criterionforum.org

I don't know about Mila Kunis, her acting skills are really limited and this looks like it's going to rely on her too much. Still though, it looks very intriguing and while Aronofsky's past films weren't my cup of tea this trailer and the subject matter have me interested.

Wow, I was a lot more interested in this before that trailer. Yikes

It looks ridiculous, but hot lesbo sex between Mila and Nat? I'm in!

So SWF meets Suspiria? Should be entertaining enough.

I hope it doesn't turn out to be more Showgirls than Suspiria!

Yup, definitely Showgirls meets Suspiria/Opera...I don't think there's going to be any eye-torture in this one though, except for maybe Kunis' acting. Anyone else think Aronofsky has slid into the same status of Richard Kelly as a once brainy, now glibly ostentatious American "independent" director?

Did anyone else chuckle at his second bite at the "back of the head" apple?

I can't wait to see this. I hope it doesn't disappoint.

I was unmoved by the trailer until Portman started to go through physical changes, and that great final shot sold me. I wonder if the metamorphosis is real or part of Portman's psychosis. I'm hoping for the former, but given it's Aronofsky, I suspect the latter.

There's also a Winona sighting, 1:25. But what would've really made the trailer is proper usage of this.

It really does look terribly silly. I don't mean to sound negative but boy does it ever

Silly trailer does not equal silly film.

But I'm not saying the trailer is silly.

That silliness is actually why I'm excited. If done right Aronofsky might have something as grossly fantastic as Videodrome. That film is utterly ridiculous in premise and execution, but still manages to be affecting at least in part because it runs it's over the top premise into the ground until we have to believe it. The line between stupid and sublime is near invisible, but when straddled right comes out with the greatest pieces of enjoyment.

Mr. Ned wrote:But what would've really made the trailer is proper usage of this.

I don't know, that would have been too rote and obvious, even for an average humanoid like me.

knives wrote:That film is utterly ridiculous in premise and execution, but still manages to be affecting at least in part because it runs it's over the top premise into the ground until we have to believe it.

For me one of the marks of a good director is a light touch. A certain nimbleness in manner even when going for broke. This trailer and most of Aronofsky's work for that matter are nothing of the kind. There's a difference between 'grab you by the throat' and being disemboweled. I guess it shouldn't be surprising that judging by appearances this film is probably the latter.

That's all good but the important question is do we get to see ti&&ties?

Does Barbara Hershey revamp her character from The Entity?

You know, you can just say "titties" here. I don't exactly understand why you'd want to, but you can.

Just watched the trailer, wow! I'm not an Aronofsky fan by a longshot, but I'm surprised still by everyone's negative reaction to what is a downright Lynchian, terrifying trailer that is pointing towards being [at best] a too-weird-for-Oscar-wins instant classic or [at worst] a big, bombastic campy failure that is still compulsively watchable. I cannot imagine being someone who watches that trailer and doesn't want to go out on a Friday night to an old arthouse theater, sit in the balcony, and soak this one up.

titties!

mfunk9786 wrote:Just watched the trailer, wow! I'm not an Aronofsky fan by a longshot, but I'm surprised still by everyone's negative reaction to what is a downright Lynchian, terrifying trailer that is pointing towards being [at best] a too-weird-for-Oscar-wins instant classic or [at worst] a big, bombastic campy failure that is still compulsively watchable. I cannot imagine being someone who watches that trailer and doesn't want to go out on a Friday night to an old arthouse theater, sit in the balcony, and soak this one up.

I agree completely; either one of those scenarios would be fine by me and I don't see how the film could skew in any other direction. I love the trailer. More than Suspiria it reminds me of a dark, girls-all-grown-up sorta sequel to Lucile Hadzihalilovic's Innocence.

I guess I was expecting something that took ballet seriously, but based on the unimaginative and unintuitive direction of the dancing I'm seeing in this trailer, we're not going to get anything approaching that. With so few films made about actual dance anymore, it's a shame this one looks to be more concerned with dance as window-dressing to more well-trod territory-- and the trailer being cut like a bad SyFy movie doesn't help. Hey, I hope I'm wrong, and it's unfair to judge a film by its trailer, but I stand by my "Yikes" for now

domino harvey wrote:I guess I was expecting something that took ballet seriously, but based on the unimaginative and unintuitive direction of the dancing I'm seeing in this trailer, we're not going to get anything approaching that. With so few films made about actual dance anymore, it's a shame this one looks to be more concerned with dance as window-dressing to more well-trod territory-- and the trailer being cut like a bad SyFy movie doesn't help. Hey, I hope I'm wrong, and it's unfair to judge a film by its trailer, but I stand by my "Yikes" for now

Maybe it'll have a megashark and megapython in it. Now that is a must see!

knives wrote:So SWF meets Suspiria? Should be entertaining enough.

I only just now realized this doesn't say SFW. I was like, "Well, I don't really see it..."

mfunk9786 wrote: I cannot imagine being someone who watches that trailer and doesn't want to go out on a Friday night to an old arthouse theater, sit in the balcony, and soak this one up.

But this one's going to be playing in multiplexes . . .

Really? No excruciatingly slow big-city rollout?