'Synecdoche, New York' - High-Def Digest Review

[Attebery]

Josh has reviewed 'Synecdoche, New York.' He says this is an art film in all the best senses of that term. This Blu-ray is a bit off the mark, with less than shimmering video and some thin supplements. Still, the film is worth your while if you're curious, and fans should be pleased with a purchase. Recommended.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2032...henewyork.html

[typ44q]

Great review! I loved this movie and feel like I need to view it a few more times before I can even begin to really understand it all.

[cooltobeyou]

Yeah, this movie really isn't everyone's cup of tea. I rented it, and I had to turn it off after the first hour. Its one thing to have parts of your movie remain symbolic, and leave parts of the movie open to the viewers interpretation. However, when the whole movie is left open to interpretation, and the writer/director gives the audience nothing to work with, then the whole plot is nothing but a mess.

It seemed like each scene was set up to just introduce another ludicrous situation after another, which was clearly not set in any sort of reality.

I hate to say it because I'm a big fan of Phillip Seymore Hoffman and Kaufman, but this film was trash IMHO. Honestly, if Phillip Seymore Hoffman wasn't such a good actor, I probably would heave stopped the movie way before the hour mark.

[Emoney7]

Cant't wait for this one. Been waiting awhile. Should be good.

[Emoney7]

Originally Posted by cooltobeyou

Yeah, this movie really isn't everyone's cup of tea. I rented it, and I had to turn it off after the first hour. Its one thing to have parts of your movie remain symbolic, and leave parts of the movie open to the viewers interpretation. However, when the whole movie is left open to interpretation, and the writer/director gives the audience nothing to work with, then the whole plot is nothing but a mess.

It seemed like each scene was set up to just introduce another ludicrous situation after another, which was clearly not set in any sort of reality.

I hate to say it because I'm a big fan of Phillip Seymore Hoffman and Kaufman, but this film was trash IMHO. Honestly, if Phillip Seymore Hoffman wasn't such a good actor, I probably would heave stopped the movie way before the hour mark.

Honestly in all rights, you could be correct. But, you didnt watch the whole movie did you?

I dunno its just a petpeeve of mine, but if you didnt watch the whole movie, I dont know how you can honestly have an educated well informed opinion about this movie.....

[cooltobeyou]

Originally Posted by Emoney7

Honestly in all rights, you could be correct. But, you didnt watch the whole movie did you?

I dunno its just a petpeeve of mine, but if you didnt watch the whole movie, I dont know how you can honestly have an educated well informed opinion about this movie.....

I would almost always agree with you on this one. Usually, you should watch the whole movie before giving any sort of opinion on the movie. However, this is one of those movies that you know you're going to like or hate within the first hour.

I made it one hour and five minutes into the movie, and its about 1 hour and 40 minutes long. At that point, I actually fast forwarded it to the ending scenes of the movie so I could see if the movie ever actually ended up making a lick of sense. After doing that, I got the general message of the movie (which there is still more to the movie than that, because the movie has a lot going on) and I still didn't agree with what the movie was trying to say. So, yeah, this movie just wasn't my cup of tea.

I'm not really posting this stuff just to be trolling this thread. I'm just trying to represent another view point on this film...and I definitely think it should be a rental before anyone runs out and buys it blindly. I enjoyed "Being John Malkovich", "Eternal Sunshine", and "Adaptation", but this movie just never grabbed me.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by cooltobeyou

I hate to say it because I'm a big fan of Phillip Seymore Hoffman and Kaufman, but this film was trash IMHO.

There's a difference between your not liking the movie and the movie being "trash".

Originally Posted by cooltobeyou

I'm not really posting this stuff just to be trolling this thread.

Can't say that I really believe you on that, unfortunately.

[cooltobeyou]

Originally Posted by Josh Z

There's a difference between your not liking the movie and the movie being "trash".



Can't say that I really believe you on that, unfortunately.

Well, I guess I used the word "trash", because I couldn't think of a better adjective at the time. After more reflection, I would say that I was more disappointed with the movie than anything. "Eternal Sunshine..." is one of my favorite movies of all time (if not my outright favorite), so I was disappointed that Kaufman couldn't seem to pull everything together to create a more cohesive story that I could care about; in the same manner that I cared about the characters and their predicaments in Eternal Sunshine.

Thinking back on Synecdoche a little bit more, I actually did like the very opening scene in the movie; at the breakfast table. At that point, Hoffman's character seemed to be someone that I could identify with...but somewhere along the line the movie really spiraled out of control for me. It seemed like too much "wackiness" and not enough explanation. I kept trying to connect with the characters and plot, but I couldn't find anything to relate too.

You're correct Josh. I would say that this movie is far from being trash. Its a well made movie, and there are good performances all around. Your review is also very well written, and I could see why some people would see it as a 4.5/5 star movie. Don't you think though, since you pointed out that the movie is not everyone's cup of tea, that the majority of people are better off renting it first instead of blind buying it?

[Drammattex]

I hated this movie with a capitol HATE.

I'd rushed out to see it because I generally love Charlie Kaufman's work and I especially love films that ask questions and don't spoon feed the audience; I want a little more challenge than that.

However, I think I'm finding where my line is--the place beyond which a film begins to lose me. I love films like Brazil, Being John Malkovich, The Fall, and even films like I'm Not There. But on the other side of the line are films like The Fountain and Synecdoche, New York. I guess I felt the essence of these films was apparent very quickly (to me, anyway)--for example, in Synecdoche it was pretty early in the film when it seemed to me that Caden was missing his real life while steeped in self-indulgent self destruction. I could relate to this as a short story writer who continually rewrites, but never finishes, his work. So I felt like I "got" it. But then I felt like I sat with it for two hours, just watching Kaufman expand on that idea and expand on it... to me it seemed inevitable, and not necessarily any deeper or truer than a similar story with a stronger/clearer narrative. I don't think that's a crutch; Kaufman's more narrative story in 'Malkovich' is packed with just as many neurotic maniacs, layers, and questions, but I think the characters' journeys are easier to see and therefore they're easier to relate to or understand. Perhaps Caden was more complex because we spent more time with him, but I didn't feel that way; to me, he seemed like he was just repeating the same behavior. I think that was one of Kaufman's essential points, but it was one I felt I picked up pretty early on... I didn't feel the film told me anything new. Heh, and maybe that's because I'm Caden.

I know this is a different kind of film. I guess it's just on the other side of that line for me.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by cooltobeyou

Well, I guess I used the word "trash", because I couldn't think of a better adjective at the time. After more reflection, I would say that I was more disappointed with the movie than anything. "Eternal Sunshine..." is one of my favorite movies of all time (if not my outright favorite), so I was disappointed that Kaufman couldn't seem to pull everything together to create a more cohesive story that I could care about; in the same manner that I cared about the characters and their predicaments in Eternal Sunshine.

Thinking back on Synecdoche a little bit more, I actually did like the very opening scene in the movie; at the breakfast table. At that point, Hoffman's character seemed to be someone that I could identify with...but somewhere along the line the movie really spiraled out of control for me. It seemed like too much "wackiness" and not enough explanation. I kept trying to connect with the characters and plot, but I couldn't find anything to relate too.

You're correct Josh. I would say that this movie is far from being trash. Its a well made movie, and there are good performances all around. Your review is also very well written, and I could see why some people would see it as a 4.5/5 star movie.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and this is a much more well-reasoned and articulated argument than your earlier posts. I don't have a problem with you not liking the movie. I just didn't appreciate you calling it "trash".

Don't you think though, since you pointed out that the movie is not everyone's cup of tea, that the majority of people are better off renting it first instead of blind buying it?

That's probably fair to say, and is one factor why I held back from calling it "Highly Recommended". However, that "Recommended" rating should not be taken to mean "blind buy". They're not the same thing.

[RoadLizard]

Originally Posted by Drammattex

I hated this movie with a capitol HATE.

I'd rushed out to see it because I generally love Charlie Kaufman's work and I especially love films that ask questions and don't spoon feed the audience; I want a little more challenge than that.

However, I think I'm finding where my line is--the place beyond which a film begins to lose me. I love films like Brazil, Being John Malkovich, The Fall, and even films like I'm Not There. But on the other side of the line are films like The Fountain and Synecdoche, New York. I guess I felt the essence of these films was apparent very quickly (to me, anyway)--for example, in Synecdoche it was pretty early in the film when it seemed to me that Caden was missing his real life while steeped in self-indulgent self destruction. I could relate to this as a short story writer who continually rewrites, but never finishes, his work. So I felt like I "got" it. But then I felt like I sat with it for two hours, just watching Kaufman expand on that idea and expand on it... to me it seemed inevitable, and not necessarily any deeper or truer than a similar story with a stronger/clearer narrative. I don't think that's a crutch; Kaufman's more narrative story in 'Malkovich' is packed with just as many neurotic maniacs, layers, and questions, but I think the characters' journeys are easier to see and therefore they're easier to relate to or understand. Perhaps Caden was more complex because we spent more time with him, but I didn't feel that way; to me, he seemed like he was just repeating the same behavior. I think that was one of Kaufman's essential points, but it was one I felt I picked up pretty early on... I didn't feel the film told me anything new. Heh, and maybe that's because I'm Caden.

I know this is a different kind of film. I guess it's just on the other side of that line for me.

Damn, I just removed this from Netflix queue because I hear movies like Brazil, The Fall, and The Fountain being mentioned. I hated all those films and want to kill the people that made them so I'd better avoid this one as well.

And, as crazy as it is... I LOVE David Lynch's Inland Empire which makes about as much sense as a football bat. Yet, that film DOES have a story, its just layered beneath Davids cooky mind in heavily symbolic scenes and setups.

[septim]

Damn if I'd have known the transfer was a letdown I just would have rented it on DVD when I had the chance.

[Hastor]

One of the best movies ever made. The video transfer wasn't demo material but I wasn't let down. I don't have as good an eye as the reviewers here, but its a definite upgrade over the DVD and that is enough for me to go ahead and get the BD, though I'll always take better when possible.

Anyways, as the cover says, quoted from Roger Ebert, see it twice. It is the only Ebert review I've read where he had to watch it twice just to feel like he had the proper grasp on it, then watched it more just cause it was great.

My girlfriend watched it with me the 3rd time I watched it, and she thought it was wonderful and beautiful, but made her think about her own life so much she completely broke down and we had to drive to the local botanical gardens just to help her be at peace. She really wants to watch it again and thinks she will be ok now that she knows what to expect. Nothing but seeing this movie can explain what it is. Plot descriptions are useless and misleading for the most part, because of the extreme amount of symbolism, it isn't about what the plot of the movie is about if you just say what everyone is doing or going through. How they are doing it, what other concept that it may represent, is the real meat.

If you have it in you to follow and enjoy a Charlie Kaufman movie, don't miss this movie. It is his heaviest on the brain so far. Compared to this, "Adaptation" is light reading.

[krylonman]

Originally Posted by septim

Damn if I'd have known the transfer was a letdown I just would have rented it on DVD when I had the chance.

It's really not (says the guy with the 42" screen, so take that as you will). It was definitely soft, but like it says in the review it doesn't come with the other distracting artifacts of a lot of digital scrubbing; to me it looked like it was an intentional part of the filming style. I've seen other soft-looking releases that distracted the hell out of me because they looked like bungled transfers, but this one seemed like a very good transfer of a not very sharp film.


As for the movie itself, I don't think I can say anything very useful about it yet, having just finished watching it once. I can say I can't wait to see it again—it's fascinating.

Actually, you know what? It reminds me of the music video for Björk's "Bachelorette" (directed by Michel Gondry, so now I'm wondering if he wrote it entirely alone); the premises are surprisingly similar, but there are some big differences in how they're put into motion and how they resolve.

[cleeve]

Originally Posted by RoadLizard

Damn, I just removed this from Netflix queue because I hear movies like Brazil, The Fall, and The Fountain being mentioned. I hated all those films and want to kill the people that made them so I'd better avoid this one as well.

And, as crazy as it is... I LOVE David Lynch's Inland Empire which makes about as much sense as a football bat. Yet, that film DOES have a story, its just layered beneath Davids cooky mind in heavily symbolic scenes and setups.

Are you saying the three other films you mentioned DON'T have a story? . The storyline in The Fall is extremely easy to understand IMO, I don't know why you had trouble with that one. The Fountain is admittedly more abstract but a great, maybe one of the best ever storylines is there. I can't comment on Brazil, it's been too long since I've seen it.


A bit more on topic, though; I just watched Synechdoche last night and I was pretty disappointed as well. I just feel like it was a fairly simple idea and it just wasn't a strong enough premise to carry an entire movie. It started getting tedious and directionless near the end as well, and I started caring less about the characters as time went on(never a good sign). Still, it did have its' positives including beautiful art direction, great acting, and well written dialogue. I'd give it a 7/10. Probably one of if not my least favorite Charlie Kaufman film.