley.
User avatar
Chris
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:45 pm
Contact:

#25 Post by Chris »

thirtyframesasecond wrote:It's good rather than great. Pretty unengaging but maybe that's the point. I'm unsure you learn as much about Curtis as you might, and as the screenplay is based on the biography by Deborah Curtis, we learn very little about his relationship with Annik, which is a crucial oversight I feel. The live performances are easily the highlight of the film, but it's not quite the masterpiece some critics have suggested, in my opinion. And this is from a Joy Division fan who wants the film to be great.
I agree with this summation. I'm reminded of why biopics generally fail when they attempt to present some objective truth about their subjects based on the subjective impressions of people that knew them: the inner lives of others, even that one person we are closer to than anyone else, remain mysteries to us. Control's Ian Curtis (Sam Riley) is composed of the recollections of his widow, Deborah Curtis, who shares co-writing credit and served as the film's executive producer. Like Hari in Solyaris who is incomplete because she's only a manifestation of Kris Kelvin's impressions of her, there appears to be nothing more to Ian than what Deborah believes to be the truth about him.

While Ian remains incomplete, Annik Honoré (Alexandra Maria Lara) is reduced to a cipher. We know nothing about her, and she appears to know nothing about Ian. Months into their relationship she implores him to open up by telling her his favorite film and color. That this conversation is the most intimate that they have beyond a clichéd marrying-young-is-a-mistake confession within hours of meeting, demonstrates how completely the deck is stacked against empathy for Annik and by consequence against understanding Ian's interest in Annik. The conclusion Control would have us draw is that Ian's tryst with Annik was the product of little more than base sexual desire muddled with repulsion at the banality of life with Housefrau Debbie (Samantha Morton) and baby. This does a disservice to Ian, Annik and, ultimately, Deborah.
Post Reply