Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

Discuss specific films and franchises
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Black Hat
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:34 pm
Location: NYC

Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#1 Post by Black Hat »

Saw Ain't Them Bodies Saints tonight and at first I wasn't sure if what I found compelling was the film or the performances. As I've let it settle a bit it's clear that it's the latter for as I go over the film in my head the story was thin, some of which didn't make much sense and you
Spoiler
immediately knew from the film's opening scenes that Affleck was going to be dead by the end
but nevertheless I kept wanting to see these actors continue these performances on screen. The really fascinating part about it is that none of the actors even had much of a chemistry with one another but you couldn't wait to see them on screen again. From Rooney Mara to Casey Affleck to Keith Carradine to Ben Foster to the brilliant casting choice of Breaking Bad's Skinny Pete each actor provoked the exact emotional response within me that their scenes required. Always good to see Keith Carradine as The Moderns is one of my all time favorite films and Ben Foster who I was unfamiliar with was able to strike such a sympathetic chord in me without saying much but with his posture, his eyes, his gestures, could not be more impressed by him.

Rooney Mara tho, Rooney Mara. For she is a special screen presence of the likes Hollywood legends once were made. Ironically I was thinking to myself the other day of asking on the forum if anybody feels like we have any true young Hollywood female stars or if anybody feels like there's an actress out there who has the potential to be one? She's clearly not on this level yet but Rooney Mara has that potential in my eyes. She made an impact on me with her small part in The Social Network but to be honest I felt she was miscast or rather not given enough to do. Otherwise Ain't The Bodies Saints was my first time experiencing her on screen and once the movie got over its introductory trope she was captivating in every scene. She's the love child of Claudette Colbert & Anna Karina spawned through a 1990s era David Bowie music video. Some smart, in their prime Hollywood director, that means you Paul Thomas Anderson, needs to create a partnership with her.

Really looking forward to reading what everybody else thinks about the film.
User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:21 am

Re: The Films of 2013

#2 Post by Luke M »

Black Hat wrote: Rooney Mara tho, Rooney Mara. For she is a special screen presence of the likes Hollywood legends once were made. Ironically I was thinking to myself the other day of asking on the forum if anybody feels like we have any true young Hollywood female stars or if anybody feels like there's an actress out there who has the potential to be one? She's clearly not on this level yet but Rooney Mara has that potential in my eyes. She made an impact on me with her small part in The Social Network but to be honest I felt she was miscast or rather not given enough to do. Otherwise Ain't The Bodies Saints was my first time experiencing her on screen and once the movie got over its introductory trope she was captivating in every scene. She's the love child of Claudette Colbert & Anna Karina spawned through a 1990s era David Bowie music video. Some smart, in their prime Hollywood director, that means you Paul Thomas Anderson, needs to create a partnership with her.
I thought she was fantastic in Fincher's The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo but probably the weakest part of Soderbergh's Side Effects. I think the "prime Hollywood director" that has partnered with her, is in fact, David Fincher. They had hoped "Dragon Tattoo" would be a solid hit and spawn 2 more sequels but as of today those haven't been greenlighted. Fincher also directed her sister, Kate Mara, in House of Cards. I've yet to see Ain't Them Bodies Saints but I'm not sold on Rooney Mara. She has been hit or miss for me.

As for young actresses with magnificent screen presence, I'd have to vote for Jennifer Lawrence.
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#3 Post by domino harvey »

Rooney Mara and Brie Larson, who are both having good years, were pretty much the only reason to suffer through Tanner Hall a couple years back. I'm sure both are hoping no one ever asks them about it in a future interview!
User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: The Films of 2013

#4 Post by flyonthewall2983 »

Luke M wrote:I think the "prime Hollywood director" that has partnered with her, is in fact, David Fincher. They had hoped "Dragon Tattoo" would be a solid hit and spawn 2 more sequels but as of today those haven't been greenlighted.
It sounds like Sony still wants to do it, but that Fincher and the leads availability could pose a problem. Also that Zaillian hasn't been able to come up with something worth greenlighting and now Andrew Kevin Walker has joined as writer for The Girl Who Played With Fire.
User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:49 am
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#5 Post by Jeff »

Lowery wears his influences on his sleeve. He's got Malick for mood, and Altman's Thieves Like Us as a narrative jumping off point. Ain't Them Bodies Saints feels like a sort of follow-up to that story. He's even got Keith Carradine playing a character called Skerritt, as if to convince you how crazy he is about that film and its cast. Black Hat's right about the threadbare plot, but the terrific performances by Affleck, Mara, Foster, and a wonderfully world-weary Carradine more than make up for that, and I like the allusions to a complicated backstory that we're only getting a glimpse of.

Lowery is clearly very talented, and I'm anxious to see what he does next.
User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:09 pm
Location: United States

Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#6 Post by Finch »

Well, I thought it was terrific. The plot may be threadbare but I found the film very absorbing all the same. Have to say that it didn't remind me all that much of Malick though, certainly not visually. I'm looking forward to seeing how Criterion will handle the transfer as the film is rather sparsely lit and much of it taking place in semi-darkness. Of the uniformly excellent cast, I liked Ben Foster and Rooney Mara best (I fear that Casey Affleck, as great as he is in this film, is getting typecast) and I loved the score which I may even get on CD, it was that good.
User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:22 pm
Location: The Room
Contact:

Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#7 Post by CSM126 »

I guess it's just me, but I thought this film was terrible. It's a lazy piece of work that relies on the hope that looking like a Malick film and sounding like a Malick film will make it as good as a Malick film... But it doesn't work that way. The whole thing is dreadfully boring from start to finish, thanks to the thin plot and the strange decision to make everyone mumble so damn much that they start to seem bored with themselves with the whole damn affair. The poorly lit, dingy photography that is supposed to pass for magic hour is horrible as well. Either film at magic hour and do it properly or turn on a damn light already. I would like to actually see the movie without half the screen being covered in black crush like a poorly authored blu-ray, which is exactly what it looked like. The cast seems disinterested, which I can't blame them for given how obviously confused an amateur the director is. Ugh. This movie is a pathetic, desperate attempt at mimicking a far, far better filmmaker.
User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:22 am

Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints (David Lowery, 2013)

#8 Post by Shrew »

While the cinematography and feel of this owe a lot to Malick, I don't think it's fair to call it an imitation. It didn't bother with the voiceover for one (save for a brief letter-reading) and for better or worse it has a leaner, meaner feel. It's got some pretty shots of nature, but it's never a presence in the way it is in Malick, and the focus is very much on the people involved rather than the world going on around them.

And a lot of the film is actually at night--which accounts for all the dim, golden lighting. I think there's only one scene that's trying to invoke the "magic hour," and that's the opening argument/flashback that pops up in snippets throughout the film. So it's indebted to Malick but very much doing its own thing.

That said, I enjoyed the film, but the cinematography did stick in my craw a bit. It had too much of a "gilded" look, as if everything was pretty and magical, when the lean and rather harsh material of the film seemed better suited to a different sort of palette. Performances are good, and I think it's good that the film doesn't delve too much into backstory, although it's a risky balancing act between being sparse and just undercooked--the relationship and history between Carradine and Affleck's characters being the big unexplored territory.

Overall I liked this but wasn't blown away. There are a couple of great scenes showing promise though--particulary Affleck's encounter with some bounty hunters culminating in a beautifully unsettling sequence where the score and ambient sound mesh.
Post Reply