broken flowers (1 Viewer)

[thejosiekiller]

what did you all think of this new bill murray movie?

obviously he is sticking with this lost in translation style of performance, but decided to use it in what i thought was a very odd movie.

some people may like this little piece, but i think it was amusing enough at times to make you think about his character's predicament...hard to get engaged in the story though to be honest.

 

[icecreamdisco]

really really liked it.

it is definitely an odd film though... the way i see it is that jarmusch is suggesting that don should stop obsessing over the mystery of his past, and opening old wounds for him and the other women, and start thinking about his future. to me it doesn't so much leave to the viewer the question of who actually is his son, but if he does have one, is it better for him to forget about him and who he belongs to or find out even though the journey may involve more anguish for him and the people he meets? anyway, i liked the attention to detail and thought the world jarmusch created - unnamed suburb and time setting and cool obscure music - really fit don's anonymous personality effectively.

speaking of lost in translation, did anyone notice that his dialogue w/ his 'son' at the end was nearly identical to when bob meets charlotte for the first time in LiT? i wonder if that was intentional.

i thought it was a nice touch having the guy who glares at don from the car at the end to be played by murray's real son, homer murray (found that out from IMDb)/

 

[Iago]

outstanding film murray is possibly the greatest actor working in cinema at the moment - from coppola's LIT to anderson's life aquatic, now to jarmusch's broken flowers. three remarkable performances (also in three top films). a very subtle and tender film. i hope to find this on dvd when it is released.

 

[thejosiekiller]

mmmm the journey was obviously the most important part of the film, i just dont think it was enough to empathise with don- because at the end of the film when he is chasing his "son" i didnt feel for him. I can definately say that it was an awkard situation for them to be in, but maybe that is that anguish with leaving things in the past.

 

[walrusbear]

really really liked it.

it is definitely an odd film though... the way i see it is that jarmusch is suggesting that don should stop obsessing over the mystery of his past, and opening old wounds for him and the other women, and start thinking about his future. to me it doesn't so much leave to the viewer the question of who actually is his son, but if he does have one, is it better for him to forget about him and who he belongs to or find out even though the journey may involve more anguish for him and the people he meets? anyway, i liked the attention to detail and thought the world jarmusch created - unnamed suburb and time setting and cool obscure music - really fit don's anonymous personality effectively.

speaking of lost in translation, did anyone notice that his dialogue w/ his 'son' at the end was nearly identical to when bob meets charlotte for the first time in LiT? i wonder if that was intentional.

i thought it was a nice touch having the guy who glares at don from the car at the end to be played by murray's real son, homer murray (found that out from IMDb)/

that's a good reading of the film - his 'philosophical' advice at the end supports that idea. something underwhelming along the lines of 'all we have is this moment - the past has already happened, i know that'.
i liked the play around with the 'mystery' elements. don's neighbour creates a path of detection for him but the narrative of the film resists any palpable conclusion. the linking motifs and objects don comes across (pink, typewriters, black dog's called Winston ) offer potential explanations but in the end only deepen the mystery.
i thought the locations were well constructed too. particularly the houses, with Lolita's 'bling' phone and car paraphernalia adorning walls, for example. (icecreams reading of the 'mysteries of the past' can be brought to light at Sharon stone's residence too. the relics of her dead husband seems to still be a large part of her life. a race car was still parked out the front of her house. similar relics of the past can be found at most residents - even if it is just the presence of don himself)
what did people make of the protagonists name. was don johnston just an excuse for a few jokes? was miami vice a detective show (i never watched it - if so, it would be a cute reference)?
apart from being darkly comic, what did people make of Lolita's appearance? it was an unsettling prospect for bill murray to be so confronted by progeny of his past flames. or was it merely amusing?

must say i really enjoyed this one. murray has played his most burned out character yet. as icecream said the soundtrack and blank suburban setting fit well with don's predicament.

 

[AlleyCat]

apart from being darkly comic, what did people make of Lolita's appearance? it was an unsettling prospect for bill murray to be so confronted by progeny of his past flames. or was it merely amusing?
.

i think a few recent movies (particularly broken flowers and me and you and everyone we know) have marked a welcome relief from an overly PC attitude towards humour and situations. the lolita situation was the funniest scene in the film in my opinion, because it made light of certain taboo circumstances. i also think that the daughter served as a reminder of Don's past, just as the hippie photo of Dora was also a relic.

the directing was top notch and very original. Jarmusch managed to keep the audience interested through entire scenes of no dialogue or clear situation. the music annoyed me at first but i got used to it. i also love little touches of direcing such as Winston's well spoken young daughter who emphatically speaks with an adult range of gestures.

bill murray was awesome. i hope he gets nominated for awards.

 

[crazyhomo]

thought it was interesting the scenes that were in the movie vs the scenes that weren't

what i mean, for example, is that when don and winston were talking in the coffee shop, winston tells don that he will be round in the morning to take him to the airport. so of course i'm expecting the next scene to be winston taking don to the airport. only instead we get don sitting alone in his house. and then he is at the airport with no shots of him travelling there

quite odd for a film that was full of travelling

 

[SoCal]

This movie didn't interest me at all. If fact I was quite bored throughout most of it. In the end I think the writer/director did manage to achieve what he was trying to convey to the audience but I feel he took a poor approach. Throughout the film nothing much changes for Don and to be honest only a few comedic moments stopped me from falling asleep. I think the main point to the movie is that you shouldn't live in the past (as said Don said in his conversation with the guy he believes to be his son) but nowhere in the film does it actually show Don living with this in mind (in the end he doesn't know whether to continue his search for his son or forget about it and move on). His ex-girlfriends he meets have not been restricted by the past but I feel Don is still grappling with this in the last scene. I think the director was trying to shows Don's changing attitudes toward his relationships and women when he visits his dead ex-girlfriends grave but we don't see him meeting any women after this to confirm his change and he doesn't seem to care that Sherry might want to get back with him. Also, his attitude toward finding his son has changed somewhat but again in the last scene he still doesn't not know what to do.

Anyway, overall I feel it was a very dry and slow paced movie and poorly put together.