Megalopolis, the new film by director Francis Ford Coppola starring Adam Driver, Nathalie Emmanuel, Jon Voight, Shia labeouf, Aubrey Plaza and more is now playing everywhere and is best seen on IMAX. I review MEGALOPOLIS, the film, by renowned and infamous director, Francis Ford Coppola which is dividing audiences with its Avant Guard style and Shakespearean take on Modern America... I mean Modern Rome. I was lucky enough to catch a special preview of the film presented by the New York Film Festival and Lincoln Center. Enjoy the review. Best, -FSD ----------------- My channel is SMALL, BUT that means that YOU CAN MAKE a BIG DIFFERENCE. Click below to SUBSCRIBE to MORE Film School Dad content. THANK YOU! www.youtube.com/@FilmSchoolDad/featured?sub_confirmation=1 **NEW**TENET Video Essay Is UP!!! th-cam.com/video/YOBMtWnMs48/w-d-xo.html For more Christopher Nolan NOW, check out THIS VIDEO Pondering if NOLAN's NEXT will be his BIGGEST MOVIE EVER... th-cam.com/video/cqci-DXcmOsW/w-d-xo.htmlhich questions if Nolan's NEXT FILM will be his BIGGEST? Or WHEN it may be ANNOUNCED... Nolan's Next Movie ANNOUNCEMENT with INTERSTELLAR IMAX re-Release? th-cam.com/video/9627Gq4O6Kg/w-d-xo.html If you want to connect on Social Media and TALK MOVIES you can find me on twitter HERE: x.com/Film_School_Dad Help support this Film School Dad buy picking up a Hoodie, T-Shirt or Mug film-school-dad-store.myspreadshop.com
art vs commodity vs commercialized art. people do no know the difference because they don't know what are is...ART is not open to interpretation art is for the artists displayed to the public. a commodity (creative commodity) is something creative created for the purpose of selling to the public....that IS open to interpretation. Megalopolis is commercialized art, it did not go through the normal commodification process (script rewrites) so it remains the artistic vision of the primary artist, but it was meant to be for public consumption therefore it leads itself to public interpretation but those interpretations are not open...they are closed...ultimately there is a right and wrong interpretation of the metaphors allusions similes etc but since it is commercialized, you have authority to say what it means to you , even state your opinion but ....unlike a commodity, no one cares.
@@FilmSchoolDad that's what I am saying art true art, the opinion of the "consumer" doesn't matter because the art is not a commodity for consumption commercialized art gives you a small ticket to express your opinion but it your opinions are subjective to an objective truth still. What I am saying is your opinion good or bad is private. It doesn't matter. Unless you can save up 124 million of your own money and produce your own film with distribution to produce your own film.
@@waitaminutepause I'm sorry but I wholeheartedly disagree. OPINION is subjective and EVERYONE is entitled to one. You do not need millions of dollars to make your own movie in order to have an opinion. If that were true there would be no critics OR FANS of anything. However - what is OBJECTIVE - is that a work IS Art, and therefore while all are entitled to their opinion - you and I included - the opinion IS INHERENTLY SUBJECTIVE - only having meaning to the specific viewer. ART can be anything to anyone. Once the artist creates it and places it in the world it belongs to us all ( in however way we choose ). Before I go - thank you for your comments. I truly enjoy talking about film as Art and whether or not we agree - a healthy debate IS what's it's all about. Best, -FSD
Convoluted explanations to convince us that we are just plebeians and incapable of discerning the genius in this masterpiece of the cinema isn't working. We can see plainly that the emperor has no clothes.
I mean. It's an Art film. It's not the first. It's not the last. And it's by one of the greatest directors of cinema the world has ever known. So even if you dislike it that's alright. Thank you for joining in our conversation as all opinions are welcome. Best, -FSD
@FilmSchoolDad I appreciate your kind response to my comment. 👌That's classy, to be sure! I will push back on your statement about this being an "art film." Shouldn't a film with that moniker be somewhat accessible to newer, genuinely interested film audiences? If a film is soooo artistic and obtuse that only the rare, film school-educated person is able to enjoy it, then why lure the low-brow masses into paying to see it? Maybe the director should have clarified who this movie was actually meant for. If the majority of the audience didn't understand (or even like) a film that cost 120 million dollars to make, then maybe it's unfair to blame the viewers for issues with it. 😆Thank you for reading my rambling comments!
@@kellycasperhanson4426 firstly - of course and you're welcome! I'm a VERY new channel and appreciate the passion whether positive or negative - because in the end I'm not a Megalopolis fan - I'm a film fan. I love movies and everything about them. Good, bad, weird, self indulgent, corny, funny, awful, frightening, educational. I just love movies. That being said I don't think Art films need to be accessible. I think Art should merely be whatever the artist wanted to make. It's up to each of us to view the art and then make up our own minds about what it means TO us - not what it means. And there in lies the problem. So many people want to "understand" this film when it's much more about having an experience. I'm a big experiential film lover. I'm one of the people who likes TENET as well... so maybe it's me 🤣 Best, -FSD
@FilmSchoolDad 😊 It's been so nice to share comments with you! I appreciate your perspective on this film (and art films in general.) Good luck on your channel!
On my phone, Megalopolis’s special effects look decent, but on the big screen? Not so much, the green screen background made me and everyone in my theater laugh. Favorite quote: So go back to the cluuuub
Can you give me an example of a film with better green screen effects? Sure it’s noticeable at times but I could say that about every movie I’ve ever seen.
Megalopolis is a higly ambitious but shallow messed up craftpiece which prefers spectacle over story. Sadly, it has ended up becoming something it never was, is and will be. Perhaps over all these years, Capolla might have retouched the original draft of screenplay so many times, that the final product turned out to be a laclustre ride rather than a unique cinematic triumph was it was actually intended to become. It personally don't this project had a huge potential of becoming a magnum opus. However, while being highly engaging and enjoyable in few pirtions of the entire runtime, due to lack of clarity in the narrative and proper execution, it has very little shelf live and will not become remembered in the pop culture for the years to come. At last, I appreciate Capella's perseverance that he stood tall against all the odds in making his dream project come to life.
I think it will quickly become a cult classic... "A Fable" is an important disclaimer... This movie is like a dream.. a bit random and haphazard. I don't mean to excuse away the flawed execution here, but it does work. I think with time, once people realize it is meant to be ancient Rome in a modern setting (like how the Met has set classical Operas in contemporary settings), will the fable make sense to people. Rome wasn't "woke" or insert your own modern interpretation here. , but it did have corruption, populism, a Senate that stopped governing, extreme factions, and powerful people each other to get more power. Feels like today, because that's the point, we are doing the same things that preceded the fall of Rome. We are in Pax Americana. I think this will get cult classic status very quickly for those who get it and are willing to look past the imperfections and narrative flaws in this film.
@@bigdreams5554 yes. Very dreamlike. Very fluid. Sometimes serious sometimes absurd. I see cult status, but I also wonder... we're days away from the film opening wide - maybe people will come out and give the movie a chance. There's so much boring regurgitated sameness out there and it's exciting to see a SINGULAR vision.
@@FilmSchoolDadyes there is sameness in todays offerings…i may get tired of eating burgers everyday…but don’t try to tell me i should enjoy oyster soaked in ketchup and cheese just because at least it’s different… give me something different and good. I actually give more props to the film than most but it seems that there are those that want to raise it up lofty heights almost as a counter narrative to what others are saying instead of just on the films own merit.
Even if it's a train wreck, I'm planning on seeing it in my town when it opens here this week. Trying to get my son to go with me. We went to see Babylon a couple years back when virtually no one else did because I like to support ambitious artistic attempts, even if they wholly or partially fail, simply because they are trying to do something different than the usual franchise crap. A movie that's 20 percent edifying is better than the average brain-dead formulaic borefest.
It feels like people are quick to judge the movie as trash rather than face the fact that they were either confused or a lot of it went of their heads. It doesnt even take great knowledge of greek art/philosophy to understand the characters largely speak metaphorically
I hear you. And I also think it's OK people don't get the movie. There are plenty of high art films that just don't work for me either. This one just really HIT for me, happily. But I do think there's a lot of jumping on the hate bandwagon going on. Best -FSD
Counter point: I saw Megalopolis this night and it was TOO ambitious, too unfocused, and made two to three decades too late. There is one good idea in Megalopolis and it's portraying Roman history in a modern setting. Unfortunately that got buried in so much... Stuff.
Bummed the film didn't click with you but I DO think it's great that you went out and saw it for yourself and made up your own mind. That's what's it's all about. Best, -FSD
Agreed- and Coppola thought about it for too long and spent too much money on it. It also would have been better with less CGI effects and better dialogue. It seems like the whole essence of the film was to purposely camp it up, which detracted from the implied philosophical intent. He's a master filmmaker, sadly this one failed.
No 🤣 it's written by me. I wrote it at 1am the night I watched the film and I produced this entire review within 22hrs. I'm a real human. Beep beep boop beep.
Acudí con las expectativas muy bajas tras las críticas tan malas que leí y...me gustó bastante. Creo que la gente no está entiendo la película. Enhorabuena por el canal. Saludos desde España
I also love Megalopolis! It is a beautiful, brilliant, crazy, flawed and ambitious achievement. There are some very gorgeous scenes and fascinating moments, while some objectively terrible scenes at the same time. And I’m glad that Nathalie Emmanuael’s performance is getting praised by somebody. She gives a subtle and believable performance that brings everything to a sense of believability and reality. And you’re right, she’s basically the audience who isn’t sure that Adam Driver’s character is a hero or villain. Adam Drive and Aubrey Plaza are also excellent. I think the only weak performance was from Jon Voight, but even he has his moments. Shia is also very entertaining, and Giancarlo Esposito is also great. I give this film an 8.5/10. It’s definitely one of the best films of 2024 so far.
Definitely a top '24 film. Agreed. I did love seeing Voight again though. I think of all the characters, his worked well for how ridiculous he went with it. It may be his last on screen performance and I say: what I way to go out.
I just watched megalopolis and was so enthralled. Its December and id say was one of if not the most inspiring films i've seen. i'm so so surprised that its not as popular as I thought it would be. i'm shocked. I don't understand how everyone didn't thoroughly enjoy watching it. what a trip.
It feels like this rare gem that only a few can appreciate. I sound like such a jerk when I talk like that but I don't know how else to describe it. I thought the movie was really special.
I think it does. But of course value can be different for different people. 100 dollars may be a lot of money to some - and meaningless to others. Value as art - is in the eye of the beholder. Art is art. Have a great day! Thanks for watching! -FSD
I absolutely loved the film. im gonna copy and paste here what i wrote on lettrdbox at 2 am after getting out of the theater at 12: really i think one of the best movies to come out in the past ten years, definitely in terms of American film. No movie ive seen made me cry as much, at first the blatant and almost cartoonish use of roman imagery/dress/language seemed a bit jarring, but it allowed for a symbolic setting. fantasy, or fable is best served in the symbolic setting, it's a symbolic endeavor to deal with archetypal fortunes. coppola makes the parallel clear in the first scene, in carved stone. he gives us a reason for this mish-mash nyc, and shows us the little things in outlandish ways, because the little things really aren't that little, we just are used to seeing them in a more familiar setting. I've never read the fountainhead, but I'm pretty sure this is it. caesar is at least an architect, and isn't the one in rand’s book a megalomaniac - or accused of being one? (maybe he isn't, maybe he’s nuanced, but i didn't read it, so idk) whether caesar is one in the film is of course up to the observer, like any art. I think that in a way he is, but not superficially, hes not a flamboyant narcissist, hes obviously very self-aware - but the fact is that the world revolves around him, he controls time with his desire, at his will - that is being at the center of the universe. In this role he is alchemist, he transforms his pain into a new substance with particles seems to bend to his will. There are whispers through-out the film that this substance was made from his wife's dead body or his hair. His wife, that he drove to suicide by lacking a true moral code, perpetuated by unsubstantiated self. She comes to him in visions, and is projected onto the substance (i gotta look up what this was called i forgot, ‘megalon’ maybe?) i really want to write a whole bunch on the jungian analysis on that part of the film and its depictions of anima and animus, and the anima's representation of creativity and life. but that's kinda unnecessary for letterbox, this whole review is kinda out of hand. I will probably just save it to tell people in person. People say this movie was a vanity project, it was auteur in a sense. It tells a deeply personal story, of self realization. It feels like its a call to arms for artists, which would make sense for coppola, as an artist, to give as a final message to inspire others to take on an artistic transformative role in society. Its a story of personal transformation and self actualization - and the gifts that are bestowed and created in return. Last notes: i like the slightly gaudy aesthetics and feeling of the film, very terry gillam feeling. Also a very funny movie And im really not doing this meme or anything, its a really beautiful movie that covers an entire scope of self, and therefore is not really a reflection of society but of man. Its the story of the magician, of the christ, the hero, the actualized man.
I read your review a few times. I like it a lot. Well thought out and communicated. I like your explanation of the film as a "call to arms" for artists. As I've been diving back into Coppola's work it's obvious he was always an artist. Godfather Part 2 and Apocalypse Now are so much more fluid and dreamlike than I had remembered. You can see the seeds of his avant-"garden" spouting - but with Megalapolis he finally just let go of all restraint and made a true work of art. I think categorizing as Art over strictly being a movie is required. Similar to 2001 - which not a strictly Sci-fi film... it is more a kin to viewing a painting at a museum. And I appreciate the difference. Seems you do too!!! Thank you for sharing! Best, -FSD
Thank you. My channel will always focus more on how movies make me ( and others ) FEEL. I believe seeing a movie can and should be an experience. I like to focus on the experience itself over all the technical aspects. In the end, as a piece of art - how does that creative work speak to you/me, etc. Much appreciated for the kind words. Best, -FSD
I thought it was brilliant. Coppola made excellent use of all the actors apart from James Remar where was he? Adam Driver was a force of nature & Audrey Plaza was on top form. Lots of references, still thinking about this movie 2 days later. REAL THOUGHT PROVOKING STUFF.
It's funny that this is the most disliked review, yet it's the closest one to the truth. People who aren't used to theatre would be unused to what the movie is doing.
I saw it last night .. was "sublime". Had flawed execution, a bit too abstract , tonally inconsistent... But interesting concepts. Something to talk about. In a world where most people are fine watching explosions and pretty colors on their phones, this is the polar opposite... Abstract yet heavy handed, self serious, yet comical... A film of contradictions and amazing potential. But like Icarus, flew too close to The Room and gives off Wiseau vibes at times... In a decadent way, just like ancoent Rome itself
Interesting final point that you made. In the film Cesar is as decant as the elite he so despises... And his character is a conduit to Coppola - so you're saying Coppola is a decadent as WE.?!? I dig it.
If you are criticizing the lack of a clean, linear narrative, the tendency for the film to start and stop plot threads, you are not engaging with the film on its own terms. Megalopolis, and basically all of Coppola’s classics, is episodic, a series of meditations. And yes, my screening had the in-theater performance portion of the film.
Nice! The experience was really interesting and over too soon if you ask me. And I agree about Megalopolis being a meditation. Do you have to know what happened in the movie to understand the movie? I don't think you do. I think if you focused on the plot you missed the SECRET movie happening behind the frames. Man. I dug this move.
@@FilmSchoolDad The thing that kills me is people who say, “The film poses questions but has no answers.” That’s … sort of the point. Cesar Catalina says a few times that the questions are the point because the questions initiate debate, and the debate happens outside the movie. It actually occurred to me now that the in-theater performance is a clue that what happens on screen is as important as what’s happening in the theater, and that’s the film passing the debate over to the audience.
Good Theatre and Good Cinema is about asking difficult questions. That is what Shakespeare did all time. Bad theatre and cinema is about spooning out answers.
I'm glad I could help. That really was the point of my review. Hopefully letting other film fans know the movie truly is NOT what they're all saying. Go in with an open mind and you won't be let down. It's weird. It's fun. It's different. It's Art. Best, -FSD
I just put here what I wrote for IMDB: "Megalopolis is another ambitious movie by Coppola, and probably the last one. So it is kind of a testament he passes for the younger generations, and a bold statement. His alter-ego is Cesar Catalina (performed by Adam Driver), a visionary that wants to change the future of the city, just like Coppolla did do about Cinema. Inspired by utopic artists from the XX century that imagined different ways to make cities, Coppola takes it to the next level. Several characters will appear that will try to undermine Cesar's vision, with the exception of Julia that becomes in love with Cesar. So it is also a love story. The narrative is linear, but with a delivery closer to theatre, breaking away from from realism echoeing the likes of directors such as Manoel de Oliveira or Felinni. There are shadows of past movies. The ending recalls a lot the ending of "The Cotton Club", yet another masterpiece. And off course, it is impossible not to remember "One from the heart", another masterpiece and an elegy to artistic vision. "Megalopolis" is a fable, very human, but also epic and a message for a better future. Probably what we all miss is utopia after all. Utopia at least let's people dream and desire for a better tomorrow." This is my take on this movie. A piece of Art indeed.
Thank for the review. In regard to humor and farce, a friend and I saw "Clockwork Orange" and were horrified. Then a group of acquaintances who had not seen it almost literally dragged us to see it again. Well, this time around my friend and I laughed our heads off - we thought it was hysterical. Our scandalized friends let us know that we were depraved monsters... We had a lot to talk about! This is the first review that makes me want to see this film.
I'm surprised so many reviewers were so hard on it. I think - maybe - some "more seasoned" TH-cam movie reviewers want to please their audience and assume many mainstream movie goers aren't looking to be provoked - but instead... fed candy. And listen. I LOVE candy. I love marvel. I love Chris Nolan. I enjoy ALL aspects of the cinema. I love it all, I really do. And that's WHY I'm so happy this movie exists. Because it only adds to my library now. Here's a new edition of a movie I want to watch again and add my collection. That's a win! As for Clockwork Orange I think it's a great example and comparison. Best, -FSD
Why is it that every time someone makes a self-indulgent movie that isn't as deep as they would like to have you believe someone defends it with "audiences don't deserve this instant classic?" We've been given modern directors that pushed the envelope far more that Coppola has in the last 30 years. I think most deserve a bit more respect and leeway than that tired film critic argument.
@@FilmSchoolDad and I think that's a very valid point of view. I intend to see it despite my opinion that we don't need any more love letters to Ayn Rand. I just don't like the argument that the audience is some how inferior if they don't like or don't understand more arthouse films. I don't think anyone would argue that it's lofty and aspirational but it's hard say anyone who doesn't like this (or the numerous other movies that this argument has been pinned to) that they are somehow intellectually deficient. I say this as someone who has heard time and time again since the dawn of movie discussions when a critics chides someone with "well you just didn't get it." I have loved some really esoteric films and hated some equally. I like the popcorn summer blockbusters just as much as anyone but I just wish that particular argument would just fade away. When you make a $100 million dollar movie with another $100 million ad campaign you cannot expect an arthouse film to make back a budget of a marvel movie. Ridley Scott just challenged that and lost with the Last Duel, ironically another Driver piece. I just know the same thing is going to happen and we're going to hear more of bemoaning of the younger generation and lack of attention span as opposed to...was this the right film, for the right price, for the right time.
@@roberttaylor9259 I agree that no one SHOULD be saying that anyone is "less than" for not understanding the film. If you rewatch my review I in no way say that anyone is unintelligent or less than me for not getting it - only that I DO GET IT. That's all. I want to give the other side of the argument. Here's a self financed art project that's being derailed at every turn. Let's let the film speak for itself is all I ask. There are SO MANY art house films that I abhor to be honest. Since my early twenties I have, less and less, fallen in love with Avant Guard films. But this one just spoke to me. I will defend my one comment in the video arguing that anyone who says this film is Equal to the THE ROOM - they don't understand the differences. But that is true and I stand by that. The room was a mistaken cult classic. This film is quite intentional - weather good or bad. Hey ! thanks so much for engaging with me on this. Whether or not you like the film, I'm glad you'll go see it for yourself. Best, -FSD
Coppola mentioned, during the Q&A, that he believes humanity is actively being held back from our true potential. I believe Driver's character - representing progress - has these abilities to showcase that we ALL are more special than we realize and have the ability to make this world a better place if we were to have an open mind.
I loved Megolopolis. The way it had elements of theater and old silent movies was beautiful. Whenever movies try to tackle big themes, it's easy for audiences to be confused, as in life, theres never clear-cut answers. How do we solve problems when people are so stubborn about the status quo? I need to watch it again, but it does blow my mind how people are confused or bored by it. Great review! I agree whole heartidly
Like you said at the beginning of your video, this film is a work of art! Pure and simple, it is magnificent! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on it. I will be watching it over and over again.
Lucky us, it's out on VOD, but really I want to own it on physical. This feels like a movie that may have a tough time finding a printer, but I bet FFC will make sure to get it out there. Looking forward to my rewatches as well. Best, -FSD
I’ve seen MEGALOPOLIS twice. I walked-or, more accurately, bounded-out of the theater after the first time, smiling. After the second, having loved it even more, I knew it was well on its way to being a favorite. (I’ve pre-ordered the 4K UHD disc. Can’t wait.) What is the film for me? It’s Francis’s heartfelt, apologetic, and urgent letter to his wife Eleanor written in a cinematic love language shared between them. She was his anchor, keeping him from drifting into the rocks during his stormiest times. He’s apologetic because he often thanked her by cheating and otherwise treating her badly. It’s urgent because, after spending decades trying and failing to put these thoughts into words and images, he, like Cesar, was running out of time. Eleanor’s health was failing. True, the film often feels rushed, half finished, as if his infamous rehearsal improvs were adopted as finished scenes, or as if he grew impatient with special effects pros and decided to go DIY. (I love the handmade feel of the visuals. They’re very ONE FROM THE HEART. And I’ve always been a fan of improvised moments such as the make-believe tug-of-war between Cesar and Julia.) His hurry was to make sure Eleanor got a chance to see it before passing away. Her reaction, “Francis. You did it!” I imagine that shared moment, knowing she understood and appreciated his gesture, was worth his every last dime to him. You could say that, just as TWIXT was an entire movie dreamed up to hold one amazing shot expressing his pain over the loss of his son and his casting of his daughter Sofia in THE GODFATHER PART III was a means to send himself, through Michael Corleone, a warning about sacrificing his family for his business, MEGALOPOLIS is an elaborate film designed to hold a dedication to his wife. I don’t think I’m off base: Coppola has often and obviously used his characters as avatars. Michael Corleone, Harry Caul, Willard, Hank, Rusty James, Peggy Sue’s husband Charlie, Preston Tucker, Dracula, Jack, and now Cesar are all thinly disguised versions of Francis. As described in the recent Sam Wasson quasi-biography THE PATH TO PARADISE, Coppola’s career arc began with experimental films like THE RAIN PEOPLE until financial failure forced him to play in the Hollywood sandbox with the GODFATHER films. Things got out of hand, though, almost destroying him during the making of APOCALYPSE NOW. He recovered, forever changed, and learned to chase his dreams with ONE FROM THE HEART leading to RUMBLE FISH, TUCKER: THE MAN AND HIS DREAM, his deeply personal and lovely trilogy about writers trying to complete their masterwork consisting of YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH, TETRO, and TWIXT, and finally completing his own, to him at least, greatest work, MEGALOPOLIS. As told by Eleanor in her published journals, most famously for APOCALYPSE NOW, she was there through all of it and much of it was hellish. It was an ongoing tug-of-war. Stay with him or take the kids and leave. Her avatar is Julia. And MEGALOPOLIS is an allegory of their bumpy journey together. Early dreams of utopia that Cesar shares with Julia (but that she can only see if she closes her eyes because they are still but mere dreams). Efforts to gradually realize his vision within the rules of New Rome, one demolished building replaced with Megalon at a time. Things getting out of hand to the point of nearly destroying him during Wow’s wedding. With Julia’s encouragement, Cesar learning to follow his heart amongst hanging girders (yep, that lovely scene is ONE FROM THE HEART). His relationship with Julia blossoming and the film (after getting stuck and burning up in the projector gate) flowering as well into something different, almost Abel Gance-like with triple split screens, superimpositions, irises, and gorgeous, unabashedly old-fashioned matte paintings reminiscent of METROPOLIS and THINGS TO COME. The film ends with sentimental, optimistic hopefulness with New Rome and its horrors forgotten. (I think the naiveté is intentional. Coppola battling cynicism. He wears his political leanings beyond his sleeve.) Finally, I think MEGALOPOLIS is about Francis and Eleanor’s complicated relationship because many of the films Coppola has listed as influences are about just that. PYGMALION, THE RED SHOES, CEASAR AND CLEOPATRA, CITIZEN KANE, EYES WIDE SHUT, and BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (1946), the last two being explicitly about marriage, one jealous, the other sacred. While Julia begins to fall for Cesar after closing her eyes and sharing in his vision and their relationship is consummated while kissing on a hanging girder, their relationship begins during a now oft-quoted scene. All I need say is “CLUUUUUB.” Memes seldom acknowledge, though, that the scene is quite interesting, even pivotal. The dialog is lifted, barely modified, from THE RED SHOES and PYGMALION and Julia enters Cesar’s office cloaked like Belle when she first meets the Beast in Cocteau’s masterpiece. And Cesar’s dismissal of Julia turns to fascination when she brings up T-symmetry, wondering if time reversal is possible. Just as Cesar would love to travel back in time (like Peggy Sue forging a different marriage with Charlie in PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED) to when dreams of utopia hadn’t been laughed out of society to be replaced by expectations of dystopia, THINGS TO COME pushed aside by BLADERUNNER, something he begins to realize with Julia’s help, Francis wishes he could turn back the clock and experience the film career he originally desired. One where THE RAIN PEOPLE and THX 1138 were successful, his original American Zoetrope studio in San Francisco became the home base of his dreams, THE CONVERSATION still became THE CONVERSATION, APOCALYPSE NOW was directed by George Lucas, and TUCKER: THE MAN AND HIS DREAM was a musical. And, more than anything, one where he spent more time with his kids and Eleanor.
Thank you for a fascinating review. I hadn’t planned on seeing it, due to all the negative reviews. I’ll definitely go see it in the theater now, as I want to judge it for myself, and I, too, like to support artists of every kind.
Thanks for your kind words. Happily, It's still playing in SOME theaters, and if you enjoy the movie and it was because you found my ONE good review of the film then my work here is done. Best, -FSD
I saw it (in an empty theater) and liked it. I'm a student of Roman history and Cicero is one of my heroes, especially in his fight against Catiline's coup; Mayor Frank Cicero even recites the beginning of the real's Cicero's first Catiline speech. And Cicero opposed Caesar. But Coppola resolved the conflict well. Cesar is a cross between architect Howard Roark and miracle-material inventor Hank Rearden with an Ayn Rand-type speech thrown in. But Cesar is a very mixed individual. So Coppola gives us valid arguments from both Cicero and Cesar. I’m a scifi fan but I can see how Cesar stopping time is confusing. Was it all in his head, like him imagining his dead wife still alive? If I recall correctly, Cesar offers family as a central value. As a half Italian I appreciate that perspective. And the new baby helps bring Cicero and Cesar together. I, as a baby, performed just that function. My Italian immigrant Catholic peasant grandparents did not approve of my mom marrying a non-Italian Protestant. But when I came along, and because my dad was an honest, stand-up guy, always helpful to my grandparents, I only remember love within our families. I hope viewers can appreciate that crucial point in the film. And I need to see it again!
thank you so much for that wonderful addition to our conversation. I think your perspective is very interesting and some of the history you mentioned above may help other viewers understand a bit more. Best, -FSD
I love weird movies and deep abstract concepts. I can't remember the last time I was so inspired by a vision and simultaneously I have never ever been so disappointed by wasted potential. It's so full of ideas but doesn't find the time to explore them in details, ground them in reality and deal with the consequences making it feel superficial and hollow. The whole film feels like a nonsensical collage of trailers for at least 3 seasons of an epic philosophical show.
Coppla wanted to make an abstract painting as his last film gotta respect him as an artist for doing what he wanted and following his own creativity nobody wants to repeat themselves. Cant imagine the temptation to just make godfather sequels and tv shows must have been tempting to lay on past successes but Coppla was never that kinda guy.
I am a little worried about the box office - because for more Art to be financed ( I know he self financed this ) there need to be examples. Oppenheimer was a great example last year of Art pushing through. Dune part two balanced Art and the blockbuster format well. Now it's time to see if audiences are tired of the same old thing. Even TV isn't what it was 10 years ago. Prestige TV is hanging on for dear life. Can this save cinema? No. But it's a step in the right direction. Best!!! -FSD
I agree, the fact that most people are not familiar with Roman history, culture, theatre, customs is an issue. You need to be familiar with this because the movie makes a LOT more sense with this context. There was a time when people were educated in the classics.... Those people would totally get it...
I know what you mean. I do think there is a certain amount of Shakespeare and world history that one must first acquire to be able to better enjoy the film. I lucked out. Already had some. 😎
Just because you know Shakespeare, Roman history, metropolis, or any classic art does not help this movie. It makes it seem even more obvious and weakly scripted. It's a barrage of ideas any high-school student can piece together to create a story.
@@afrocut I have to disagree. Because its easy to say "anyone" could have done it - but no one has... He did. So it exists. That is all. Stinks the film didn't land for you but that's ok. I dug it. Obviously. But I don't like every movie and I bet neither do you. All good. Movies still rock. Best, -FSD
Megalopolis is the most boring, dull, drawn out, meandering, and badly written movie I've ever seen. Film school and art students will no doubt bore everyone about its many layers that only they can unravel. Everyone else will see through it for the pile of garbage it really is.
Hey. You're a million percent entitled to your opinion. Side note: all the film/art students who are inspired by the movie... may someday make something you really like. Who knows? Thank you for sharing your opinion. Best, -FSD
Oh yeah- wait- here's one film school alum who agrees with you 💯, it's horrible. I wanted to like it so badly, especially after some negative reviews but instead kept falling asleep and rejoiced when it was over.
Let me begin by saying I am a huge fan of Mr. Francis Ford Coppola. I honestly believe that in the top ten greatest motion pictures ever made, Mr. Coppola has three. The Godfather, The Godfather Part II and Apocalypse Now. Personally, I believe The Godfather and The Godfather Part II to be tied at number 1. Having said that, I also believe that Mr. Coppola hasn't made a truly great film since the 70s. Rumble Fish was a very good film, Dracula was good, The Cotton Club Encore was good and Tetro was the closest he came to greatness in the latter part of his career. Even before the 70s, The Rain People was very good, but not a great film for Mr. Coppola. So that brings me to the topic of Megalopolis. A film 45 years in the making. Before it was filmed, when the cast was announced and it was confirmed to be going into production, I made a prediction to myself that this would be the first great film by Francis since the 70s. In my scoring system, a great film begins at 91/100, a great great film is 94 though 96, a masterpiece is 97 and above, and of course, a 100 is a perfect masterpiece film. Coppola has three perfect 100 masterpieces by my estimation. So, my thoughts leading up to Megalopolis was I thought Francis would have a chance to hit that 91 mark, but probably nothing higher. Then Cannes came around and the reviews were anything but flattering. So, I thought either A), Francis is way past his best and created a really bad film or B), which I was hoping and leaning towards, that critics these days mostly know NOT what the hell they are talking about. Most critics these days are afraid to voice a real opinion. There is a lot of WOKE garbage and anything out of the norm is immediately going to be panned. So I saw Megalopolis tonight with high hopes, but relatively low expectations. I was, honestly, sincerely and TOTALLY blown away. I shit you not. I give Megalopolis a perfect 100 score! The film I saw is one of the top 30 or so greatest motion pictures ever and a real cinematic achievement. The story was great! The acting was marvelous in a kind of 1989 Batman sort of way. The cinematography was beautiful and psychedelic. The closest thing I could find to a criticism was maybe it doesn't possess that one, iconic line that will be repeated forever, but so what?! A lot of films are iconic, but not great. As far as I'm concerned, this film is perfection and I am so happy for Francis Ford Coppola. He sold a large piece of his winery, he took a real chance on himself and it paid off. Yeah, he may not make his budget back and a lot of people are shitting on the film, but I believe he is happy with it and I know for certain that I couldn't be more pleased with it. Much like how the main character, Cesar Catalina, successfully created the city of Megalopolis, Mr. Coppola created this masterpiece film Megalopolis. Way to go, Francis! Congratulations! Thank you, sir for your contribution to this great art form that we all love. You are one of the absolute greatest filmmakers to ever live.
I went in to the theatre exactly the same as you. I was hopeful but cautious. I had zero expectations and figured I'd either enjoy the "huge mess of a film" or be delighted if it were good. I definitely didn't think I'd love it as much as I do. It's been so long since I saw a mainstream avant-garde film... "Brazil" maybe. And yes, I do think many reviewers are either fans of film but unstudied or just want to agree with the bandwagon for views. Had I said this movie was bad this video may have more views 🤣 but instead the movie was sublime. I loved it and can't wait to see it again. Best! -FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad Awesome! And you mentioned Brazil. That is another magnificent and unique motion picture that is near and dear to my heart. Thanks for the great review! Keep doing your thing.
Really incredible experience. Sure, you could say not every aspect "worked", but the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This is big budget film making unrestrained by commercial interests, a glimpse at Hollywood production as personal expression! A triumph of the human mind and spirit!
I wouldn't focus on the "story" per se. The movie takes place between the words and images. Go in without expectations and you may be pleasantly surprised.
@@FilmSchoolDad just got around to watching it as i wasn't able to see it when it did come to my cinema! i wouldn't say it's bad but it really does feel like 40 years worth of ideas crammed into 2 hours. would have much better if the plot was more simplified/had less stuff. the ideas were there but the execution wasn't. loved the visuals tho so go back to the cluuuuub
Hey, very kind of you to say. I just love movies and I appreciate your positive remarks even while we may disagree. That's what it's all about. Come back Anytime! Best, -FSD
I went with low expectations and loved it. Ive been reading about cicero recently so that helped- but ive also always loved coppolas ethos and spirit that come accross in his interviews- i feel like this movie is the apotheosis of his career- bringing together all the themes and ideas hes been exploring in his life and movies. Looking forward to seeing it again
I have to agree in many points with you. I was completely blown away by the movie. And like you, I desperately have to see it again: to understand more and to feel the experience again. This movie isn't realistic and doesn't try to be. I also cannot understand the people who found its narrative hard to follow. I mean sure it isn't as clear cut as the typical blockbuster, but I just let the movie take me where it wants and I had no problems understanding the narrative. Still there are many themes for which I need to rewatch the movie to get a better picture. And I say all of this, having seen no other movie by Francis Ford Coppola and just engaging with the movie on its terms.
Ive been going back through his greatest works and having re-watched after seeing Megalopolis they play very differently to me. I see the artist was always there and his dissolves are pure magic....
That was my feeling as well : although it has some faults (a bit too on the noze at times I felt, especially when underlining metaphors), this was a good movie. However it required some basic culture in both cinema and in late Roman Republic.
I think the issue is with human world modelling and expectations. We want some amount of novelty, but within a predictable and well established framework. The story of the film must exist within the stories we tell ourselves about film itself. When something truly novel and new comes along, we attack it like white blood cells attacking a pathogen, it irritates people, it causes cognitive dissonance. Films like Southland Tales and Enter The Void are good examples. This is a “pretentious” sounding idea, but it takes a certain amount of intelligence and creativity to not be annoyed by that which is different, it requires a brain capable of reinterpreting reality on the fly, and adjusting our world models and narrative frameworks. One of the most consistent critiques of media that I hear these days is- “why isn’t it just more like everything else?!!” We have so many rigid rules and conventions that we defend and uphold to the point of banal creative homogeneity. I’ve not seen this film, I may hate it, but I’m sure that many people are simply annoyed that it’s not playing by the “rules”
@@FigmentHF you're not wrong 🏆 I hope you get the opportunity to check it it for yourself because I do think it's a very interesting epilogue to Coppola's career. I'm re-watching his earlier work right now for fun and it's really not so surprising when watching Apocalypse Now and Godfather 2 even though they're SO different in terms of tone and style. Thanks for contributing to the conversation. Best, -FSD
I went tosee it just because it looked so weird and out of place in this day of modern movies and I wasn't disappointed. Its definitely a weird art film and visually just so stunning and wonderful to look at. So many wonderful concepts and I loved how he chose a sort of modern 1950s art Deco styling for it. Its got Modern Rome and Shakespeare elements stacked on old school 1950s noir and classic drama. I think there so many different elements that hes pulling from that it may overwhelm most peopleor completely go over there heads. You should definitely watch this one more than once just to fully enjoy it and to soak up all the different levels of brilliance going on here
The book or the film? I haven't read the book and I maybe possibly could have but am not sure if I did see the movie. And to answer your question... It is equal. Because Art. Best, -FSD
I think if people were to go back watch The Spirit and Romeo+ Juliet from the 90s as a way to kind of prep themselves to see this movie more people might get it or be more wikling to see it or grasp some of the choices made here. Its highly stylized and the dialogue isnt something most people are use to hearing on a regular basis but if you get it and you get why it works. It just works.
A lot of art is. Many modern audiences would hate old classic films that were celebrated. Audiences have been dumbed down by movies begging for them to like them for so long, they’ve forgotten how to watch something truly different.
Honestly loved the film. It’s abstract art, but if you enjoy abstract art like I do you’ll love it. It’s a farce, social commentary about generational conflict over the passing on of responsibility, and Coppola’s views on our world/life/ and a vision of the future wrapped up in a surreal love story. So many cool camera effects and tricks that were masterfully done by Roman Coppola, who did the same on Dracula. I was ready for the film to be bad after seeing first response, but really enjoyed it and was pleasantly surprised. It’s unapologetic art and doesn’t beg the audience to like it like many of Hollywood films. I have to admit I worked a day on the film doing stunts but didn’t get used on the day and hung out on set. I’ve worked on plenty of bad movies though and never afraid to criticize something I’ve worked on. I also saw it with my friend who worked on it in the camera department too. So we wanted it to be good, but we were both ready to for it to maybe be bad based on what we heard. She actually saw a rough cut a while ago that worried her. But after it was over we both loved what we saw and thought it achieved what Coppola wanted it to. It was want perfect by any means, but it was bold, and from someone who is 85 who wanted to put this out into the world before he goes I greatly respect that. The worst thing a movie can do is be boring and that’s what I was expecting based on early reviews, but this was the complete opposite!
You definitely have a really interesting perspective having been on set, even for one day. I wonder, could you give any insight into what the vibes were on set? Would be great to have some insight. Also loved to hear your thoughts on the film. I agree as I always liked abstract film in general and as a film student years ago wasted many rolls of 16mm attempting my own art. I have a short film on my other tester page and it's something I'm very proud of - of course... I hated it for years... but I finally fell back in love with it. That's what art can be. Anything. Fluid. Ever changing. Thanks for your words! Best, -FSD
Megalopolis is an interesting film, But i think its also a film that many people must understand first. Im actually fascinated by the fantasies Francis added to his film, It felt very special. I'll check It out if i had the time to view it
Nathalie looks nice but lacked gravitas. I spent most of her scenes thinking of how many actresses would have been better, though to be fair to FFC the movie would have had to been made decades ago for them to be the right age for the role. And Aubrey was a mistake making the entire thing impossible to take seriously.
I enjoyed their off kilter performances but I can understand how you might not. What's most important, though is that you watched the film and made up your own mind. Cinema!!!! Best, -FSD
I still need to see this, but it's giving "I remade Metropolis". Idk, I'm looking forward to it. Hope I don't leave the theater just feeling like I've seen it before.
I can assure you this is not a remake of Metropolis. That amazing classic film stands on its own and there's no part of Coppola's new film ( other than a similar sounding name ) that treads on it. You may walk out... but I would have watched another hr. It's a great film if you can just take in the art. Best of luck! -FSD
Thank you, I had a feeling there was much more to this film than all that ??? from the reviews. People were put off that there was no Joker or Batman in the story ? Really look forward to seeing it.
I like all types. Blockbusters. CBMs. They're all art to me but it's something special like THIS that only comes around once in a long time. I hope you'll come back here and tell me what you think when you see the film.
"true work of art" isn't substance. it's accepting whatever is spoon-fed to you under the guise that you can't be critical of it because it's a "fable"
To be fair, most have been "spoon-fed" that this movie is bad. This video - my opinion - is based solely on my own thoughts and experience. Thanks for contributing your opinion. Believe it or not ALL opinions are welcome here. In fact, I'm quite annoyed they tacked on the "a fable" to the end of the films official title. I'd rather it just be called Megalopolis and live or die on its own merit ( which, it seems to be doing.... it seems to be dying... ) What did YOU think was worse? This or Joker 2? Best , -FSD
Seen it and liked it. But I would totally not challenge anyone's opinion if they feel otherwise. It's just a movie outside the norm and so naturally is divisive.
I’m glad you enjoyed it and I’m glad to see filmmakers like Coppola try and craft something truly original but I found this unbearable from start to end. Even ignoring the “farcical” characters and atrocious dialogue. There is such a lack of a deep or powerful narrative through line in this film. The conflict between Cicero, Cesar, and Shia LaBeouf was so dull and shallow I found myself laughing hysterically at every “dramatic” beat or yawning during every pure dialogue scene between characters like Cesar and Julia (who had no chemistry). I just think the core of the film was just horrendously boring and stupid, the mythical and historical elements of the filmmaking aside.
I know what you mean. I assumed the same when I went to the preview. I was just excited to see the train wreck before anyone else 🤣 but I fell in love with the bravery to make a film like this. A true Auteur.
What a relief right? I definitely went in to the theatre not know what I was going to see and I was ( yes - obviously ) enamored with what I found as well.
@@IntertropicalConvergence-gf3bm I was expecting to see the same movie everyone else saw... but apparently me and you saw a good movie and no one else did 🤣
Interestingly I bet it could have 2 cult followings. People who think it's the NEW "The Room" ( which I disagree - but we're in the minority ); and the second group from people who adore the film and see it for what it is. -FSD
Oh she absolutely is. I agree. When I go over her character at 06:26 I note I believe her character to the audience avatar more so than Driver. Best, -FSD
@droidx1191 yes- and she's the one able to relate to both poles of cicero and cesar bring them together and reignite cesars powers. Beautiful character
People talking about movies and music, need to understand than "I didn't like it", has nothing to do with, "It's a bad movie!" I like a loot of bad movies but I can see why movies I didn't like are considered masterpieces... is not that hard! I'm now intrigued to go to see, this one! if most people like it, it's just another movie with a linear story and B&W threads between caracters! ...most of the time!
You're so right about I didn't live it VS it is bad. 100%. Too many people didn't listen to the second sentence which was that not everyone agrees on their favorite artists. That's the thing with MEGALOPOLIS. It's its own thing. And people weren't ready for it. I get their side too. But I'm just happy I loved it because the thing is really something special. Best, -FSD
As a fan of Mr. Coppola, and as an artiste, every time I watched the trailer of this wonderful cinematic work of art, I teared up. And after watching it on the screen (I choked up with emotion in that it was the first day of release, and tragically there were only 7 other people in the audience)...I agree with you Film School Dad...this is a corporate sabotage in that no way do the powers that be want a self- financed movie to succeed. Truth be told, most of the negative reviews are bought and paid for (that in and of itself perpetuates the decline of our present society - so emblematic in the theme of this masterpiece!). Shame on these shills for the studios...ignore them for they are feces. As for this fabulous film, yes it will live on as long as there is a society whereby it and in retrospect we- us...are either still breathing or whether we can actually breathe. BRAVO Mr. Coppola!
Well said. And I agree - how interesting that this film seems to be a mirror to how Coppola is currently looked at by the world. Just as Cesar Catalina is a well regarded "Architect" whom the citizens seem to be raging against for his ascertain that the world could be a better place... so to is Coppola acting as a Martyr for the betterment of Film AS Art. Very clairvoyant of him... Best, -FSD
I watch a lot of movies. Not only blockbuster. I actually prefer intellectual ones. This movie, for me, was the closest I could get to understand how people with dementia must feel. What a mess.
I'm all for this take. The film wasn't perfect- it had some pacing issues, particularly in the second half. Besides that I think it's a brilliant film. Very very weird... and that's not gonna be for everybody. The movie is going to go over a lot of peoples heads, including mine, but I can at least recognize that this is something special. All of the "weird/bad" fever dream type stuff was intentional imo and that is what makes it good.
I believe I will go see this I also I heard about a scene someone throws their hat just so their assistant can pick it up and the assistant does the same and it goes like that to me that sounds so obviously a metaphor for just wanting to feel powerful but the reviewer didn't get it he posed the idea but wasn't sure if all reviews are like that than I'm a lot smarter than I thought
The film is packed with Farce and Satire. At points even Monty python comes to mind. I had mentioned Brazil in a previous comment and there's bits of Terry Gilliam in there but even bolder. There's lots of interesting things in the film well worth a watch - even if you might not love it - it's definitely a movie that demands to be seen.
I believe that if you were to list five films that have a similar tone, feel, aesthetic, art direction, line delivery, etc, then I think it may be easier for people to understand this film's place in cinema.
After one viewing to list five films with similar tone, feel etc... would be disingenuous of me - however I'll give you two... on feel alone: it's Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon meets Baz Lurmen's Romeo+Juliet. But don't take my word. Go check this wild film out yourself.
@FilmSchoolDad I'm sorry - I wrote this comment whilst pondering to myself what films I would compare Megalopolis to in some way, shape or form and didn't mean for you specifically to shoulder this burden - realising I wrote this comment on your video. I am enjoying the rhetoric surrounding this film in particular. In some ways, it reminds me of some of Baz Luhrmann's films. In others, it reminds me of films from the 1920s and early 30s. For sure, it has elements of many silver screen adaptations of Shakespeare. I like to marinate in a film that intrigues me and this is certainly one such film.
Just seeing this comment NOW. Sorry, I would responded to you a month ago! Thanks for taking the time to explain, and I agree. It reminded me of Baz's Romeo+Juliet.
It’s a mess-terpiece, like “The room” that is gonna be quoted for years as an example. I figure this is what atlas shrugged would look like if at the half part of the book Ayn Rand got sick so the editor had to hire a cosmopolitan feminist writer to finish the rest of the book.
I keep reading that the audience is laughing parts that are not meant to be funny but I think that the film is funny and almost all the parts that elicit laughs ( at least in the dialogue) are funny.
Agreed. It seems as if the first wave of reviewers were unaware of Farce. The movie is very funny - but in an artistic way. How did you like the film?!?!
I and a friend saw "Clockwork Orange" and were horrified. Then a group of acquaintances who had not seen it almost literally dragged us to see it again. Well, this time around my friend and I laughed our heads off - we thought it was hysterical. Our scandalized friends let us know that we were depraved monsters... We had a lot to talk about!
Coppola has no editorial control, he had none for a very long time. He can not write, does not know what to do, can not build a language that empowers him to experiment. Cronenberg is the same by now. So give up, understand that even good directors grow old, lose the little thread they ever had and mostly work on a retirement, even when, like this case, they expend everything they have on the thin deep obsession that they still have something to say. Francis Ford Coppola has nothing to say and most importantly he has no language with which to say it.
The acting style was rough, reminded me of Prince's movies (really go see Under the Cherry Moon)... but yea I really enjoyed it. I can see it becoming a cult classic.
I have to say - at first - the acting was off for me too, but as soon as I got it, I loved it. These are TOP Hollywood actors and just to be able to see them overact was immensely enjoyable for me. Glad it worked for you too. Best, -FSD
I have not seen this film yet but the references to the fall of Rome are interesting and important. Firstly in an historical sense there is a great deal we simply don't know about the fall of the Western Roman Empire. St Augustine is one of the very few people from that time we really know about as a full three dimensional character. The fall of the Empire was a highly complex process involving decades if not centuries. The attack on Rome in 410 did not destroy the Western Roman Empire like someone neatly felling a tree with one blow. There were at least nominal Western Emperors until 476. You also have to add to the equation that the Roman Empire in the East - the so called "Byzantine Empire" lasted on till the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Anybody stereotyping this Eastern Empire as just a load of decadent and effeminate Caesars and scheming Eunuchs and an institution locked in the past is carelessly doing it a grave disservice. So I think Megalopolis could be about the philosophical idea of the fall of Rome (with references to very traditional ideas of that Fall from very old historians like Gibbon) than it is about the reality. In reference to the USA - yes there is I think clear evidence of America declining - and moreover being eclipsed by powers like China. But this is also a highly complex and unrigid process and is not simply due to decadence and debauched behaviour. Or fundamentalism. The truth is far far more complex and I think the USA will probably remain a very important world player for some time to come. Cinema is not always the best medium to understand about the decline of Empires. Very often one has to do a great deal of reading and researching and talking to experts and even then if one is very lucky one only has the tip of the iceberg.
What's great about the film is that while the "fall of New Rome" is the backdrop it's very much a positive message that Coppola has for us. In order to save the future... we must NOW begin to talk about it. Amazing comment! Best, -FSD
@@FilmSchoolDadThank you Film School Dad for your very thoughtful comment. I think there is a very common human mental fallacy that if you don't treat a problem as a problem and ignore it then somehow it will disappear and cease to exist. This can cover situations like someone with toothache but it can also cover huge situations like the economy of a country or an empire needing urgent, difficult reforms in order to stop the process of its decline. This then poses the question who are the people without their heads in the sand and just because they recognise the problems when others don't are their solutions really any good? Considering the deeply flawed nature of us all it is clear (as Frank Herbert talks about in Dune) that hero worship and personality cults are a very very bad thing. What we need is team work, and a first among equals and that first among equals being mature enough to humbly listen to constructive criticism that is designed to help. Constructive criticism is the one thing all of us will always need. But these things are very very difficult.
The issues I have with this movie are the themes being bashed over your head or directly narrated to you, the length it could have had 20-40 mins off and would help pacing so much more, either focus on the dynamics of the government and family running/corrupting the city or have a true Greek comedy ending where the family dies by the true hubris of the main character since we already know he said he was cold and distant by his own admission, and ideally have more showing of the decisions of the present versus the future on display
What's most important is you saw the film for yourself and made up your own mind. This alone will keep cinema alive - albeit not monetarily, but artistically. Best, -FSD
Saw it today, and I loved it. Saw 2 people walk out and not come back, and when the movie was over and I looked at over people, they all seemed confused and angry. Don't get me wrong, i can completely understand why some don't like this movie, it's definitely not for everyone. But I really enjoyed the world, visuals, story, characters, and sets of this film. And many aspects of history, philosophy, and architecture this film takes is something I really appreciate, though I can see why people who aren't into those things will be bored watching, or they just don't like the story or characters.
Damn I liked the movie. I'm a little surprised by all the negativity. I don't want to be that guy, but I feel internet consensus convinced people to hate this movie. The people in my theater liked it at least (they were boomers lol). I was questioning myself at first but im going to die on this hill. The movie was great. If anything I thought the movie should have been longer.
It's funny because I would have watched another 30 minutes - easily. Glad you liked the movie and feel FREE to say so! ahaha so many people hate the movie to point I can't understand. BUT, hey... more for me. I can't wait to pick this on on physical when it comes out. Best, -FSD
As one of the people who asked (begged ;) to deliver the in-house question to Adam Driver in the middle of the movie I agree with you too! Having seen it 14 times as a result, it definitely holds up! It's an utterly brilliant and moving experience, that has made me revisit, and reevaluate, Coppola's whole movie-making career. Bravo Maestro! And shout-out to our local indie cinema in Toronto for committing to it for a full 2 weeks! (Interesting fyi: Once the audience gets beyond 50 or so, they loosen up and find more joy in the movie! Clapping/whooping... here's to Megalopolis finding its true audience over time!)
I think there's plenty of truth in their performances - while, I believe, it was Coppola aiming for farce. But - I need to rewatch this movie another 5 times to really get into it. I need this on physical but as of today it's only available to stream or download.
@FilmSchoolDad There is no farce anywhere in the movie and Coppola is definitely not aiming for it. I don't understand why you think that farce and a fable-a legend are the same thing.
@ my interpretation of the film is that Coppola used farce in his presentation. This review is merely MY interpretation of the film, how it spoke to ME, my first thoughts, emotions provoked, etc. The beautiful thing is that the film brought us together so we could discuss Art. That's what matters. It that we disagree... that we discourse in the first place is a WIN for film. Best, -FSD
They really set the mood too. There were NO trailers and they played the films score until the Q&A began. It was a really great way to screen a film and the film itself..... chefs kiss.
The film score in the beginning is called an “Overture” This is a common practice back in the cinema days in the 30s/40s/50s ( maybe even earlier or later) when epic film is being shown.
@@artemus80j.4 for example 2001: a space odyssey begins with a true overture - the MGM logo doesn't even appear before the overture starts. Amazing. Megalopolis didn't have an overture though. It was special music for the pre-show Q&A. But it made me wish we'd get more overtures these days. It was amazing.
@@FilmSchoolDad I totally agree with you on 2001 and that’s because Kubrick took overture to the next level just like how he took sci fi to the next level. In Ben Hur (1959) the overture is just an image of “ Hands of god” from Michelangelo “Sistine Chapel” with score in the background just like what we saw at the beginning of Megalopolis, still image of Cesar holding a T ruler with the score playing. The only difference is that Megalopolis doesn’t have the word “ overture “ on it so I guess it wasn’t really an overture. Lol
@@artemus80j.4 love the Ben-Hur reference. I think you're right. The overture felt very classic yet modern since it's been so long since the audience was treated so respectfully.
Megalopolis, the new film by director Francis Ford Coppola starring Adam Driver, Nathalie Emmanuel, Jon Voight, Shia labeouf, Aubrey Plaza and more is now playing everywhere and is best seen on IMAX. I review MEGALOPOLIS, the film, by renowned and infamous director, Francis Ford Coppola which is dividing audiences with its Avant Guard style and Shakespearean take on Modern America... I mean Modern Rome.
I was lucky enough to catch a special preview of the film presented by the New York Film Festival and Lincoln Center.
Enjoy the review.
Best,
-FSD
-----------------
My channel is SMALL, BUT that means that YOU CAN MAKE a BIG DIFFERENCE. Click below to SUBSCRIBE to MORE Film School Dad content.
THANK YOU!
www.youtube.com/@FilmSchoolDad/featured?sub_confirmation=1
**NEW**TENET Video Essay Is UP!!!
th-cam.com/video/YOBMtWnMs48/w-d-xo.html
For more Christopher Nolan NOW, check out THIS VIDEO Pondering if NOLAN's NEXT will be his BIGGEST MOVIE EVER...
th-cam.com/video/cqci-DXcmOsW/w-d-xo.htmlhich questions if Nolan's NEXT FILM will be his BIGGEST?
Or WHEN it may be ANNOUNCED...
Nolan's Next Movie ANNOUNCEMENT with INTERSTELLAR IMAX re-Release?
th-cam.com/video/9627Gq4O6Kg/w-d-xo.html
If you want to connect on Social Media and TALK MOVIES you can find me on twitter HERE: x.com/Film_School_Dad
Help support this Film School Dad buy picking up a Hoodie, T-Shirt or Mug
film-school-dad-store.myspreadshop.com
I think that Driver is not Coppola, I think Driver is Elon Musk-esque 4:30
art vs commodity vs commercialized art. people do no know the difference because they don't know what are is...ART is not open to interpretation art is for the artists displayed to the public. a commodity (creative commodity) is something creative created for the purpose of selling to the public....that IS open to interpretation. Megalopolis is commercialized art, it did not go through the normal commodification process (script rewrites) so it remains the artistic vision of the primary artist, but it was meant to be for public consumption therefore it leads itself to public interpretation but those interpretations are not open...they are closed...ultimately there is a right and wrong interpretation of the metaphors allusions similes etc but since it is commercialized, you have authority to say what it means to you , even state your opinion but ....unlike a commodity, no one cares.
@@waitaminutepause It's an excellent ART film that a good 20 - 30 of us really like.
Best,
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad that's what I am saying art true art, the opinion of the "consumer" doesn't matter because the art is not a commodity for consumption commercialized art gives you a small ticket to express your opinion but it your opinions are subjective to an objective truth still. What I am saying is your opinion good or bad is private. It doesn't matter. Unless you can save up 124 million of your own money and produce your own film with distribution to produce your own film.
@@waitaminutepause I'm sorry but I wholeheartedly disagree. OPINION is subjective and EVERYONE is entitled to one. You do not need millions of dollars to make your own movie in order to have an opinion. If that were true there would be no critics OR FANS of anything.
However - what is OBJECTIVE - is that a work IS Art, and therefore while all are entitled to their opinion - you and I included - the opinion IS INHERENTLY SUBJECTIVE - only having meaning to the specific viewer.
ART can be anything to anyone. Once the artist creates it and places it in the world it belongs to us all ( in however way we choose ).
Before I go - thank you for your comments. I truly enjoy talking about film as Art and whether or not we agree - a healthy debate IS what's it's all about.
Best,
-FSD
I’m going to put “a fable” at the end of my tax return so the IRS can’t judge it…
🤣
LOL
Convoluted explanations to convince us that we are just plebeians and incapable of discerning the genius in this masterpiece of the cinema isn't working.
We can see plainly that the emperor has no clothes.
I mean. It's an Art film. It's not the first. It's not the last. And it's by one of the greatest directors of cinema the world has ever known. So even if you dislike it that's alright.
Thank you for joining in our conversation as all opinions are welcome.
Best,
-FSD
@FilmSchoolDad
I appreciate your kind response to my comment. 👌That's classy, to be sure!
I will push back on your statement about this being an "art film." Shouldn't a film with that moniker be somewhat accessible to newer, genuinely interested film audiences?
If a film is soooo artistic and obtuse that only the rare, film school-educated person is able to enjoy it, then why lure the low-brow masses into paying to see it?
Maybe the director should have clarified who this movie was actually meant for. If the majority of the audience didn't understand (or even like) a film that cost 120 million dollars to make, then maybe it's unfair to blame the viewers for issues with it.
😆Thank you for reading my rambling comments!
@@kellycasperhanson4426 firstly - of course and you're welcome! I'm a VERY new channel and appreciate the passion whether positive or negative - because in the end I'm not a Megalopolis fan - I'm a film fan. I love movies and everything about them. Good, bad, weird, self indulgent, corny, funny, awful, frightening, educational. I just love movies.
That being said I don't think Art films need to be accessible. I think Art should merely be whatever the artist wanted to make. It's up to each of us to view the art and then make up our own minds about what it means TO us - not what it means. And there in lies the problem. So many people want to "understand" this film when it's much more about having an experience.
I'm a big experiential film lover. I'm one of the people who likes TENET as well... so maybe it's me 🤣
Best,
-FSD
@FilmSchoolDad
😊 It's been so nice to share comments with you! I appreciate your perspective on this film (and art films in general.)
Good luck on your channel!
@@FilmSchoolDadWow, how unusual to get such a kind response to a negative comment on your review! You have a new subscriber.
On my phone, Megalopolis’s special effects look decent, but on the big screen? Not so much, the green screen background made me and everyone in my theater laugh.
Favorite quote: So go back to the cluuuub
That's the best quote in the film, hands down.
Can you give me an example of a film with better green screen effects? Sure it’s noticeable at times but I could say that about every movie I’ve ever seen.
I think the people who are obsessed with rome and the fall of an empire will enjoy this film
Undoubtedly. I just hope others can cross the line and take a closer look at this film when it opens. An open mind goes a long way.
that is a GROSS oversimplification 🙏🏻
Megalopolis is a higly ambitious but shallow messed up craftpiece which prefers spectacle over story. Sadly, it has ended up becoming something it never was, is and will be.
Perhaps over all these years, Capolla might have retouched the original draft of screenplay so many times, that the final product turned out to be a laclustre ride rather than a unique cinematic triumph was it was actually intended to become.
It personally don't this project had a huge potential of becoming a magnum opus. However, while being highly engaging and enjoyable in few pirtions of the entire runtime, due to lack of clarity in the narrative and proper execution, it has very little shelf live and will not become remembered in the pop culture for the years to come.
At last, I appreciate Capella's perseverance that he stood tall against all the odds in making his dream project come to life.
Agreed! A singular vision against the will of the studios... Coppola gives us his mind.
I think it will quickly become a cult classic... "A Fable" is an important disclaimer... This movie is like a dream.. a bit random and haphazard. I don't mean to excuse away the flawed execution here, but it does work. I think with time, once people realize it is meant to be ancient Rome in a modern setting (like how the Met has set classical Operas in contemporary settings), will the fable make sense to people. Rome wasn't "woke" or insert your own modern interpretation here. , but it did have corruption, populism, a Senate that stopped governing, extreme factions, and powerful people each other to get more power. Feels like today, because that's the point, we are doing the same things that preceded the fall of Rome. We are in Pax Americana. I think this will get cult classic status very quickly for those who get it and are willing to look past the imperfections and narrative flaws in this film.
@@bigdreams5554 yes. Very dreamlike. Very fluid. Sometimes serious sometimes absurd. I see cult status, but I also wonder... we're days away from the film opening wide - maybe people will come out and give the movie a chance.
There's so much boring regurgitated sameness out there and it's exciting to see a SINGULAR vision.
@@FilmSchoolDadyes there is sameness in todays offerings…i may get tired of eating burgers everyday…but don’t try to tell me i should enjoy oyster soaked in ketchup and cheese just because at least it’s different… give me something different and good. I actually give more props to the film than most but it seems that there are those that want to raise it up lofty heights almost as a counter narrative to what others are saying instead of just on the films own merit.
@@istherenooneleftgreat analogy. Exactly what I was thinking.
Even if it's a train wreck, I'm planning on seeing it in my town when it opens here this week. Trying to get my son to go with me. We went to see Babylon a couple years back when virtually no one else did because I like to support ambitious artistic attempts, even if they wholly or partially fail, simply because they are trying to do something different than the usual franchise crap. A movie that's 20 percent edifying is better than the average brain-dead formulaic borefest.
100% it's always worth the effort to see and support a film that TRYS.
This film made Babylon look like an Oscar winner lol
@@robzap8874 I still need to catch Babylon
I really loved Babylon. This is what Megalopolis lacked, the dark underground world that hid under glamorous societt
It feels like people are quick to judge the movie as trash rather than face the fact that they were either confused or a lot of it went of their heads. It doesnt even take great knowledge of greek art/philosophy to understand the characters largely speak metaphorically
I hear you. And I also think it's OK people don't get the movie. There are plenty of high art films that just don't work for me either. This one just really HIT for me, happily.
But I do think there's a lot of jumping on the hate bandwagon going on.
Best
-FSD
People feel insulted by films that, in any capacity, asks them to actively engage in it instead just passively flitting past their dull eyes.
@ Agree.
Counter point: I saw Megalopolis this night and it was TOO ambitious, too unfocused, and made two to three decades too late.
There is one good idea in Megalopolis and it's portraying Roman history in a modern setting. Unfortunately that got buried in so much... Stuff.
Bummed the film didn't click with you but I DO think it's great that you went out and saw it for yourself and made up your own mind.
That's what's it's all about.
Best,
-FSD
I fully agree with you.
I agree with you, it feels like the author making rookie mistakes
Agreed- and Coppola thought about it for too long and spent too much money on it. It also would have been better with less CGI effects and better dialogue. It seems like the whole essence of the film was to purposely camp it up, which detracted from the implied philosophical intent. He's a master filmmaker, sadly this one failed.
Is this review written by AI lol?
No 🤣 it's written by me. I wrote it at 1am the night I watched the film and I produced this entire review within 22hrs. I'm a real human. Beep beep boop beep.
Acudí con las expectativas muy bajas tras las críticas tan malas que leí y...me gustó bastante. Creo que la gente no está entiendo la película. Enhorabuena por el canal. Saludos desde España
Obviously not, the best review of the movie there is
@@YourBestMate64 No, you're the best!
🤣
@@dosentradascentraditas Thank you so much, and HELLO from the USA! I'm glad you liked the movie and saw it for. yourself!
Best,
-FSD
I also love Megalopolis! It is a beautiful, brilliant, crazy, flawed and ambitious achievement. There are some very gorgeous scenes and fascinating moments, while some objectively terrible scenes at the same time. And I’m glad that Nathalie Emmanuael’s performance is getting praised by somebody. She gives a subtle and believable performance that brings everything to a sense of believability and reality. And you’re right, she’s basically the audience who isn’t sure that Adam Driver’s character is a hero or villain. Adam Drive and Aubrey Plaza are also excellent. I think the only weak performance was from Jon Voight, but even he has his moments. Shia is also very entertaining, and Giancarlo Esposito is also great. I give this film an 8.5/10. It’s definitely one of the best films of 2024 so far.
Definitely a top '24 film. Agreed.
I did love seeing Voight again though. I think of all the characters, his worked well for how ridiculous he went with it. It may be his last on screen performance and I say: what I way to go out.
@@FilmSchoolDad - I agree, Voight seemed to know what kind of crazy film he’s in. But I think Shia went even further with the craziness! Lol
@@Transformers217 It's his best work since "Holes".
@@FilmSchoolDad - I think it’s his best since Nymphomaniac.
@@Transformers217 that one is on my list, but I haven't seen it yet. Without spoilers, what's the draw of that movie?
I just watched megalopolis and was so enthralled. Its December and id say was one of if not the most inspiring films i've seen. i'm so so surprised that its not as popular as I thought it would be. i'm shocked. I don't understand how everyone didn't thoroughly enjoy watching it. what a trip.
It feels like this rare gem that only a few can appreciate. I sound like such a jerk when I talk like that but I don't know how else to describe it. I thought the movie was really special.
Art doesn't make something have value
I think it does. But of course value can be different for different people. 100 dollars may be a lot of money to some - and meaningless to others. Value as art - is in the eye of the beholder.
Art is art.
Have a great day! Thanks for watching!
-FSD
@@carlosalegria4776 Apocalypse Now, Dr. Zhivago, Citizen Kane- those are masterpieces. Megalopolis is just bad filmmaking.
@@carlosalegria4776 lol literally nobody has said it's a masterpiece. If nobody, literally nobody, "values" it, then it has no value.
@@HappyHighwayman i say that its a masterpiece, now what?
@@lizze490 a lot of people label pretentious art that they do not understand
Jesus, what a smug review
I absolutely loved the film.
im gonna copy and paste here what i wrote on lettrdbox at 2 am after getting out of the theater at 12:
really i think one of the best movies to come out in the past ten years, definitely in terms of American film. No movie ive seen made me cry as much, at first the blatant and almost cartoonish use of roman imagery/dress/language seemed a bit jarring, but it allowed for a symbolic setting.
fantasy, or fable is best served in the symbolic setting, it's a symbolic endeavor to deal with archetypal fortunes. coppola makes the parallel clear in the first scene, in carved stone. he gives us a reason for this mish-mash nyc, and shows us the little things in outlandish ways, because the little things really aren't that little, we just are used to seeing them in a more familiar setting.
I've never read the fountainhead, but I'm pretty sure this is it. caesar is at least an architect, and isn't the one in rand’s book a megalomaniac - or accused of being one? (maybe he isn't, maybe he’s nuanced, but i didn't read it, so idk) whether caesar is one in the film is of course up to the observer, like any art. I think that in a way he is, but not superficially, hes not a flamboyant narcissist, hes obviously very self-aware - but the fact is that the world revolves around him, he controls time with his desire, at his will - that is being at the center of the universe. In this role he is alchemist, he transforms his pain into a new substance with particles seems to bend to his will.
There are whispers through-out the film that this substance was made from his wife's dead body or his hair. His wife, that he drove to suicide by lacking a true moral code, perpetuated by unsubstantiated self. She comes to him in visions, and is projected onto the substance (i gotta look up what this was called i forgot, ‘megalon’ maybe?) i really want to write a whole bunch on the jungian analysis on that part of the film and its depictions of anima and animus, and the anima's representation of creativity and life. but that's kinda unnecessary for letterbox, this whole review is kinda out of hand. I will probably just save it to tell people in person.
People say this movie was a vanity project, it was auteur in a sense. It tells a deeply personal story, of self realization. It feels like its a call to arms for artists, which would make sense for coppola, as an artist, to give as a final message to inspire others to take on an artistic transformative role in society. Its a story of personal transformation and self actualization - and the gifts that are bestowed and created in return.
Last notes: i like the slightly gaudy aesthetics and feeling of the film, very terry gillam feeling.
Also a very funny movie
And im really not doing this meme or anything, its a really beautiful movie that covers an entire scope of self, and therefore is not really a reflection of society but of man. Its the story of the magician, of the christ, the hero, the actualized man.
i feel so happy to have found a review that's closer to a real analysis and not weird rejection or superficial reading
I read your review a few times. I like it a lot. Well thought out and communicated.
I like your explanation of the film as a "call to arms" for artists. As I've been diving back into Coppola's work it's obvious he was always an artist. Godfather Part 2 and Apocalypse Now are so much more fluid and dreamlike than I had remembered. You can see the seeds of his avant-"garden" spouting - but with Megalapolis he finally just let go of all restraint and made a true work of art.
I think categorizing as Art over strictly being a movie is required. Similar to 2001 - which not a strictly Sci-fi film... it is more a kin to viewing a painting at a museum. And I appreciate the difference. Seems you do too!!!
Thank you for sharing!
Best,
-FSD
Thank you. My channel will always focus more on how movies make me ( and others ) FEEL. I believe seeing a movie can and should be an experience. I like to focus on the experience itself over all the technical aspects. In the end, as a piece of art - how does that creative work speak to you/me, etc.
Much appreciated for the kind words.
Best,
-FSD
Agreed, it's a breath of fresh air.
I thought it was brilliant. Coppola made excellent use of all the actors apart from James Remar where was he? Adam Driver was a force of nature & Audrey Plaza was on top form. Lots of references, still thinking about this movie 2 days later. REAL THOUGHT PROVOKING STUFF.
It's funny that this is the most disliked review, yet it's the closest one to the truth.
People who aren't used to theatre would be unused to what the movie is doing.
Imagine being this wrong lmao
I saw it last night .. was "sublime". Had flawed execution, a bit too abstract , tonally inconsistent... But interesting concepts. Something to talk about. In a world where most people are fine watching explosions and pretty colors on their phones, this is the polar opposite... Abstract yet heavy handed, self serious, yet comical... A film of contradictions and amazing potential. But like Icarus, flew too close to The Room and gives off Wiseau vibes at times... In a decadent way, just like ancoent Rome itself
Interesting final point that you made. In the film Cesar is as decant as the elite he so despises... And his character is a conduit to Coppola - so you're saying Coppola is a decadent as WE.?!?
I dig it.
If you are criticizing the lack of a clean, linear narrative, the tendency for the film to start and stop plot threads, you are not engaging with the film on its own terms. Megalopolis, and basically all of Coppola’s classics, is episodic, a series of meditations.
And yes, my screening had the in-theater performance portion of the film.
Nice! The experience was really interesting and over too soon if you ask me.
And I agree about Megalopolis being a meditation. Do you have to know what happened in the movie to understand the movie? I don't think you do. I think if you focused on the plot you missed the SECRET movie happening behind the frames.
Man. I dug this move.
@@FilmSchoolDad The thing that kills me is people who say, “The film poses questions but has no answers.” That’s … sort of the point. Cesar Catalina says a few times that the questions are the point because the questions initiate debate, and the debate happens outside the movie. It actually occurred to me now that the in-theater performance is a clue that what happens on screen is as important as what’s happening in the theater, and that’s the film passing the debate over to the audience.
Good Theatre and Good Cinema is about asking difficult questions. That is what Shakespeare did all time. Bad theatre and cinema is about spooning out answers.
"Great art shouldn't give you the answer. It should make you ask the question." - me
@@richardrickford3028 100% million%! Yes. Agree!
Despite all the slating that's happened, I've still remained curious to see it and your take is really helpful so thank you - I'll definately see it
I'm glad I could help. That really was the point of my review. Hopefully letting other film fans know the movie truly is NOT what they're all saying.
Go in with an open mind and you won't be let down.
It's weird. It's fun. It's different. It's Art.
Best,
-FSD
I just put here what I wrote for IMDB: "Megalopolis is another ambitious movie by Coppola, and probably the last one. So it is kind of a testament he passes for the younger generations, and a bold statement. His alter-ego is Cesar Catalina (performed by Adam Driver), a visionary that wants to change the future of the city, just like Coppolla did do about Cinema. Inspired by utopic artists from the XX century that imagined different ways to make cities, Coppola takes it to the next level. Several characters will appear that will try to undermine Cesar's vision, with the exception of Julia that becomes in love with Cesar. So it is also a love story. The narrative is linear, but with a delivery closer to theatre, breaking away from from realism echoeing the likes of directors such as Manoel de Oliveira or Felinni. There are shadows of past movies. The ending recalls a lot the ending of "The Cotton Club", yet another masterpiece. And off course, it is impossible not to remember "One from the heart", another masterpiece and an elegy to artistic vision. "Megalopolis" is a fable, very human, but also epic and a message for a better future. Probably what we all miss is utopia after all. Utopia at least let's people dream and desire for a better tomorrow." This is my take on this movie. A piece of Art indeed.
@@MrPunkbeto thank you so much for that thoughtful contribution!
Best,
-FSD
Thank for the review. In regard to humor and farce, a friend and I saw "Clockwork Orange" and were horrified. Then a group of acquaintances who had not seen it almost literally dragged us to see it again. Well, this time around my friend and I laughed our heads off - we thought it was hysterical. Our scandalized friends let us know that we were depraved monsters... We had a lot to talk about!
This is the first review that makes me want to see this film.
I'm surprised so many reviewers were so hard on it. I think - maybe - some "more seasoned" TH-cam movie reviewers want to please their audience and assume many mainstream movie goers aren't looking to be provoked - but instead... fed candy.
And listen. I LOVE candy. I love marvel. I love Chris Nolan. I enjoy ALL aspects of the cinema. I love it all, I really do. And that's WHY I'm so happy this movie exists. Because it only adds to my library now. Here's a new edition of a movie I want to watch again and add my collection. That's a win!
As for Clockwork Orange I think it's a great example and comparison.
Best,
-FSD
Thank you. A very insightfull and clearminded reviewfrom.
Why is it that every time someone makes a self-indulgent movie that isn't as deep as they would like to have you believe someone defends it with "audiences don't deserve this instant classic?" We've been given modern directors that pushed the envelope far more that Coppola has in the last 30 years. I think most deserve a bit more respect and leeway than that tired film critic argument.
@@roberttaylor9259 the movie is a beautiful work of art in my eyes.
@@FilmSchoolDad and I think that's a very valid point of view. I intend to see it despite my opinion that we don't need any more love letters to Ayn Rand. I just don't like the argument that the audience is some how inferior if they don't like or don't understand more arthouse films. I don't think anyone would argue that it's lofty and aspirational but it's hard say anyone who doesn't like this (or the numerous other movies that this argument has been pinned to) that they are somehow intellectually deficient. I say this as someone who has heard time and time again since the dawn of movie discussions when a critics chides someone with "well you just didn't get it." I have loved some really esoteric films and hated some equally. I like the popcorn summer blockbusters just as much as anyone but I just wish that particular argument would just fade away. When you make a $100 million dollar movie with another $100 million ad campaign you cannot expect an arthouse film to make back a budget of a marvel movie. Ridley Scott just challenged that and lost with the Last Duel, ironically another Driver piece. I just know the same thing is going to happen and we're going to hear more of bemoaning of the younger generation and lack of attention span as opposed to...was this the right film, for the right price, for the right time.
@@roberttaylor9259 I agree that no one SHOULD be saying that anyone is "less than" for not understanding the film. If you rewatch my review I in no way say that anyone is unintelligent or less than me for not getting it - only that I DO GET IT. That's all.
I want to give the other side of the argument. Here's a self financed art project that's being derailed at every turn. Let's let the film speak for itself is all I ask.
There are SO MANY art house films that I abhor to be honest. Since my early twenties I have, less and less, fallen in love with Avant Guard films. But this one just spoke to me.
I will defend my one comment in the video arguing that anyone who says this film is Equal to the THE ROOM - they don't understand the differences. But that is true and I stand by that. The room was a mistaken cult classic. This film is quite intentional - weather good or bad.
Hey ! thanks so much for engaging with me on this. Whether or not you like the film, I'm glad you'll go see it for yourself.
Best,
-FSD
I feel the author of this video is trolling us, ( and thinking it's being controversial and artsy)
Nope. Just super passionate about movies I like. Have a great one. Thanks for stopping by!!! Legit.
Best,
-FSD
Just saw the movie.... what do you think the megalon material and ability to stop time are metaphors to?
Coppola mentioned, during the Q&A, that he believes humanity is actively being held back from our true potential. I believe Driver's character - representing progress - has these abilities to showcase that we ALL are more special than we realize and have the ability to make this world a better place if we were to have an open mind.
@@FilmSchoolDad like a Barbie heh
Megalopolis is bad. It doesn’t even pretend hard enough to look like art.
Tell me more.
I loved Megolopolis. The way it had elements of theater and old silent movies was beautiful.
Whenever movies try to tackle big themes, it's easy for audiences to be confused, as in life, theres never clear-cut answers. How do we solve problems when people are so stubborn about the status quo?
I need to watch it again, but it does blow my mind how people are confused or bored by it. Great review! I agree whole heartidly
@@LanaTiikpuu thank you. This will go down as the most misunderstood film of the decade in my opinion.
Like you said at the beginning of your video, this film is a work of art! Pure and simple, it is magnificent! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on it. I will be watching it over and over again.
Lucky us, it's out on VOD, but really I want to own it on physical. This feels like a movie that may have a tough time finding a printer, but I bet FFC will make sure to get it out there.
Looking forward to my rewatches as well.
Best,
-FSD
I’ve seen MEGALOPOLIS twice. I walked-or, more accurately, bounded-out of the theater after the first time, smiling. After the second, having loved it even more, I knew it was well on its way to being a favorite. (I’ve pre-ordered the 4K UHD disc. Can’t wait.)
What is the film for me? It’s Francis’s heartfelt, apologetic, and urgent letter to his wife Eleanor written in a cinematic love language shared between them. She was his anchor, keeping him from drifting into the rocks during his stormiest times. He’s apologetic because he often thanked her by cheating and otherwise treating her badly. It’s urgent because, after spending decades trying and failing to put these thoughts into words and images, he, like Cesar, was running out of time. Eleanor’s health was failing.
True, the film often feels rushed, half finished, as if his infamous rehearsal improvs were adopted as finished scenes, or as if he grew impatient with special effects pros and decided to go DIY. (I love the handmade feel of the visuals. They’re very ONE FROM THE HEART. And I’ve always been a fan of improvised moments such as the make-believe tug-of-war between Cesar and Julia.) His hurry was to make sure Eleanor got a chance to see it before passing away. Her reaction, “Francis. You did it!”
I imagine that shared moment, knowing she understood and appreciated his gesture, was worth his every last dime to him. You could say that, just as TWIXT was an entire movie dreamed up to hold one amazing shot expressing his pain over the loss of his son and his casting of his daughter Sofia in THE GODFATHER PART III was a means to send himself, through Michael Corleone, a warning about sacrificing his family for his business, MEGALOPOLIS is an elaborate film designed to hold a dedication to his wife.
I don’t think I’m off base:
Coppola has often and obviously used his characters as avatars. Michael Corleone, Harry Caul, Willard, Hank, Rusty James, Peggy Sue’s husband Charlie, Preston Tucker, Dracula, Jack, and now Cesar are all thinly disguised versions of Francis.
As described in the recent Sam Wasson quasi-biography THE PATH TO PARADISE, Coppola’s career arc began with experimental films like THE RAIN PEOPLE until financial failure forced him to play in the Hollywood sandbox with the GODFATHER films. Things got out of hand, though, almost destroying him during the making of APOCALYPSE NOW. He recovered, forever changed, and learned to chase his dreams with ONE FROM THE HEART leading to RUMBLE FISH, TUCKER: THE MAN AND HIS DREAM, his deeply personal and lovely trilogy about writers trying to complete their masterwork consisting of YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH, TETRO, and TWIXT, and finally completing his own, to him at least, greatest work, MEGALOPOLIS.
As told by Eleanor in her published journals, most famously for APOCALYPSE NOW, she was there through all of it and much of it was hellish. It was an ongoing tug-of-war. Stay with him or take the kids and leave. Her avatar is Julia. And MEGALOPOLIS is an allegory of their bumpy journey together. Early dreams of utopia that Cesar shares with Julia (but that she can only see if she closes her eyes because they are still but mere dreams). Efforts to gradually realize his vision within the rules of New Rome, one demolished building replaced with Megalon at a time. Things getting out of hand to the point of nearly destroying him during Wow’s wedding. With Julia’s encouragement, Cesar learning to follow his heart amongst hanging girders (yep, that lovely scene is ONE FROM THE HEART). His relationship with Julia blossoming and the film (after getting stuck and burning up in the projector gate) flowering as well into something different, almost Abel Gance-like with triple split screens, superimpositions, irises, and gorgeous, unabashedly old-fashioned matte paintings reminiscent of METROPOLIS and THINGS TO COME. The film ends with sentimental, optimistic hopefulness with New Rome and its horrors forgotten. (I think the naiveté is intentional. Coppola battling cynicism. He wears his political leanings beyond his sleeve.)
Finally, I think MEGALOPOLIS is about Francis and Eleanor’s complicated relationship because many of the films Coppola has listed as influences are about just that. PYGMALION, THE RED SHOES, CEASAR AND CLEOPATRA, CITIZEN KANE, EYES WIDE SHUT, and BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (1946), the last two being explicitly about marriage, one jealous, the other sacred. While Julia begins to fall for Cesar after closing her eyes and sharing in his vision and their relationship is consummated while kissing on a hanging girder, their relationship begins during a now oft-quoted scene. All I need say is “CLUUUUUB.” Memes seldom acknowledge, though, that the scene is quite interesting, even pivotal. The dialog is lifted, barely modified, from THE RED SHOES and PYGMALION and Julia enters Cesar’s office cloaked like Belle when she first meets the Beast in Cocteau’s masterpiece. And Cesar’s dismissal of Julia turns to fascination when she brings up T-symmetry, wondering if time reversal is possible.
Just as Cesar would love to travel back in time (like Peggy Sue forging a different marriage with Charlie in PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED) to when dreams of utopia hadn’t been laughed out of society to be replaced by expectations of dystopia, THINGS TO COME pushed aside by BLADERUNNER, something he begins to realize with Julia’s help, Francis wishes he could turn back the clock and experience the film career he originally desired. One where THE RAIN PEOPLE and THX 1138 were successful, his original American Zoetrope studio in San Francisco became the home base of his dreams, THE CONVERSATION still became THE CONVERSATION, APOCALYPSE NOW was directed by George Lucas, and TUCKER: THE MAN AND HIS DREAM was a musical. And, more than anything, one where he spent more time with his kids and Eleanor.
Thank you so much for sharing these thoughts, initial and secondary reactions and thoughts connecting Coppola to his work.
Best,
-FSD
I really liked the vision behind megalopolis in the movie! The thing that drove Cesar Catilina, the ambition, I really liked that perspective!
Thank you for a fascinating review. I hadn’t planned on seeing it, due to all the negative reviews. I’ll definitely go see it in the theater now, as I want to judge it for myself, and I, too, like to support artists of every kind.
Thanks for your kind words. Happily, It's still playing in SOME theaters, and if you enjoy the movie and it was because you found my ONE good review of the film then my work here is done.
Best,
-FSD
Nice to see a positive review for a change
I saw it (in an empty theater) and liked it. I'm a student of Roman history and Cicero is one of my heroes, especially in his fight against Catiline's coup; Mayor Frank Cicero even recites the beginning of the real's Cicero's first Catiline speech. And Cicero opposed Caesar. But Coppola resolved the conflict well. Cesar is a cross between architect Howard Roark and miracle-material inventor Hank Rearden with an Ayn Rand-type speech thrown in. But Cesar is a very mixed individual. So Coppola gives us valid arguments from both Cicero and Cesar.
I’m a scifi fan but I can see how Cesar stopping time is confusing. Was it all in his head, like him imagining his dead wife still alive?
If I recall correctly, Cesar offers family as a central value. As a half Italian I appreciate that perspective. And the new baby helps bring Cicero and Cesar together. I, as a baby, performed just that function. My Italian immigrant Catholic peasant grandparents did not approve of my mom marrying a non-Italian Protestant. But when I came along, and because my dad was an honest, stand-up guy, always helpful to my grandparents, I only remember love within our families. I hope viewers can appreciate that crucial point in the film. And I need to see it again!
thank you so much for that wonderful addition to our conversation. I think your perspective is very interesting and some of the history you mentioned above may help other viewers understand a bit more.
Best,
-FSD
Love the review and the movie. I wouldn't call it his best and I think it is objectively flawed but the good is more than worth it
It's a bit of a muddled mess, but I like Aubrey as much that I'll give it another look eventually.
Rather: Aubrey as Wow so much.
I thought she was amazing, as always and I, too look forward to my next viewing.
I love weird movies and deep abstract concepts. I can't remember the last time I was so inspired by a vision and simultaneously I have never ever been so disappointed by wasted potential. It's so full of ideas but doesn't find the time to explore them in details, ground them in reality and deal with the consequences making it feel superficial and hollow. The whole film feels like a nonsensical collage of trailers for at least 3 seasons of an epic philosophical show.
Coppla wanted to make an abstract painting as his last film gotta respect him as an artist for doing what he wanted and following his own creativity nobody wants to repeat themselves. Cant imagine the temptation to just make godfather sequels and tv shows must have been tempting to lay on past successes but Coppla was never that kinda guy.
100%
he’s planning on doing another film
@@paulelroy6650 planning is key word it took a decade to get off the ground. Might not be around long enough at his age
I'm with you, I loved the film, though it is clearly not for everyone and is going to bomb hard. Nonetheless, I'm so glad it exists
I am a little worried about the box office - because for more Art to be financed ( I know he self financed this ) there need to be examples. Oppenheimer was a great example last year of Art pushing through. Dune part two balanced Art and the blockbuster format well. Now it's time to see if audiences are tired of the same old thing. Even TV isn't what it was 10 years ago. Prestige TV is hanging on for dear life. Can this save cinema? No. But it's a step in the right direction.
Best!!!
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad Agreed!
I agree, the fact that most people are not familiar with Roman history, culture, theatre, customs is an issue. You need to be familiar with this because the movie makes a LOT more sense with this context. There was a time when people were educated in the classics.... Those people would totally get it...
I know what you mean. I do think there is a certain amount of Shakespeare and world history that one must first acquire to be able to better enjoy the film. I lucked out. Already had some. 😎
Oh now I have to do homework before watching a movie? Cool...
@@meciocio 🤣 no. But... maybe?
Just because you know Shakespeare, Roman history, metropolis, or any classic art does not help this movie. It makes it seem even more obvious and weakly scripted. It's a barrage of ideas any high-school student can piece together to create a story.
@@afrocut I have to disagree. Because its easy to say "anyone" could have done it - but no one has... He did. So it exists. That is all.
Stinks the film didn't land for you but that's ok. I dug it. Obviously. But I don't like every movie and I bet neither do you.
All good. Movies still rock.
Best,
-FSD
Megalopolis is the most boring, dull, drawn out, meandering, and badly written movie I've ever seen. Film school and art students will no doubt bore everyone about its many layers that only they can unravel. Everyone else will see through it for the pile of garbage it really is.
Hey. You're a million percent entitled to your opinion.
Side note: all the film/art students who are inspired by the movie... may someday make something you really like. Who knows?
Thank you for sharing your opinion.
Best,
-FSD
Oh yeah- wait- here's one film school alum who agrees with you 💯, it's horrible. I wanted to like it so badly, especially after some negative reviews but instead kept falling asleep and rejoiced when it was over.
@@lizze490 well hey, at least your got some rest ❤️
Best,
-FSD
I am so happy that you understand the movie!! Or at least, I agree with you completely!
Let me begin by saying I am a huge fan of Mr. Francis Ford Coppola. I honestly believe that in the top ten greatest motion pictures ever made, Mr. Coppola has three. The Godfather, The Godfather Part II and Apocalypse Now. Personally, I believe The Godfather and The Godfather Part II to be tied at number 1.
Having said that, I also believe that Mr. Coppola hasn't made a truly great film since the 70s. Rumble Fish was a very good film, Dracula was good, The Cotton Club Encore was good and Tetro was the closest he came to greatness in the latter part of his career.
Even before the 70s, The Rain People was very good, but not a great film for Mr. Coppola. So that brings me to the topic of Megalopolis. A film 45 years in the making. Before it was filmed, when the cast was announced and it was confirmed to be going into production, I made a prediction to myself that this would be the first great film by Francis since the 70s.
In my scoring system, a great film begins at 91/100, a great great film is 94 though 96, a masterpiece is 97 and above, and of course, a 100 is a perfect masterpiece film. Coppola has three perfect 100 masterpieces by my estimation.
So, my thoughts leading up to Megalopolis was I thought Francis would have a chance to hit that 91 mark, but probably nothing higher. Then Cannes came around and the reviews were anything but flattering. So, I thought either A), Francis is way past his best and created a really bad film or B), which I was hoping and leaning towards, that critics these days mostly know NOT what the hell they are talking about. Most critics these days are afraid to voice a real opinion. There is a lot of WOKE garbage and anything out of the norm is immediately going to be panned.
So I saw Megalopolis tonight with high hopes, but relatively low expectations. I was, honestly, sincerely and TOTALLY blown away. I shit you not. I give Megalopolis a perfect 100 score! The film I saw is one of the top 30 or so greatest motion pictures ever and a real cinematic achievement. The story was great! The acting was marvelous in a kind of 1989 Batman sort of way. The cinematography was beautiful and psychedelic. The closest thing I could find to a criticism was maybe it doesn't possess that one, iconic line that will be repeated forever, but so what?! A lot of films are iconic, but not great.
As far as I'm concerned, this film is perfection and I am so happy for Francis Ford Coppola. He sold a large piece of his winery, he took a real chance on himself and it paid off. Yeah, he may not make his budget back and a lot of people are shitting on the film, but I believe he is happy with it and I know for certain that I couldn't be more pleased with it.
Much like how the main character, Cesar Catalina, successfully created the city of Megalopolis, Mr. Coppola created this masterpiece film Megalopolis. Way to go, Francis! Congratulations! Thank you, sir for your contribution to this great art form that we all love. You are one of the absolute greatest filmmakers to ever live.
I went in to the theatre exactly the same as you. I was hopeful but cautious. I had zero expectations and figured I'd either enjoy the "huge mess of a film" or be delighted if it were good. I definitely didn't think I'd love it as much as I do. It's been so long since I saw a mainstream avant-garde film... "Brazil" maybe.
And yes, I do think many reviewers are either fans of film but unstudied or just want to agree with the bandwagon for views. Had I said this movie was bad this video may have more views 🤣 but instead the movie was sublime. I loved it and can't wait to see it again.
Best!
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad Awesome! And you mentioned Brazil. That is another magnificent and unique motion picture that is near and dear to my heart. Thanks for the great review! Keep doing your thing.
Really incredible experience. Sure, you could say not every aspect "worked", but the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This is big budget film making unrestrained by commercial interests, a glimpse at Hollywood production as personal expression! A triumph of the human mind and spirit!
I am your 500th subscriber
And you ROCK!!!!!!! Thanks for being number 500!*!*!*!*!*!
i'm debating whether to see this when it comes to my local cinema this friday...visually it looks amazing but idk if the story is for me or not
I wouldn't focus on the "story" per se. The movie takes place between the words and images. Go in without expectations and you may be pleasantly surprised.
@@FilmSchoolDad sir yes sir
@@ezekiasound just some helpful advice so you don't fall prey to so many others unmet "expectations" 🤣
@@FilmSchoolDad just got around to watching it as i wasn't able to see it when it did come to my cinema! i wouldn't say it's bad but it really does feel like 40 years worth of ideas crammed into 2 hours. would have much better if the plot was more simplified/had less stuff. the ideas were there but the execution wasn't. loved the visuals tho
so go back to the cluuuuub
Although I didn’t liked the film (for me is a 51/100) but this review is awesome man. Keep going!
Hey, very kind of you to say. I just love movies and I appreciate your positive remarks even while we may disagree. That's what it's all about.
Come back Anytime!
Best,
-FSD
I went with low expectations and loved it. Ive been reading about cicero recently so that helped- but ive also always loved coppolas ethos and spirit that come accross in his interviews- i feel like this movie is the apotheosis of his career- bringing together all the themes and ideas hes been exploring in his life and movies. Looking forward to seeing it again
I have to agree in many points with you. I was completely blown away by the movie. And like you, I desperately have to see it again: to understand more and to feel the experience again. This movie isn't realistic and doesn't try to be. I also cannot understand the people who found its narrative hard to follow. I mean sure it isn't as clear cut as the typical blockbuster, but I just let the movie take me where it wants and I had no problems understanding the narrative. Still there are many themes for which I need to rewatch the movie to get a better picture.
And I say all of this, having seen no other movie by Francis Ford Coppola and just engaging with the movie on its terms.
Ive been going back through his greatest works and having re-watched after seeing Megalopolis they play very differently to me. I see the artist was always there and his dissolves are pure magic....
Love the review. Mastpiece cinema. Unforgettable.
Thanks!!!! Much appreciated.
That was my feeling as well : although it has some faults (a bit too on the noze at times I felt, especially when underlining metaphors), this was a good movie. However it required some basic culture in both cinema and in late Roman Republic.
I think the issue is with human world modelling and expectations. We want some amount of novelty, but within a predictable and well established framework. The story of the film must exist within the stories we tell ourselves about film itself. When something truly novel and new comes along, we attack it like white blood cells attacking a pathogen, it irritates people, it causes cognitive dissonance. Films like Southland Tales and Enter The Void are good examples.
This is a “pretentious” sounding idea, but it takes a certain amount of intelligence and creativity to not be annoyed by that which is different, it requires a brain capable of reinterpreting reality on the fly, and adjusting our world models and narrative frameworks. One of the most consistent critiques of media that I hear these days is- “why isn’t it just more like everything else?!!” We have so many rigid rules and conventions that we defend and uphold to the point of banal creative homogeneity.
I’ve not seen this film, I may hate it, but I’m sure that many people are simply annoyed that it’s not playing by the “rules”
@@FigmentHF you're not wrong 🏆
I hope you get the opportunity to check it it for yourself because I do think it's a very interesting epilogue to Coppola's career. I'm re-watching his earlier work right now for fun and it's really not so surprising when watching Apocalypse Now and Godfather 2 even though they're SO different in terms of tone and style.
Thanks for contributing to the conversation.
Best,
-FSD
No, it's bad.
I went tosee it just because it looked so weird and out of place in this day of modern movies and I wasn't disappointed. Its definitely a weird art film and visually just so stunning and wonderful to look at. So many wonderful concepts and I loved how he chose a sort of modern 1950s art Deco styling for it. Its got Modern Rome and Shakespeare elements stacked on old school 1950s noir and classic drama. I think there so many different elements that hes pulling from that it may overwhelm most peopleor completely go over there heads. You should definitely watch this one more than once just to fully enjoy it and to soak up all the different levels of brilliance going on here
100% very layered with decades of film language and history coursing through its veins. Looking forward to deconstructing it over multiple viewings.
Is this movie as good and deep as Cloud Atlas?
The book or the film?
I haven't read the book and I maybe possibly could have but am not sure if I did see the movie.
And to answer your question...
It is equal.
Because Art.
Best,
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad Thank you.
I think if people were to go back watch The Spirit and Romeo+ Juliet from the 90s as a way to kind of prep themselves to see this movie more people might get it or be more wikling to see it or grasp some of the choices made here. Its highly stylized and the dialogue isnt something most people are use to hearing on a regular basis but if you get it and you get why it works. It just works.
oh oh... This is the new pretentious TH-camrs, "it's too smart for you," isn't it?
I sure hope so! Tenet was getting old. Guess I'll mov(i)e on 🤣
It probably is too smart for typical viewers. It will never make back its budget for that reason. But that’s ok: Coppola goes out with a bang.
A lot of art is. Many modern audiences would hate old classic films that were celebrated. Audiences have been dumbed down by movies begging for them to like them for so long, they’ve forgotten how to watch something truly different.
@@maxcalder1010 They didn’t like “truly different” back then, either. Common tastes are always common.
This comment thread is even more pretentiously cringey than the video itself (and that saying a lot)! 😆
I agree that we are bad and that is why i'm happy to know that at least aliens enjoy this
Honestly loved the film. It’s abstract art, but if you enjoy abstract art like I do you’ll love it. It’s a farce, social commentary about generational conflict over the passing on of responsibility, and Coppola’s views on our world/life/ and a vision of the future wrapped up in a surreal love story. So many cool camera effects and tricks that were masterfully done by Roman Coppola, who did the same on Dracula. I was ready for the film to be bad after seeing first response, but really enjoyed it and was pleasantly surprised. It’s unapologetic art and doesn’t beg the audience to like it like many of Hollywood films. I have to admit I worked a day on the film doing stunts but didn’t get used on the day and hung out on set. I’ve worked on plenty of bad movies though and never afraid to criticize something I’ve worked on. I also saw it with my friend who worked on it in the camera department too. So we wanted it to be good, but we were both ready to for it to maybe be bad based on what we heard. She actually saw a rough cut a while ago that worried her. But after it was over we both loved what we saw and thought it achieved what Coppola wanted it to. It was want perfect by any means, but it was bold, and from someone who is 85 who wanted to put this out into the world before he goes I greatly respect that. The worst thing a movie can do is be boring and that’s what I was expecting based on early reviews, but this was the complete opposite!
You definitely have a really interesting perspective having been on set, even for one day. I wonder, could you give any insight into what the vibes were on set? Would be great to have some insight.
Also loved to hear your thoughts on the film. I agree as I always liked abstract film in general and as a film student years ago wasted many rolls of 16mm attempting my own art.
I have a short film on my other tester page and it's something I'm very proud of - of course... I hated it for years... but I finally fell back in love with it.
That's what art can be. Anything. Fluid. Ever changing.
Thanks for your words!
Best,
-FSD
Megalopolis is an interesting film, But i think its also a film that many people must understand first. Im actually fascinated by the fantasies Francis added to his film, It felt very special. I'll check It out if i had the time to view it
Well worth a trip to the cinema if you get a chance while it's still playing.
Best,
-FSD
Nathalie looks nice but lacked gravitas. I spent most of her scenes thinking of how many actresses would have been better, though to be fair to FFC the movie would have had to been made decades ago for them to be the right age for the role. And Aubrey was a mistake making the entire thing impossible to take seriously.
I enjoyed their off kilter performances but I can understand how you might not. What's most important, though is that you watched the film and made up your own mind.
Cinema!!!!
Best,
-FSD
I still need to see this, but it's giving "I remade Metropolis". Idk, I'm looking forward to it. Hope I don't leave the theater just feeling like I've seen it before.
I can assure you this is not a remake of Metropolis. That amazing classic film stands on its own and there's no part of Coppola's new film ( other than a similar sounding name ) that treads on it.
You may walk out... but I would have watched another hr.
It's a great film if you can just take in the art.
Best of luck!
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad oh thank god, because the small amount of previews I saw it looks like a remake. Thanks!
Because Metropolis is my absolute favorite film of all time.
Metropolis is a revolutionary Film. And Fritz Lang is a treasure.
Thank you, I had a feeling there was much more to this film than all that ??? from the reviews. People were put off that there was no Joker or Batman in the story ? Really look forward to seeing it.
I like all types. Blockbusters. CBMs. They're all art to me but it's something special like THIS that only comes around once in a long time. I hope you'll come back here and tell me what you think when you see the film.
"true work of art" isn't substance. it's accepting whatever is spoon-fed to you under the guise that you can't be critical of it because it's a "fable"
To be fair, most have been "spoon-fed" that this movie is bad. This video - my opinion - is based solely on my own thoughts and experience.
Thanks for contributing your opinion. Believe it or not ALL opinions are welcome here.
In fact, I'm quite annoyed they tacked on the "a fable" to the end of the films official title. I'd rather it just be called Megalopolis and live or die on its own merit ( which, it seems to be doing.... it seems to be dying... )
What did YOU think was worse? This or Joker 2?
Best ,
-FSD
THANK GOD YOU WRAPPED EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING! The movie feels like Spartacus mixed with Citizen Kane!
Spartacus. A guilty confession. I've not yet seen it. A little nervous as I'm such a HUGE Kubrick fan. I need to see it.
@@FilmSchoolDad The 4k is amazing as it includes a specific scene that was later cut from the movie. Its a pivotal plot point as well.
Maybe it's time !
One word … Masterpiece!
Three words - You Rock!
Seen it and liked it. But I would totally not challenge anyone's opinion if they feel otherwise. It's just a movie outside the norm and so naturally is divisive.
100%
Appreciate your honesty
I’m glad you enjoyed it and I’m glad to see filmmakers like Coppola try and craft something truly original but I found this unbearable from start to end. Even ignoring the “farcical” characters and atrocious dialogue. There is such a lack of a deep or powerful narrative through line in this film. The conflict between Cicero, Cesar, and Shia LaBeouf was so dull and shallow I found myself laughing hysterically at every “dramatic” beat or yawning during every pure dialogue scene between characters like Cesar and Julia (who had no chemistry). I just think the core of the film was just horrendously boring and stupid, the mythical and historical elements of the filmmaking aside.
I loved it. I kept waiting for the train wreck I read about but it never happened. It inspired me.
I know what you mean. I assumed the same when I went to the preview. I was just excited to see the train wreck before anyone else 🤣 but I fell in love with the bravery to make a film like this. A true Auteur.
@@FilmSchoolDad Yeah. I hope to see it agaiin next weekend if it's still around. Such a rich experience.
I loved it !
What a relief right? I definitely went in to the theatre not know what I was going to see and I was ( yes - obviously ) enamored with what I found as well.
@@FilmSchoolDad yea i went in there ready to chuck tomatoes.
@@IntertropicalConvergence-gf3bm I was expecting to see the same movie everyone else saw... but apparently me and you saw a good movie and no one else did 🤣
this movie was a trip, man! I really enjoyed it ...I think it's a cult classic in the making
Interestingly I bet it could have 2 cult followings. People who think it's the NEW "The Room" ( which I disagree - but we're in the minority ); and the second group from people who adore the film and see it for what it is.
-FSD
I considered Nathalie Emmanuel to be the audience stand-in.
Oh she absolutely is. I agree. When I go over her character at 06:26 I note I believe her character to the audience avatar more so than Driver.
Best,
-FSD
@droidx1191 yes- and she's the one able to relate to both poles of cicero and cesar bring them together and reignite cesars powers. Beautiful character
People talking about movies and music, need to understand than "I didn't like it", has nothing to do with, "It's a bad movie!" I like a loot of bad movies but I can see why movies I didn't like are considered masterpieces... is not that hard! I'm now intrigued to go to see, this one! if most people like it, it's just another movie with a linear story and B&W threads between caracters! ...most of the time!
You're so right about I didn't live it VS it is bad. 100%. Too many people didn't listen to the second sentence which was that not everyone agrees on their favorite artists.
That's the thing with MEGALOPOLIS. It's its own thing. And people weren't ready for it.
I get their side too. But I'm just happy I loved it because the thing is really something special.
Best,
-FSD
I enjoyed it. I also had the pleasure of having rhe theater all to myself.
I feel that the movie is shallow, but at the same time as a lot of depth.
It was an interesting fun art piece throughout.
@@JackGardener17 100%
i’m sorry my dude but this movie is we not good, unintentionally funny
I'm pretty sure everything in this movie is intentional. Whether you enjoyed it is up to you. The beauty of art!
Best,
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDad Go back to film school.
@@Matt-oq4jq A loan please.
I can Dig it!
As a fan of Mr. Coppola, and as an artiste, every time I watched the trailer of this wonderful cinematic work of art, I teared up. And after watching it on the screen (I choked up with emotion in that it was the first day of release, and tragically there were only 7 other people in the audience)...I agree with you Film School Dad...this is a corporate sabotage in that no way do the powers that be want a self- financed movie to succeed. Truth be told, most of the negative reviews are bought and paid for (that in and of itself perpetuates the decline of our present society - so emblematic in the theme of this masterpiece!). Shame on these shills for the studios...ignore them for they are feces. As for this fabulous film, yes it will live on as long as there is a society whereby it and in retrospect we- us...are either still breathing or whether we can actually breathe. BRAVO Mr. Coppola!
Well said. And I agree - how interesting that this film seems to be a mirror to how Coppola is currently looked at by the world. Just as Cesar Catalina is a well regarded "Architect" whom the citizens seem to be raging against for his ascertain that the world could be a better place... so to is Coppola acting as a Martyr for the betterment of Film AS Art.
Very clairvoyant of him...
Best,
-FSD
Cool story, I am watching it right now. So I never have to watch it again. Not Ad Astra bad due to the visuals, but wow.
I watch a lot of movies. Not only blockbuster. I actually prefer intellectual ones. This movie, for me, was the closest I could get to understand how people with dementia must feel. What a mess.
Not Memento?
@@FilmSchoolDad I loved Memento. 😍
I'm all for this take. The film wasn't perfect- it had some pacing issues, particularly in the second half. Besides that I think it's a brilliant film. Very very weird... and that's not gonna be for everybody. The movie is going to go over a lot of peoples heads, including mine, but I can at least recognize that this is something special. All of the "weird/bad" fever dream type stuff was intentional imo and that is what makes it good.
I believe I will go see this I also I heard about a scene someone throws their hat just so their assistant can pick it up and the assistant does the same and it goes like that to me that sounds so obviously a metaphor for just wanting to feel powerful but the reviewer didn't get it he posed the idea but wasn't sure if all reviews are like that than I'm a lot smarter than I thought
The film is packed with Farce and Satire. At points even Monty python comes to mind. I had mentioned Brazil in a previous comment and there's bits of Terry Gilliam in there but even bolder. There's lots of interesting things in the film well worth a watch - even if you might not love it - it's definitely a movie that demands to be seen.
Absolutely loved it. Adam Driver's speech toward the end gave me chills.
I believe that if you were to list five films that have a similar tone, feel, aesthetic, art direction, line delivery, etc, then I think it may be easier for people to understand this film's place in cinema.
After one viewing to list five films with similar tone, feel etc... would be disingenuous of me - however I'll give you two... on feel alone: it's Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon meets Baz Lurmen's Romeo+Juliet. But don't take my word. Go check this wild film out yourself.
@FilmSchoolDad I'm sorry - I wrote this comment whilst pondering to myself what films I would compare Megalopolis to in some way, shape or form and didn't mean for you specifically to shoulder this burden - realising I wrote this comment on your video. I am enjoying the rhetoric surrounding this film in particular. In some ways, it reminds me of some of Baz Luhrmann's films. In others, it reminds me of films from the 1920s and early 30s. For sure, it has elements of many silver screen adaptations of Shakespeare. I like to marinate in a film that intrigues me and this is certainly one such film.
Just seeing this comment NOW. Sorry, I would responded to you a month ago! Thanks for taking the time to explain, and I agree. It reminded me of Baz's Romeo+Juliet.
It’s a mess-terpiece, like “The room” that is gonna be quoted for years as an example. I figure this is what atlas shrugged would look like if at the half part of the book Ayn Rand got sick so the editor had to hire a cosmopolitan feminist writer to finish the rest of the book.
I keep reading that the audience is laughing parts that are not meant to be funny but I think that the film is funny and almost all the parts that elicit laughs ( at least in the dialogue) are funny.
Agreed. It seems as if the first wave of reviewers were unaware of Farce. The movie is very funny - but in an artistic way. How did you like the film?!?!
@@FilmSchoolDad I had a blast. I am going to see it again this weekend.
I and a friend saw "Clockwork Orange" and were horrified. Then a group of acquaintances who had not seen it almost literally dragged us to see it again. Well, this time around my friend and I laughed our heads off - we thought it was hysterical. Our scandalized friends let us know that we were depraved monsters... We had a lot to talk about!
Coppola has no editorial control, he had none for a very long time. He can not write, does not know what to do, can not build a language that empowers him to experiment. Cronenberg is the same by now. So give up, understand that even good directors grow old, lose the little thread they ever had and mostly work on a retirement, even when, like this case, they expend everything they have on the thin deep obsession that they still have something to say. Francis Ford Coppola has nothing to say and most importantly he has no language with which to say it.
Art is art.
Have a great day!!!!!
-FSD
The acting style was rough, reminded me of Prince's movies (really go see Under the Cherry Moon)... but yea I really enjoyed it. I can see it becoming a cult classic.
I have to say - at first - the acting was off for me too, but as soon as I got it, I loved it. These are TOP Hollywood actors and just to be able to see them overact was immensely enjoyable for me. Glad it worked for you too.
Best,
-FSD
I have not seen this film yet but the references to the fall of Rome are interesting and important. Firstly in an historical sense there is a great deal we simply don't know about the fall of the Western Roman Empire. St Augustine is one of the very few people from that time we really know about as a full three dimensional character. The fall of the Empire was a highly complex process involving decades if not centuries. The attack on Rome in 410 did not destroy the Western Roman Empire like someone neatly felling a tree with one blow. There were at least nominal Western Emperors until 476. You also have to add to the equation that the Roman Empire in the East - the so called "Byzantine Empire" lasted on till the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Anybody stereotyping this Eastern Empire as just a load of decadent and effeminate Caesars and scheming Eunuchs and an institution locked in the past is carelessly doing it a grave disservice. So I think Megalopolis could be about the philosophical idea of the fall of Rome (with references to very traditional ideas of that Fall from very old historians like Gibbon) than it is about the reality. In reference to the USA - yes there is I think clear evidence of America declining - and moreover being eclipsed by powers like China. But this is also a highly complex and unrigid process and is not simply due to decadence and debauched behaviour. Or fundamentalism. The truth is far far more complex and I think the USA will probably remain a very important world player for some time to come. Cinema is not always the best medium to understand about the decline of Empires. Very often one has to do a great deal of reading and researching and talking to experts and even then if one is very lucky one only has the tip of the iceberg.
What's great about the film is that while the "fall of New Rome" is the backdrop it's very much a positive message that Coppola has for us. In order to save the future... we must NOW begin to talk about it.
Amazing comment!
Best,
-FSD
@@FilmSchoolDadThank you Film School Dad for your very thoughtful comment. I think there is a very common human mental fallacy that if you don't treat a problem as a problem and ignore it then somehow it will disappear and cease to exist. This can cover situations like someone with toothache but it can also cover huge situations like the economy of a country or an empire needing urgent, difficult reforms in order to stop the process of its decline. This then poses the question who are the people without their heads in the sand and just because they recognise the problems when others don't are their solutions really any good? Considering the deeply flawed nature of us all it is clear (as Frank Herbert talks about in Dune) that hero worship and personality cults are a very very bad thing. What we need is team work, and a first among equals and that first among equals being mature enough to humbly listen to constructive criticism that is designed to help. Constructive criticism is the one thing all of us will always need. But these things are very very difficult.
@@richardrickford3028 I really like the way your write and express yourself. Thank you so much for your well thought out commentary.
Best!
-FSD
The issues I have with this movie are the themes being bashed over your head or directly narrated to you, the length it could have had 20-40 mins off and would help pacing so much more, either focus on the dynamics of the government and family running/corrupting the city or have a true Greek comedy ending where the family dies by the true hubris of the main character since we already know he said he was cold and distant by his own admission, and ideally have more showing of the decisions of the present versus the future on display
What's most important is you saw the film for yourself and made up your own mind. This alone will keep cinema alive - albeit not monetarily, but artistically.
Best,
-FSD
thats what im saying this is art (: have no idea whats going on but its art
I think that's good. I'm looking forward to a second screening so I can unravel more, myself.
Saw it today, and I loved it. Saw 2 people walk out and not come back, and when the movie was over and I looked at over people, they all seemed confused and angry.
Don't get me wrong, i can completely understand why some don't like this movie, it's definitely not for everyone. But I really enjoyed the world, visuals, story, characters, and sets of this film. And many aspects of history, philosophy, and architecture this film takes is something I really appreciate, though I can see why people who aren't into those things will be bored watching, or they just don't like the story or characters.
Damn I liked the movie. I'm a little surprised by all the negativity. I don't want to be that guy, but I feel internet consensus convinced people to hate this movie. The people in my theater liked it at least (they were boomers lol). I was questioning myself at first but im going to die on this hill. The movie was great. If anything I thought the movie should have been longer.
It's funny because I would have watched another 30 minutes - easily. Glad you liked the movie and feel FREE to say so! ahaha so many people hate the movie to point I can't understand. BUT, hey... more for me. I can't wait to pick this on on physical when it comes out.
Best,
-FSD
As one of the people who asked (begged ;) to deliver the in-house question to Adam Driver in the middle of the movie I agree with you too! Having seen it 14 times as a result, it definitely holds up! It's an utterly brilliant and moving experience, that has made me revisit, and reevaluate, Coppola's whole movie-making career. Bravo Maestro! And shout-out to our local indie cinema in Toronto for committing to it for a full 2 weeks!
(Interesting fyi: Once the audience gets beyond 50 or so, they loosen up and find more joy in the movie! Clapping/whooping... here's to Megalopolis finding its true audience over time!)
I'll "Cheers" you on that. Megalopolis will find its audience over time.
He said words
One word masterpiece
I agree. It really is THE Masterpiece, isn't it?
-FSD
It is going to be a classic if we’re lucky
Already is my eyes. I think it will go down as something really special. This may take time though. No one liked 2001 when it first came out.
its fantastic on mushrooms
I'm glad you enjoyed the film!!!
I don't think there is any farce in their acting and no one of the actors is over the top at any scene.
I think there's plenty of truth in their performances - while, I believe, it was Coppola aiming for farce. But - I need to rewatch this movie another 5 times to really get into it. I need this on physical but as of today it's only available to stream or download.
@FilmSchoolDad There is no farce anywhere in the movie and Coppola is definitely not aiming for it. I don't understand why you think that farce and a fable-a legend are the same thing.
I don't think they are the same. I think he was forced to label it a fable to appease the masses who can't recognize farce.
@FilmSchoolDad But there is no farce in the movie. That's why i say that a fable-a legend is different thing from farce.
@ my interpretation of the film is that Coppola used farce in his presentation. This review is merely MY interpretation of the film, how it spoke to ME, my first thoughts, emotions provoked, etc.
The beautiful thing is that the film brought us together so we could discuss Art. That's what matters. It that we disagree... that we discourse in the first place is a WIN for film.
Best,
-FSD
What a joy to see something like this on the big screen
They really set the mood too. There were NO trailers and they played the films score until the Q&A began. It was a really great way to screen a film and the film itself..... chefs kiss.
The film score in the beginning is called an “Overture” This is a common practice back in the cinema days in the 30s/40s/50s ( maybe even earlier or later) when epic film is being shown.
@@artemus80j.4 for example 2001: a space odyssey begins with a true overture - the MGM logo doesn't even appear before the overture starts. Amazing.
Megalopolis didn't have an overture though. It was special music for the pre-show Q&A. But it made me wish we'd get more overtures these days. It was amazing.
@@FilmSchoolDad I totally agree with you on 2001 and that’s because Kubrick took overture to the next level just like how he took sci fi to the next level. In Ben Hur (1959) the overture is just an image of “ Hands of god” from Michelangelo “Sistine Chapel” with score in the background just like what we saw at the beginning of Megalopolis, still image of Cesar holding a T ruler with the score playing. The only difference is that Megalopolis doesn’t have the word “ overture “ on it so I guess it wasn’t really an overture. Lol
@@artemus80j.4 love the Ben-Hur reference. I think you're right. The overture felt very classic yet modern since it's been so long since the audience was treated so respectfully.