criterionforum.org

Lowery's latest, which reteams him with Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck, is getting raves out of Sundance and sounds like another winning acquisition from A24 (they, wisely it would seem, bought it unseen before the festival). Critical reaction is effusive and it sounds like a singular experience. To wit, the film's highlight is said to be an unbroken shot ten minutes or more in length of Mara eating a pie

Oh goodie. Putting this on my "looking forward" list. I loved Ain't Them Bodies Saints.

Just watched the trailer, got strong Tree of Life vibes from this movie, albeit without it feeling like it was made by Terrence Malick.

The 1.37:1 aspect ratio is rather different but seems to suite the vibe the film is going for that it is supposed to look like home movies.

I'm expecting there to be some confusion about this film and its target demographic though; I was expecting a horror film based upon the name and the poster and was really thrown off by the fact that it was a existentialist film when I saw the trailer.

I'm excited to see this one though, looks like it could be pretty special off of the first trailer

That poster led you to think it would be a horror film? With... ghosts under sheets? Lovely, mysterious, and cosmic?

I thought it would be the long-awaited Beetlejuice sequel, with Affleck as Keaton's ghoulish brother or something. Actually, now I want to see that movie

Wouldn't Affleck be the new Baldwin considering the sheet?

Do you or do you not want to see Casey Affleck in Beetlejuice makeup

More than anything

I got to catch this at Music Box Theatre last night for the Chicago Critics Film Festival. I want to wait for others to see it in wide release before posting too much here. It was such a wonderful viewing experience that I will gladly go back a second time, and probably need to in order to crystalize my thoughts on the few flaws in an otherwise gorgeous and meditative poem on the passing of time. I haven't seen Lowery's Pete's Dragon yet, but after Ain't Them Body's Saints and now A Ghost Story, I'm looking forward to it.

Just got back from this, and (not that this is saying much) it's my favorite 2017 release to date. There's a lot more to it than one might expect from just hearing the premise (I haven't watched any trailers). I found Ain't Them Bodies beautiful but rathe remote and empty, and Pete's Dragon far too gentle narratively (though it captures a nice "folk" tone and renders its milieu nicely), but this film was a step up from those in practically every regard, being more ambitious thematically and more resonant emotionally. It is, of course, beautiful, and spends a great deal of time sinking the viewing into its atmosphere. Like the correspondent above, it may be wisest to let other seeing it before really diving in, and I think it's best for prospective viewers to enter it knowing nothing beyond the basic set-up and having some expectation of tone (e.g., it's not a horror movie).

My wife and I saw this today -- and we both loved it (while not particularly "understanding" it). Not a horror movie -- and not _quite_ a romantic ghost story (in the mode of Marie and Julien or Journey to the Shore). It had a few (possibly coincidental) echoes of Back's Crac. Doesn't really fit into any existing category.

This is a brilliant and uniquely cinematic film, an easy favorite for this year so far, and one of the few films I can think of in a long while that I'm eager to recommend to just about everyone I know -- because it's so universally relatable. The "It's all about time" tagline on the poster might as well be the film's mission statement. In a way A Ghost Story has more in common with

Spoiler

the room at the end of 2001 or with Richard McGuire's genius minimalist site specific graphic novel Here

than with Malick or, really, with any other film I've ever seen. Moments of pathos and deep human longing exist side by side with unexpected moments of humor and profound philosophical musings on the nature and purpose of existence. Every time you think you have this film or the protagonist figured out, something happens that upends your expectations in the best possible way. It goes further than you think it will with just about every idea and develops in ways that are the least obvious or manipulative. There's even some rather harrowing and ultimately quite Buddhist-inflected confrontations of mortality

Spoiler

like the rotting remains of the little pioneer girl whose habits of leaving secret notes to herself seem to echo M's.

All that and you get cameos by Will Oldham and Kesha! Just go see it, please.

warren oates wrote: Just go see it, please.

This, one thousand times over. I'm sure this is one of those films where reactions will vary widely, but I find it hard to believe that any cinephile wouldn't find enough of value in seeing A Ghost Story in theaters to justify a $10/90 minute investment.

This is a major step forward for Lowery - who has demonstrated promise in his prior features but really brings that potential to fruition here - but it also really underlined for me how valuable Rooney Mara is to the film world. I know her performances often provoke divisive reactions, but I've been a fan since her work with Fincher, and she absolutely kills this role (much as she kills that pie Domino references in the first post).

I want to write more but I don't have time at the moment, and if posting another positive reaction and bumping the thread prompts one more person to see the movie this weekend who otherwise wouldn't have, I will feel that I've done something of value with my life.

While I enjoy having narrative expectations upended by the film seemingly coming to a natural end with over an hour left, this small-scale look at grief quickly bit off more than it could chew and ended up being quite a meandering mess. I am happy for those of you who found beauty in its insights, but I found the limited attempts at grand ideas undercooked and not nearly as clever as the film thinks. An odd film, but not successfully so.

I thought it was a fine short film very obviously stretched out to feature length (Rooney Mara eats a pie; Will Oldham monologues). There’s no need for scenes like that to be so distended and they throw the pace and structure of the whole film off.

Have to agree with the last few posts. Oldham's monologue was the turning point for me from 'undercooked with some nice qualities' to thinking this was an unforgivably pretentious slog.

This film felt far too brisk to me to be a "slog," but I don't think everything in it worked by any means. And some of the best stuff was after the Oldham monologue IMO. (By the way, did anyone else find that the Oldham scene was mixed oddly? It had the unconvincing "canned party atmosphere" quality of a beer commercial.)

I'm late at writing this since I did see it at the cinema but held off on writing something until I could form a more coherent opinion. This was a great film in a year of quite a few surprises, with my experience helped by going into it blind. While I agree with the pacing issues, for me it all added toward the film's charm. The odd choice to have Mara eat an entire pie uninterrupted and the messy attempts at time travel didn't work entirely but they did add toward the endearing strangeness of the film. So many of the scenes feel out of place but combined they add up to an enjoyable whole and I appreciate a film that gives me the kind of whiplash this did as it moved from scene to scene. The film plays with genres and character but maintains the same droll tone throughout, prying into mortality while skipping through a paradoxical series of events.

The monologue, on the other hand, dragged everything down with its heavy-handed explanations of the film's themes and seemed to come from Lowery's lack of confidence in his viewer to "get it." And I agree, whaleallright, the scene did look like it was shot as part of a Miller ad campaign. It even had a Kesha cameo!

With this and mother! my love of the cinema has been reinvigorated. I can't imagine watching either of them for the first time at home after experiencing the confused laughter and focused silence of the theater's crowd. There was a strange energy that added to each film, especially with mother!

The monologue was indeed clunky (and added little) -- but also detracted little from what I liked both before and after it.

The superfluousness of the monologue was made up for by it being delivered by Will Oldham.

...by it being delivered by Will Oldham.

Ugh, that was him? I knew there was something extra hollow, phony sounding and ripped off about that monologue, and i'm not referring to the sound mix. And now i know it's the singer who's second only to Beck in the ongoing competition for the title of our generation's most wholly disingenuous "artist". On the brighter side, at least he he didn't start singing...

I almost feel like I should apologize to Baby Driver after this. As at its worst it had nothing so patently misguided and self effacing as the last ten or so minutes of this mess. If anyone could convincingly argue how that is not a total and complete cop out cheapening what little integrity the film maintained I'd be shocked.

I don't really understand what you mean, copping out from what?