criterionforum.org

I don't disagree about new hope for the future - and something about progression maybe, but am less sure about his best poem. I'm not sure all has been entirely lost, maybe the words, but he still has the experience now tempered.

It is without a doubt his best poem. Part of the greatness of the scene with the little girl is how much better her poem is than his work (though he's not bad, he's definitely at the "shows promise" stage)

mfunk9786 wrote:But the film is also very much about progression and practice and dedication.

That goes with the routine structure and day to day focus. I also forgot how much the movie shows his progression, thinking things through, changing lines here and there. I need to go back and watch his last poem scene again.

edit: Somewhat unrelated, though mentioned earlier in the thread. The blu ray is really bare bones, almost surprisingly so--not even a trailer. Even though the transfer is fine this might be calling for a Criterion, they could do some interesting things features wise.

I feel another important aspect of the film is the contrast between how Paterson and Laura express themselves. Laura's self-expression, or art, is all on the outside, performance or design-based. She flits from one idea to the next and her template is literally "black-and-white" (obvious, no ambiguity). Paterson's self-expression is all internal and he stays with one practice (his poetry), refining it and embracing the contradictions of his thoughts.

domino harvey wrote:It is without a doubt his best poem. Part of the greatness of the scene with the little girl is how much better her poem is than his work (though he's not bad, he's definitely at the "shows promise" stage)

He's clearly developing. But overall I'm very uncomfortable with judging poems like that, as his best or whatever. Clearly you feel it's his best and I'm sure for lots of good reasons, many I may agree with. Depending how I feel. How lucid I am, or am not and to him and or the world. But we don't know everything about him. We don't know about the other poems in his book, they may be excellent. Surely the poetry may come and go, ebb and flow, especially the way he does it? What may be the best to him? Maybe his last was especially charged for him and for us?

I don't agree with your comparison of the relative merits of the little girl's poem. But again don't see much point comparing them.

Seeing it a third time, I'm not sure if I'd realised before, but the season seems to start to turn too, I liked that.

Edit - but I also don't like it when I start talking like I know what I'm talking about. Just how talk of how I feel. I was more impressed with the poems than ever on third viewing. They seem necessary for him which is part of why I defend them.

Roger Ryan wrote:I feel another important aspect of the film is the contrast between how Paterson and Laura express themselves. Laura's self-expression, or art, is all on the outside, performance or design-based. She flits from one idea to the next and her template is literally "black-and-white" (obvious, no ambiguity). Paterson's self-expression is all internal and he stays with one practice (his poetry), refining it and embracing the contradictions of his thoughts.

This is right on, but another, similar aspect to them is Laura can adapt to change while Paterson cannot have his routine broken. Even Paterson's unwillingness to get a cell phone shows how hard it is for him to adapt and have his routine or his own perception of his routine to be disturbed. Was he more disturbed that his poems were destroyed or that particular routine of writing in "that" book that he can no longer do be so bothersome? Maybe both.

I have only watched this once so I don't have the benefit of catching the nuisance of his character.

Rosenbaum has a great piece on Paterson, in which he mentions that "Water Falls" is the only poem in the film written by Jarmusch himself.