There are so many filmmakers now who get praised for the “realism” that their films portray when essentially they look like everything else… compare it to the creativity of the 1960’s. I hope the form will open up once more and audiences seek something new.
I agree. I think occasionally we get more formalistic films like Everything Everywhere All at Once, but other than that they're all pretty flat. What's weird is even Superhero movies are like that, you'd figure they'd be more colorful and fantastical than what they are.
@@rockypalladinofilm that's true. Even the color grading. I'm nit sure how true it is but I heard Marvel was pretty restrictive of how Raimi shot MoM which si frustrating. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Raimi is the greatest director, but I do think he has more personality in his films than most MCU directors.
The performances are really really strange. But the strange mood is consistent throughout and many of the actors have been great so it’s obviously intentionally strange.
I wonder if he realizes that he actually does understand the criticism, and just hasn't drawn the connection between the anecdote he shared about Godfather Part II. For those of you who haven't heard the full interview, He specifically talks about people criticized the actors in the Godfather II -- until he re-structured the edit. Then everyone said the performances were amazing. His justification was: when the illusion isn't working for whatever reason, the perception of what the actor is doing is completely different. So it's really interesting how he (in the same interview) answers his own question later, but isn't able to consciously draw that connection.
@@Vegan_PhotographsCompletely agree. Saw it today and it was one of my favorite theater experiences of all time because it was so unique and such a personal thing for Coppola. I wouldn't call it a perfect film but it's been a long time since I've seen a film that affected my mental state like this. I wouldn't have it any other way
It's not highly theatrical compared to many movies today. The issue people have is the combination of the roman and American design/culture and the local dialect which too combines the modern and the old, which is unusual. And the way the movie is shot is not exactly standard studio fare too - a lot of unique shots, the animated sequence, the moving huge statues, etc. But the plot is very conventional and a power play/power struggle we've seen in The Godfather especially combined with a new age sci-fi about developing/attempting a utopia.
The movie premiered at Cannes so the trailer was countering reviews and confused reactions that had been dominating conversations about the movie for a few months.
@@kip388 The trailer that had disparaging critic's quotes for FFC's earlier films was official. The studio retracted it within the day and issued an apology because the quotes were made up by an AI chatbot. It was wild. Don't use chatgtp for your job!
@@matthewmatt5285 I dare you to sit down with Coppola (still one of the greatest directors) and tell into his face directly that his film sucks. I DARE YOU or anyone! You just don't do it as an interviewer. Cuz it's not the job of an interviewer to rate a movie.
@@matthewmatt5285 1. He was talking about The Conversation (1974) 2. Respectfully, that doesn't benefit you at all, you just make yourself more miserable. It's art; it's meant for people to have differing opinions, the world isn't worse if someone appreciates something harmless. Who is it embarassing for? If you are embarrassed by someone liking a movie, you need better hobbies 3. You never said what you gain
Francis Ford Coppola called Megalopolis a deeply personal project, uniquely shaped by his artistic vision rather than outside pressures, like producer or studio demands. He aimed to explore themes of utopia, political tension, and humanity’s potential to rebuild society; however, the result skewed toward showcasing decadence and self-indulgence, with audiences struggling to connect with the characters on screen. This led some viewers to wonder if the film reflects Coppola’s deeper ideals. Watching Megalopolis has even been likened to experiencing the infamous Playboy helicopter scene in Apocalypse Now for much of the film-an unsettling, prolonged dive into excess rather than uplift.
Um, I would call the film a near-perfect mashup of Greek Tragedy, Roman history, early 20th century Futurism and Art-Deco, Ayn Randian Objectivism, 1980s New York cocaine-excess and 2024 political electioneering..I loved it for those reasons and more. I understand how a necessary rewrite interfered with the story itself but forgiving it that watching it was a unique experience and am glad Coppola could finish it in his lifetime
A true practiced artist is not competitive, nor do they rate work on a scale. I mean sure, you have your opinion, but that belongs to you and no one else.
Coppola financed the film himself. He had complete creative control to make the movie he wanted to make and get the performances he wanted from the actors. (Wasn't this film something like 45 years in the making?) So, if there's "bad acting," what is that even supposed to mean in this context, when it's exactly what Coppola wanted? You can reject the movie as a whole, but you can't blame the actors for what you don't like. In this case, that's all on the auteur.
"Is Taj Mahal 3* and Notre Dame 4*?". That's pretty funny. But critic ratings today (not in the past 20 years, I mean TODAY) pretty much function as a guide for average moviegoers and average people. So if Megalopolis gets an average critic rating of 46%, this hints most of the average viewers that this is probably not up to their liking much. Same with Joker 2. I follow ratings, but as I'm getting older, I more or less just focus on the overall concept/story, people behind the film, and if I like the concept, I watch the movie. By the same token, even if a movie has great ratings and the concept doesn't interest me like at all, chances are I might not watch it even if it's average rating is 90% (Substance). ratings are a form of hint for a general viewer, but you have to know what you are interested in as you grow older. I enjoyed Megalopolis, not a classic, but I liked aspects of it - cinematography, design, the concept about building utopia, some ideas. That's enough for me to not consider it wasted money, because I saw thousands of films now, so I enjoy something that gives me something unique.
@nomchompsky3012 the most I've heard bout that is from unconfirmed information that seems inconclusive. And you're proving my point, regardless if he has done something wrong or not, the movie should be judged on its own, for its own faults and merits.
@@nomchompsky3012 the criticism has little to no to do with all those allegations . The movie already was being trashed before all those things turned up.
@@CATDHD Still, I think people are being unfair and not totally honest with their criticism. It might not be his best film, but I don't think it's as bad as they make it out to be.
I wish he knew how much of a legend he is. The amount of influence he's had. His approach, from straight classical filmmaking to intuitive experiences like Apocalypse Now, theatrical epics... My goat. People still don't understand Coppola and his vision just like they didn't understand Kubrick, Orson , Ye. His heart is his commander.
I feel like actual legends really never understand or accept that they're legends. I think that's what makes them legends, haha. They do what they do because they are compelled to do it.
It’s his passion project and I’m excited to see it when it comes to VOD (because it’s not playing in any theatres near me). Dracula and Apocalypse Now are some of my all time favorite movies. Yes, I love Dracula, the set design and atmosphere might are amongst the greatest in all of film.
In the first minute of this interview you can see why the movie failed: the interviewer is flattering Coppola, who takes it as a genuine analysis and responds "Exactly! This is how I learn - the greatest teacher is the student." Coppola has been praised so long, he can't separate praise from honesty and there are plenty of worshippers willing to praise him to get one of his productions on their C.V. Like Lucas with the Star Wars prequel, he's high off his own supply - movies are a collaborative art and complete creative control is a mistake for these guys.
I want to support this movie and will try to go see it if I can this weekend I don't care if its flopped Francis is a visionary and for him to have worked on it as long as he has and to have sold his winery to make it deserves my ticket. Even if I don't like it fuck the naysayers, a film made with this much passion deserves your time.
that thing about the guy wanting his art to get copied so he becomes part of the other artist's work is a really funky thought that I fuck with you do you coppola
I watched this yesterday: once i got over The Matrix fingerprints, I really got into it and the time flew past. That ending is still rattling around my mind.
I’ll go a watch it, I don’t care how bad it seems. I’m just really curious, because this movie is Coppola’s vision and he’s happy with the result. I need to know what is there that pisses people off so much.
just let the work speak for itself, stop trying to explain yourself. This kind of interviews with "old" filmmakers, "old" musicians etc. should be taken with a grain of salt. All of these guys are trying to protect or recreate their legacy so I don't really trust their comments . It's over for Coppola, he's done, his best work is far behind him and that's fine. The guy is no longer relevant.
I saw it last night. I'm 100% confident this movie is all Freemason and New World Order ideas. Caesar is like a Walt Disney character from a Rockefeller family, with his 1939 World's Fair vision and inventiveness for a utopic Epcot future. What do I mean? In case you didn't know, Walt Disney was like a poster boy for Freemasonry. Everything he did in his career was in line with their ideals, starting with some of the earliest Mickey Mouse comics being commissioned for a Freemason newspaper. You can Google that, it's true. His upbringing in a freemasonic youth group (also easily googled) taught him the ideals of Freemasonry, one of which is to strive toward the "great work" in all areas of his life. The "great work" is an idea that comes from idolizing the ancient Egyptians. It's about working together to create the best version of something. Applied to all areas of life would theoretically create a utopia. Walt was heavily involved in the 1939 World's Fair, which had a speech by FDR signalling for a New World Order and urging Europe to become a union. Caesar encompasses so much about Walt Disney it can't be a coincidence in my opinion. Caesar is a great architect, uses a protractor to plan his utopia, and also has the power to stop time like a literal god. One of the titles for God in Freemasonry is the Great or Supreme Architect of the Universe, and he is seen with a protractor (one of the main symbols of Freemasonry). Caesar starts the movie seeing the female lead as vulgar, until she reveals to him that she can see things the way he does. That might sound insignificant if you haven't researched Freemasonry, but it fits right into their code from Duncan's Ritual of Freemasonry book. Freemasons call the uninitiated "vulgar and profane." Caesar loses an eye, giving us a very unique Eye of Providence visual in the film. The ending with the pledge of allegiance converted to a New World Order version of itself was surprisingly bold. I'd give the film five stars. It was funny and different.
The movie is a disaster,. I just don't know WHY they can't do Romaman movies in the Roman period,. Doing them with a modern day twist is just TERRIBLE ; (
@@lukeshioshio But they use all Roman names and Roman charicterizations and it's just Campy to be Kind~ It's just absurd and unwatchable in that context...lol~
The performances were not so bad. Instead, the actors were given a lousy script and poor direction. Thus, the performances were all over the place, as no one quite knew what kind of picture they were in.
The acting wasnt bad, it seems bad becuse you are comparing it to our "realistic" standard of modern fims. The acting was very theatre like and grandiose on purpose. It was meant to be different.
Just because it's different doesn't make it good. I think the biggest issue people have with this movie was whatever message was trying to be communicated was obfuscated by 15 layers of presumption, and the main character is insufferable and honestly somewhat of a villain but he's definitely framed as the good guy? Idk it kinda feels like it's just ego filtering through into the film.
Im sorry but no. People can understand different things. People don't like crap that's not made for them. This movie was made for people in movies. 0.00000003% of the world.
This movie seems very similar to poor things in themes and story (although it didn’t stick the landing as well) , I wonder why the reception is so vastly negative. Probably woulda benefited from not having the directors name attached
Coppola is interesting. I never understood how the same person who made GF and Apocalypse also directed that awful and horrible Dracula movie. The thing is, the "best director" hype worked then. People praise that movie as "the best vampire movie" to this day. despite it being truly terribly acted and directed. almost comically so
It's REALLY BAD,.These people trying to say it's good are DELUSIONAL~ It's somehow HIP NOW for people to call garbage GOOD././lol These people would eat their own~
not only has the young audience become post literate, many have become post visual in the .jpg age. Creatives will look kindly on the film in decades to come.
I’m fairly certain they were friends and not student/peer. They met on film sets together and George gave Coppola his script for Apocalypse Now when he went to shoot Star Wars.
@@ChrisKat he was coppola's assistant at first, the script was written by john milius and coppola wanted lucas to direct it but he was preparing for star-wars/didn't want to do it, then coppola wanted milius to direct it but he couldn't do it, so he eventually did it himself after rewriting the script.
Interessante il suo punto di vista del voto... Far votare i 14enni , per 4 voti di loro equivarrebbe a 1 voto, poi i 16enni, per 2 voti di loro, 1 voto. Questo per insegnare ai piu giovani a portarsi le responsabilità del mondo man mano nel tempo sulle proprie spalle.
The actors are trying everything to make the basic but overcomplicated script interesting so it just feels heavy handed and doesn’t really set up or pay off anything interesting.
Lol they're not they're trashing the actors themselves, they're trashing your direction of them, your script and your overall movie. No one seriously believes the likes of Adam Driver and Giancarlo Esposito became garbage actors overnight 😂
Very few individuals have earned the rights to be "critics" of art. Yes, everyone can have an OPINION, but just because you believe "X" about something doesn't mean it's true. I know a person who loathes "The Abyss" simply because he thought it was "unrealistic". 😂 It's like... really? NO SHEET, I NEVER WOULD'VE FIGURED THAT OUT, lol. So, yup, opinions are like arseholes, but only those who actually study a craft have earned the right to pose their voice as an important one regarding art. Storytelling, dramatic structure, character arcs, literary (and cinematic) techniques, thematic underpinnings, and much more aren't in the common vernacular to "opinionated fellows".
It's very sad how a 40yr plus project and all that money amounts to the cinematic equivalent of toothache. Can these people not give their wealth away to sectors of the community that need it? Are they that removed from everyday reality that they cannot see the downtrodden for their own bloated ego?
Stealing phrases from that worm Commode. I don’t even like Coppola but Commode is one of the biggest turd hypocrites ever. Ask him about Nic Roeg’s Puffball haha. He gets away with it because his fans are mostly teenagers who haven’t got a clue about anything
It's possible for this film, or any film, not to resonate with someone. "I don't get it," "I didn't do anything for me," or even "I was bored by it" are perfectly acceptable critiques if they are honest expressions of personal dislike or disinterest. However, for someone to state that the film is "terrible," "bad," or "unwatchable " is the height of arrogant delusion. This is a film that Coppola has thought about for decades. It goes without saying that Coppola has a better understanding of his art than the vast majority of the critics.
I haven't seen Megalopolis yet, but I'm getting the impression that a lot of people are too brain dead to appreciate such a unique and deep film these days. Basically, it's not that the film is necessarily bad, it's that people are too simple and childish these days to appreciate it.
i wanted to like it. i saw it. it’s a mess. didactic with jejune ideas, banal, inane dialogue when not quoting the classics, the leading parts are everyman stereotypes, not rounded characters, i could go on.
The movie looks unhinged 😂 It’s a complete fucking mess and there’s no arguing otherwise. I was about to buy tickets for it but decided to check it out a bit on a streaming site and ended up watching it in its entirety. I’d feel insulted if I had to spend a single cent on it
It makes a lot of sense. They are specific types of film. They crave and want success. Those films want to win. Megalopolis does not have that mentality. It just exists. Saying it’s so bad you could of directed it is just not true and stupid. I didn’t even like this film but it wasn’t that bad. Just a personal film. It either hits or it doesn’t.
I haven't even seen the movie but looking at the cast I know it's not a top tier movie. I'd imagine it's like Blade Runner without Harrison Ford or eyes wide shut without Tom Cruise. With average actors those would be average movies. No name stands out in that cast, some of them are even negatives.
Movie was AWFUL and sort of a rip off of Romeo and Juliet withDiCaprio,. These shakespeare in MODERN DAY just DON'T WORK,. STOP doing Them! It would have been soo much better if this move had been done in the Roman Period,. Just a complete waste of money~
What’s the standard of a good performance? I dunno maybe actors who transform themselves into a character who brings the story to life and add depth to the world they portray whatever world the director is trying to build, yeah megalopolis didn’t do that, the movie builds a world that doesn’t make any sense, it’s a convoluted mess that’s trying hard to be profound and fails and instead of trying to use real world events that people can draw their own reactions and emotions from to elicit more emotional reactions is usually how it works, you need real world events to tether the fictional to nonfictional in order for any story to make sense, if I wanted to I could make a story about people 10,000 years into the future where everyone turns into gray blobs and if my entire movie was a bunch of gray blobs just moving across the screen for 2 hrs straight then it would be a terrible movie, it would be stupid for me to try and defend that saying things like well the audience just doesn’t get it there’s so much happening with the gray blobs and everyone is stupid for not seeing how deep the movie is…., think about Forrest Gump , it’s a movie about a very fictional character dealing with very real nonfictional events that Americans had to deal with and Tom Hanks played that character very well and gave an amazing performance, he played a character that was mentally challenged and saw things through the lens of a child basically and as the audience we see that no matter how complicated events can be at the very core sometimes the most complicated things in life can be remedied by just a simple answer , that’s what made that film so powerful and successful, megalopolis didn’t do any of that, the movie sucked, Coppola fudged it up and his head is so far up his own butt he can’t see otherwise, just my two cents
You wrote all that for what? To say that Forest Gump is a well acted film. To compare a cheap film like that to Megaloplis is laughable. Completely different approaches, different aims. I don’t even like Megalopolis but I’d watch it 100 times more over Forest Gimp. Horrible cheap film
@@curiositytax9360 your entitled to watch whatever you want, but the question to Coppola was what makes a good character or performance, he replied with some vague open ended question trying to be deep and profound which pretty much sums up megalopolis, it’s a mixture of a play of Caesar and a science fiction movie and a fever dream that’s trying to be very deep and it fails, just because a bunch of money was thrown into it doesn’t make it a good movie in the history of movies, it feels like a high schooler that watched a bunch of art films was given millions of dollars to make his or her own art film and it was disappointing, I honestly believe no one is going to remember this movie in 1 year , as for the visual effects or visual interpretation it was lackluster, you don’t think Forrest Gump is a good movie? You have poor taste in movies and storytelling and you should rewatch it
Not really. I don’t even like Coppola but he’s just made a personal film. All the criticisms remind me of the type of shit thrown at Nic Roeg’s films. The professional film nerds are actually the ones out of touch. The fact a film like that Joker from few years back is considered a great film by means most opinions are completely irrelevant.
@@curiositytax9360personal film about Rome of jews in NY. It's actually not answering any of questions that it made including politics, most actual part, but I hope it's not about his beliefs in elon musk. Movie looks like half constructed
Modern acting sucks. Adam was stiff and uninspired, self absorbed tripe. Plaza and Shia played themselves essentially, with Aubrey being corny evil comic book character and Shia playing insane like he actually is.
@@LuneyTune72 I’m not going to give a pass to someone just because of his age. Additionally, this isn’t the first time he’s made something bizarre. Have you ever heard of his film Twixt from 13 years ago? Yeah, that was similarly strange.
Mr. Coppola, the problem was expecting your audience to find that specific "key" to like the movie (not "understand", because it's high school level sociology and anthroplogy). This movie does not introduce new ideas, nor does it execute the old ideas in a way that is digestible. The acting is purposefully bad, themes were purposefully woven haphazardly, the plot had no fluid motion, there was no real reason for things to be happening, they just were. The excuse for the type of fable storytelling is just that. It's an excuse. It's lazy. It's pretentious. It doesn't trust it's audience to understand even simple concepts, so it takes a huge effort to explain everything in words so that your tiny little non-artist brain will understand. This movie is as embarrassing to watch as it is sad, because one of the greatest filmmakers of all time had a big miss. Hope we get one more from Coppola before he kicks the bucket. Dont want this one to be his last
@@kre_dopeprod.3766 nope. Coppola was in full control. The movie was never made with a distro already connected. He finished the film and THEN took it to distros
What are the odds he read the “this sucks megacockolis” review
not zero
😂😂😂
There are so many filmmakers now who get praised for the “realism” that their films portray when essentially they look like everything else… compare it to the creativity of the 1960’s. I hope the form will open up once more and audiences seek something new.
I agree.
I think occasionally we get more formalistic films like Everything Everywhere All at Once, but other than that they're all pretty flat.
What's weird is even Superhero movies are like that, you'd figure they'd be more colorful and fantastical than what they are.
@@jkcrawl part of that is they use the same techniques (cgi, volumes, green screen) and a one size fits all method of approach
@@rockypalladinofilm that's true.
Even the color grading.
I'm nit sure how true it is but I heard Marvel was pretty restrictive of how Raimi shot MoM which si frustrating.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Raimi is the greatest director, but I do think he has more personality in his films than most MCU directors.
@@jkcrawl Felt that way
I think the 70s were far more creative, at least for American movies.
The performances are really really strange.
But the strange mood is consistent throughout and many of the actors have been great so it’s obviously intentionally strange.
I wanted to believe that. But then the film ended. I don't believe it.
I wonder if he realizes that he actually does understand the criticism, and just hasn't drawn the connection between the anecdote he shared about Godfather Part II.
For those of you who haven't heard the full interview, He specifically talks about people criticized the actors in the Godfather II -- until he re-structured the edit. Then everyone said the performances were amazing. His justification was: when the illusion isn't working for whatever reason, the perception of what the actor is doing is completely different.
So it's really interesting how he (in the same interview) answers his own question later, but isn't able to consciously draw that connection.
The acting feels strange because it’s highly theatrical. Going back to a pre-Brando era kind of thing.
Just a thought.
That’s what I was gleaning off the trailer. It seems it’s a bit of a homage to the original movie.
A strange movie is good, strange is individual, specific
I’d much rather a unique experience than a generic one, this goes for all art
what do you mean by pre brando era ? what was different then?
@@Vegan_PhotographsCompletely agree. Saw it today and it was one of my favorite theater experiences of all time because it was so unique and such a personal thing for Coppola. I wouldn't call it a perfect film but it's been a long time since I've seen a film that affected my mental state like this. I wouldn't have it any other way
It's not highly theatrical compared to many movies today. The issue people have is the combination of the roman and American design/culture and the local dialect which too combines the modern and the old, which is unusual.
And the way the movie is shot is not exactly standard studio fare too - a lot of unique shots, the animated sequence, the moving huge statues, etc.
But the plot is very conventional and a power play/power struggle we've seen in The Godfather especially combined with a new age sci-fi about developing/attempting a utopia.
That defensive trailer with the quotes made me think they expected it to not be great and hoped to change people’s minds.
The movie premiered at Cannes so the trailer was countering reviews and confused reactions that had been dominating conversations about the movie for a few months.
That was not an official trailer if you're referring to the one I'm thinking of.
@@kip388 The trailer that had disparaging critic's quotes for FFC's earlier films was official. The studio retracted it within the day and issued an apology because the quotes were made up by an AI chatbot. It was wild. Don't use chatgtp for your job!
@@NomeIndeciso Ah good to know, I must have misunderstood what someone meant when they referred to it as a 'fake' trailer lol
the acting feels over the top like you're watching a play from the bleachers, yet up close.
exactly as he intended it to be
FFC: "The scoring doesn't work for art"
Also FFC: giving a 5 stars score to his own film.
thats not real he doesnt actually have a letterboxd account lol
@@alexdean9287 yes, he has.
Maybe he can come off his high horse and direct : Meg 3
Very funny)
A movie about a philosophical shark 😂
This dude's such a yes man...
Seriously,..The movie is a Trainwreck~
well, you can't exactly sit down as an interviewer and tell the movie sucks to the director's face lmao
@@AmojiBear That's True,.Cause it did SUCK~LOL
@@matthewmatt5285 I dare you to sit down with Coppola (still one of the greatest directors) and tell into his face directly that his film sucks. I DARE YOU or anyone! You just don't do it as an interviewer. Cuz it's not the job of an interviewer to rate a movie.
@@benceelias1849 Have him stop by later,.
I'll bring the Wine ~
The movie is an abomination~
Incredible to see this much humility in a director that accomplished ! Watched The Conversation yesterday, really extraordinary movie!
It really is a great film. I love hearing Coppola talk
Megalopolis is a terrible movie~
@@matthewmatt5285 I usually don't bother and probably won't again but what are you gaining by saying this?
@@samuelzins5089 Because it's an Aful movie and embarrassing to hear someone call it a great one maybe?,..🤔🤨🙄😮💨lol
@@matthewmatt5285 1. He was talking about The Conversation (1974)
2. Respectfully, that doesn't benefit you at all, you just make yourself more miserable. It's art; it's meant for people to have differing opinions, the world isn't worse if someone appreciates something harmless. Who is it embarassing for? If you are embarrassed by someone liking a movie, you need better hobbies
3. You never said what you gain
Francis Ford Coppola called Megalopolis a deeply personal project, uniquely shaped by his artistic vision rather than outside pressures, like producer or studio demands. He aimed to explore themes of utopia, political tension, and humanity’s potential to rebuild society; however, the result skewed toward showcasing decadence and self-indulgence, with audiences struggling to connect with the characters on screen. This led some viewers to wonder if the film reflects Coppola’s deeper ideals. Watching Megalopolis has even been likened to experiencing the infamous Playboy helicopter scene in Apocalypse Now for much of the film-an unsettling, prolonged dive into excess rather than uplift.
Um, I would call the film a near-perfect mashup of Greek Tragedy, Roman history, early 20th century Futurism and Art-Deco, Ayn Randian Objectivism, 1980s New York cocaine-excess and 2024 political electioneering..I loved it for those reasons and more. I understand how a necessary rewrite interfered with the story itself but forgiving it that watching it was a unique experience and am glad Coppola could finish it in his lifetime
Rome of jews
@@kre_dopeprod.3766 Oh, huh, I wouldn't know. I'm just a stranger in a strange land
Nothing worse than an artist makes something shitty, then gets mad at us for pointing out that it's shitty.
A true practiced artist is not competitive, nor do they rate work on a scale. I mean sure, you have your opinion, but that belongs to you and no one else.
Coppola financed the film himself. He had complete creative control to make the movie he wanted to make and get the performances he wanted from the actors. (Wasn't this film something like 45 years in the making?) So, if there's "bad acting," what is that even supposed to mean in this context, when it's exactly what Coppola wanted? You can reject the movie as a whole, but you can't blame the actors for what you don't like. In this case, that's all on the auteur.
"Is Taj Mahal 3* and Notre Dame 4*?". That's pretty funny. But critic ratings today (not in the past 20 years, I mean TODAY) pretty much function as a guide for average moviegoers and average people. So if Megalopolis gets an average critic rating of 46%, this hints most of the average viewers that this is probably not up to their liking much. Same with Joker 2.
I follow ratings, but as I'm getting older, I more or less just focus on the overall concept/story, people behind the film, and if I like the concept, I watch the movie. By the same token, even if a movie has great ratings and the concept doesn't interest me like at all, chances are I might not watch it even if it's average rating is 90% (Substance).
ratings are a form of hint for a general viewer, but you have to know what you are interested in as you grow older. I enjoyed Megalopolis, not a classic, but I liked aspects of it - cinematography, design, the concept about building utopia, some ideas. That's enough for me to not consider it wasted money, because I saw thousands of films now, so I enjoy something that gives me something unique.
I think people are being unreasonably critical of the movie for reasons that don't have anything to do with it
You mean because he was kissing the young female extras, and they had no HR to complain to because FFC is personally financing the film?
@nomchompsky3012 the most I've heard bout that is from unconfirmed information that seems inconclusive. And you're proving my point, regardless if he has done something wrong or not, the movie should be judged on its own, for its own faults and merits.
@nomchompsky3012 you mean you were there personally to see what he did and recorded it for all of us to see?
@@nomchompsky3012 the criticism has little to no to do with all those allegations . The movie already was being trashed before all those things turned up.
@@CATDHD Still, I think people are being unfair and not totally honest with their criticism. It might not be his best film, but I don't think it's as bad as they make it out to be.
This interview makes me want to go back to the club
Exactly - the film is in a different key and doesn't follow Hollywood norms. Watched it on IMAX. Will watch again on a smaller local screen.
Maybe I should see it on an immax screen or a bigger screen
It also screening in OTHER countries where people make independent movies don't give a fnck bout Hollywood. It just have bad final cut
I wish he knew how much of a legend he is. The amount of influence he's had. His approach, from straight classical filmmaking to intuitive experiences like Apocalypse Now, theatrical epics... My goat. People still don't understand Coppola and his vision just like they didn't understand Kubrick, Orson , Ye. His heart is his commander.
Ye’s a nazi there nothing to misunderstand he said it live on TV that he liked Hitler😭
I feel like actual legends really never understand or accept that they're legends. I think that's what makes them legends, haha. They do what they do because they are compelled to do it.
They don’t understand me as well
I bet he realize
I wish you understood that the resson he doesn't see himself as a legend is what he says in this video. Go watch some pre-70s movies good lord
Josh: there is no 'Godfather I' - it's "The Godfather.'
It’s his passion project and I’m excited to see it when it comes to VOD (because it’s not playing in any theatres near me). Dracula and Apocalypse Now are some of my all time favorite movies. Yes, I love Dracula, the set design and atmosphere might are amongst the greatest in all of film.
In the first minute of this interview you can see why the movie failed: the interviewer is flattering Coppola, who takes it as a genuine analysis and responds "Exactly! This is how I learn - the greatest teacher is the student." Coppola has been praised so long, he can't separate praise from honesty and there are plenty of worshippers willing to praise him to get one of his productions on their C.V. Like Lucas with the Star Wars prequel, he's high off his own supply - movies are a collaborative art and complete creative control is a mistake for these guys.
The acting is like a classical Greek play.
Which one?
"👉 So back to the baaAAaaths"
Have you been to one or is this just snobbish nonsense .that's rhetorical btw i know the answer
@@bervestormbottom3357 so why comment?
@@bervestormbottom3357 and I’ve been to many plays, and many movies. Own over 8000 movies and tv shows on dvd and bluray
Well done Horowitz!
lol,.Succup,.the movie is atrocious ~
He seems like a nice man.
I want to support this movie and will try to go see it if I can this weekend I don't care if its flopped Francis is a visionary and for him to have worked on it as long as he has and to have sold his winery to make it deserves my ticket. Even if I don't like it fuck the naysayers, a film made with this much passion deserves your time.
that thing about the guy wanting his art to get copied so he becomes part of the other artist's work is a really funky thought that I fuck with
you do you coppola
my only complaint about this film was the length. i think he easily could have cut out 45 mins and i still would have enjoyed it ❤
I watched this yesterday: once i got over The Matrix fingerprints, I really got into it and the time flew past. That ending is still rattling around my mind.
He is so right
I’ll go a watch it, I don’t care how bad it seems. I’m just really curious, because this movie is Coppola’s vision and he’s happy with the result. I need to know what is there that pisses people off so much.
just let the work speak for itself, stop trying to explain yourself. This kind of interviews with "old" filmmakers, "old" musicians etc. should be taken with a grain of salt. All of these guys are trying to protect or recreate their legacy so I don't really trust their comments . It's over for Coppola, he's done, his best work is far behind him and that's fine. The guy is no longer relevant.
"The movie is in a different key." Yeah, it's off key
I saw it last night. I'm 100% confident this movie is all Freemason and New World Order ideas. Caesar is like a Walt Disney character from a Rockefeller family, with his 1939 World's Fair vision and inventiveness for a utopic Epcot future.
What do I mean? In case you didn't know, Walt Disney was like a poster boy for Freemasonry. Everything he did in his career was in line with their ideals, starting with some of the earliest Mickey Mouse comics being commissioned for a Freemason newspaper. You can Google that, it's true. His upbringing in a freemasonic youth group (also easily googled) taught him the ideals of Freemasonry, one of which is to strive toward the "great work" in all areas of his life. The "great work" is an idea that comes from idolizing the ancient Egyptians. It's about working together to create the best version of something. Applied to all areas of life would theoretically create a utopia.
Walt was heavily involved in the 1939 World's Fair, which had a speech by FDR signalling for a New World Order and urging Europe to become a union. Caesar encompasses so much about Walt Disney it can't be a coincidence in my opinion.
Caesar is a great architect, uses a protractor to plan his utopia, and also has the power to stop time like a literal god. One of the titles for God in Freemasonry is the Great or Supreme Architect of the Universe, and he is seen with a protractor (one of the main symbols of Freemasonry).
Caesar starts the movie seeing the female lead as vulgar, until she reveals to him that she can see things the way he does. That might sound insignificant if you haven't researched Freemasonry, but it fits right into their code from Duncan's Ritual of Freemasonry book. Freemasons call the uninitiated "vulgar and profane."
Caesar loses an eye, giving us a very unique Eye of Providence visual in the film.
The ending with the pledge of allegiance converted to a New World Order version of itself was surprisingly bold.
I'd give the film five stars. It was funny and different.
man, your taste in movies is horrible.
@@DonLeStudio you spelled impeccable wrong
The movie is a disaster,.
I just don't know WHY they can't do Romaman movies in the Roman period,.
Doing them with a modern day twist is just TERRIBLE ; (
@@matthewmatt5285 it's not about Rome, it's about New Rome. It's New York and the Rockefellers.
@@lukeshioshio But they use all Roman names and Roman charicterizations and it's just Campy to be Kind~
It's just absurd and unwatchable in that context...lol~
The performances were not so bad. Instead, the actors were given a lousy script and poor direction. Thus, the performances were all over the place, as no one quite knew what kind of picture they were in.
I really enjoyed the cast!
This movie was an absolute MASTERPIECE! Chills.
lol~
Copolla: i got Negative Critic for my movie
Me: 😳🤯
So is it meant to be a spiritual sequel to Metropolis?
Couldn't watch it all
It was soo badd,.It
s amazing that it was even Made~
The acting wasnt bad, it seems bad becuse you are comparing it to our "realistic" standard of modern fims. The acting was very theatre like and grandiose on purpose. It was meant to be different.
People cannot understand things which are different...
Just because it's different doesn't make it good. I think the biggest issue people have with this movie was whatever message was trying to be communicated was obfuscated by 15 layers of presumption, and the main character is insufferable and honestly somewhat of a villain but he's definitely framed as the good guy? Idk it kinda feels like it's just ego filtering through into the film.
Im sorry but no. People can understand different things. People don't like crap that's not made for them. This movie was made for people in movies. 0.00000003% of the world.
@@marke4576 just google "50 great movies that flopped" n u will have ur answer
The movie was over 2hrs of this level of pretentiousness
How do u know what they experienced?
The actors are fine. The script is a pretty big problem though lol.
The movie would have been awesome as a Period Piece,.
It's just stup trying to do a modern day roman era piece ; (
Megalopolis is a beautiful film
lol~
@@matthewmatt5285 have you seen it?
This movie seems very similar to poor things in themes and story (although it didn’t stick the landing as well) , I wonder why the reception is so vastly negative. Probably woulda benefited from not having the directors name attached
Have you had your plus sign today? Listen to this interview.
Coppola is interesting. I never understood how the same person who made GF and Apocalypse also directed that awful and horrible Dracula movie. The thing is, the "best director" hype worked then. People praise that movie as "the best vampire movie" to this day. despite it being truly terribly acted and directed. almost comically so
MEGAFLOPOLIS
People have criticized your movie because, not to put too strong a point on it but uhhh . . . it ain't good.
Only romans understand the movie
Rome of jews
I have seen Megalopolis. Visually a good looking film but a weird storyline.
I hope it's just bad final cut version. But did he actually has a director one not for theaters?
Megaflopolis
It's REALLY BAD,.These people trying to say it's good are DELUSIONAL~
It's somehow HIP NOW for people to call garbage GOOD././lol
These people would eat their own~
not only has the young audience become post literate, many have become post visual in the .jpg age. Creatives will look kindly on the film in decades to come.
What is it that they will study exactly?
@@ronthorn3 Hating but people walked from the theatre when 2001 came out and Citizen Kane was trashed.....
In a different key..... on an out of tune piano.
Also, why is he pronouncing Balzac as 'ballsack'?
an out of tune piano can still make beautiful music
Seems like no one is enjoying anything in the last 5 years, like everything is trash 😮
When dollar falls down it will bring u pure new joy of life
This movie is really Bad~
Francis is basically following his students footsteps (george lucas), experimenting too much to the point of pissing everybody off or be ridiculed
both influencing and still making the blueprint for the next generation of filmmakers and creatives. Breaking new ground.
Provocation opens minds.
I’m fairly certain they were friends and not student/peer. They met on film sets together and George gave Coppola his script for Apocalypse Now when he went to shoot Star Wars.
@@ChrisKat he was coppola's assistant at first, the script was written by john milius and coppola wanted lucas to direct it but he was preparing for star-wars/didn't want to do it, then coppola wanted milius to direct it but he couldn't do it, so he eventually did it himself after rewriting the script.
Worst movie I have ever seen in the cinema. Loads walked out early, and that’s left were all laughing out loud at the end at how bad it was.
Interessante il suo punto di vista del voto...
Far votare i 14enni , per 4 voti di loro equivarrebbe a 1 voto, poi i 16enni, per 2 voti di loro, 1 voto.
Questo per insegnare ai piu giovani a portarsi le responsabilità del mondo man mano nel tempo sulle proprie spalle.
The actors are trying everything to make the basic but overcomplicated script interesting so it just feels heavy handed and doesn’t really set up or pay off anything interesting.
Wrong.
Watching pretentiousness fail is my favorite thing. It never comes with a dose of self-awareness, it just doubles down to absurd levels.
is that melanoma on his arm? o.0
Straight off the bat looking for a compliment. He only ever made 3 great movies. Good on him. But that’s it. Sniffed farts for the rest of his career.
What’s the third one lol
2 godfathers, the conversation, apocalypse now, wrote the screenplay for Patton, Rainmaker, Dracula, Tucker, and The Outsiders
"only" 😭 Bro made The Godfather isnt that enough? what have you done?
@@daanielllllllllll never liked it. It insists upon itself.
This erasure of The Conversation will not go unchecked
From pacino,brandoand deniro masterpiece to aubrey plaza,nathalie emmanuel and shia labeouf trash😂😂😂😂
Why pacino better then labeouf ?
And don’t forget Jon Voight.
It's a shame how everyone is saying this movie not good? It's a work of art by a goat 🐐 😤 it's so different enjoy that he is still with us 😢🎉
It's different and he's alive therefore it's good?
Nice argument there.
It's a garbage movie and will be forgotten very QUICKLY,.
Keep calling Crap -----> good,.
That's why we have Trash movie after Trash move ; (
Hope this movie will give last movie legacy to his movies
i hated the movie but i thought the performances were great all around
I think people just don’t understand artistic expression. I got exactly what I expected. Risk taking films are needed!!
This one backfired,..
And it had the same vibe as Romeo and Juliet with Dicaprio,..
But that was better and STILL not very good~
Stick to mobster flicks
The Godfather films are classic art, not monster flicks.
Lol they're not they're trashing the actors themselves, they're trashing your direction of them, your script and your overall movie. No one seriously believes the likes of Adam Driver and Giancarlo Esposito became garbage actors overnight 😂
The movie was good.
Very few individuals have earned the rights to be "critics" of art. Yes, everyone can have an OPINION, but just because you believe "X" about something doesn't mean it's true. I know a person who loathes "The Abyss" simply because he thought it was "unrealistic". 😂 It's like... really? NO SHEET, I NEVER WOULD'VE FIGURED THAT OUT, lol. So, yup, opinions are like arseholes, but only those who actually study a craft have earned the right to pose their voice as an important one regarding art. Storytelling, dramatic structure, character arcs, literary (and cinematic) techniques, thematic underpinnings, and much more aren't in the common vernacular to "opinionated fellows".
It's very sad how a 40yr plus project and all that money amounts to the cinematic equivalent of toothache. Can these people not give their wealth away to sectors of the community that need it? Are they that removed from everyday reality that they cannot see the downtrodden for their own bloated ego?
Stealing phrases from that worm Commode. I don’t even like Coppola but Commode is one of the biggest turd hypocrites ever. Ask him about Nic Roeg’s Puffball haha. He gets away with it because his fans are mostly teenagers who haven’t got a clue about anything
Some people reject valid criticism (like this out of touch friend of Victor Salva does in this clip)
It's possible for this film, or any film, not to resonate with someone. "I don't get it," "I didn't do anything for me," or even "I was bored by it" are perfectly acceptable critiques if they are honest expressions of personal dislike or disinterest. However, for someone to state that the film is "terrible," "bad," or "unwatchable " is the height of arrogant delusion. This is a film that Coppola has thought about for decades. It goes without saying that Coppola has a better understanding of his art than the vast majority of the critics.
I haven't seen Megalopolis yet, but I'm getting the impression that a lot of people are too brain dead to appreciate such a unique and deep film these days. Basically, it's not that the film is necessarily bad, it's that people are too simple and childish these days to appreciate it.
Or the film isn't that unique or deep, it's just stupid people that think so
i wanted to like it. i saw it. it’s a mess. didactic with jejune ideas, banal, inane dialogue when not quoting the classics, the leading parts are everyman stereotypes, not rounded characters, i could go on.
I assure you,.This movie is AWFUL and just SILLY,.
As a Roman historian the absurdity was laughable..lol~
The movie looks unhinged 😂 It’s a complete fucking mess and there’s no arguing otherwise. I was about to buy tickets for it but decided to check it out a bit on a streaming site and ended up watching it in its entirety. I’d feel insulted if I had to spend a single cent on it
As a thief your opinion on buying a ticket means very little
That this move was EVEN MADE is absurd!~
Can't believe the actors weren't like,."Man this is STUPID"~
It’s like if I directed this movie…. It doesn’t make sense how he made epic movies like the Godfathers to Apocalypse Now and then made this.
It makes a lot of sense. They are specific types of film. They crave and want success. Those films want to win. Megalopolis does not have that mentality. It just exists.
Saying it’s so bad you could of directed it is just not true and stupid. I didn’t even like this film but it wasn’t that bad. Just a personal film. It either hits or it doesn’t.
When you go big like he does then you have a higher risk of both failing and succeeding greatly.
Senile old man lost his mind.
Have some respect keyboard warrior.
Critics have less value than the worst art.
Read Pauline Kael, Anthony Lane, Andre Bazin or Mark Cousins. Then watch Dirty Grandpa or CATS.
Checked out him a while ago. Scorsese too. Big snores now. 1971 was a long time ago.
Your comment doesn’t even make any sense haha
I haven't even seen the movie but looking at the cast I know it's not a top tier movie.
I'd imagine it's like Blade Runner without Harrison Ford or eyes wide shut without Tom Cruise.
With average actors those would be average movies. No name stands out in that cast, some of them are even negatives.
It's bad and the perfomances are bad also~
Movie was AWFUL and sort of a rip off of Romeo and Juliet withDiCaprio,.
These shakespeare in MODERN DAY just DON'T WORK,.
STOP doing Them!
It would have been soo much better if this move had been done in the Roman Period,.
Just a complete waste of money~
What’s the standard of a good performance?
I dunno maybe actors who transform themselves into a character who brings the story to life and add depth to the world they portray whatever world the director is trying to build, yeah megalopolis didn’t do that, the movie builds a world that doesn’t make any sense, it’s a convoluted mess that’s trying hard to be profound and fails and instead of trying to use real world events that people can draw their own reactions and emotions from to elicit more emotional reactions is usually how it works, you need real world events to tether the fictional to nonfictional in order for any story to make sense, if I wanted to I could make a story about people 10,000 years into the future where everyone turns into gray blobs and if my entire movie was a bunch of gray blobs just moving across the screen for 2 hrs straight then it would be a terrible movie, it would be stupid for me to try and defend that saying things like well the audience just doesn’t get it there’s so much happening with the gray blobs and everyone is stupid for not seeing how deep the movie is…., think about Forrest Gump , it’s a movie about a very fictional character dealing with very real nonfictional events that Americans had to deal with and Tom Hanks played that character very well and gave an amazing performance, he played a character that was mentally challenged and saw things through the lens of a child basically and as the audience we see that no matter how complicated events can be at the very core sometimes the most complicated things in life can be remedied by just a simple answer , that’s what made that film so powerful and successful, megalopolis didn’t do any of that, the movie sucked, Coppola fudged it up and his head is so far up his own butt he can’t see otherwise, just my two cents
You wrote all that for what? To say that Forest Gump is a well acted film. To compare a cheap film like that to Megaloplis is laughable. Completely different approaches, different aims. I don’t even like Megalopolis but I’d watch it 100 times more over Forest Gimp. Horrible cheap film
@@curiositytax9360 your entitled to watch whatever you want, but the question to Coppola was what makes a good character or performance, he replied with some vague open ended question trying to be deep and profound which pretty much sums up megalopolis, it’s a mixture of a play of Caesar and a science fiction movie and a fever dream that’s trying to be very deep and it fails, just because a bunch of money was thrown into it doesn’t make it a good movie in the history of movies, it feels like a high schooler that watched a bunch of art films was given millions of dollars to make his or her own art film and it was disappointing, I honestly believe no one is going to remember this movie in 1 year , as for the visual effects or visual interpretation it was lackluster, you don’t think Forrest Gump is a good movie? You have poor taste in movies and storytelling and you should rewatch it
Sadly, Coppola is out of touch. Too much fart sniffing. Not to be rude.
Looks like Josh is sniffing them too.
@@zeeshawnali4078😂
Not really. I don’t even like Coppola but he’s just made a personal film. All the criticisms remind me of the type of shit thrown at Nic Roeg’s films. The professional film nerds are actually the ones out of touch. The fact a film like that Joker from few years back is considered a great film by means most opinions are completely irrelevant.
@@curiositytax9360personal film about Rome of jews in NY. It's actually not answering any of questions that it made including politics, most actual part, but I hope it's not about his beliefs in elon musk. Movie looks like half constructed
It's you not the actor lol
Modern acting sucks. Adam was stiff and uninspired, self absorbed tripe. Plaza and Shia played themselves essentially, with Aubrey being corny evil comic book character and Shia playing insane like he actually is.
I just don't know why they wouldn't do the movie as a Roman Era flick,.
Would have been cool,.But this was TERRIBLE~
Doesn't interest me in the slightest and I'm not going to watch a second of it but anything that makes illiterate zoomers angry is OK in my book.
It's just terrible,.
I'm glad i didn't Pay to see it~
The problem isn’t the actors, it’s his expired writing and direction. But he doesn’t want to talk about that, does he?
What’s “expired” direction look like? I rather have “expired” directing than anything from today
Who hurt you? You’re talking about a guy in his mid 80s who is still ambitious about making art
@@LuneyTune72 I’m not going to give a pass to someone just because of his age. Additionally, this isn’t the first time he’s made something bizarre. Have you ever heard of his film Twixt from 13 years ago? Yeah, that was similarly strange.
There’s no expiration on art. It’s not milk, zoomer.
you are out of your mind man.
Mr. Coppola, the problem was expecting your audience to find that specific "key" to like the movie (not "understand", because it's high school level sociology and anthroplogy).
This movie does not introduce new ideas, nor does it execute the old ideas in a way that is digestible. The acting is purposefully bad, themes were purposefully woven haphazardly, the plot had no fluid motion, there was no real reason for things to be happening, they just were. The excuse for the type of fable storytelling is just that. It's an excuse. It's lazy. It's pretentious. It doesn't trust it's audience to understand even simple concepts, so it takes a huge effort to explain everything in words so that your tiny little non-artist brain will understand. This movie is as embarrassing to watch as it is sad, because one of the greatest filmmakers of all time had a big miss.
Hope we get one more from Coppola before he kicks the bucket. Dont want this one to be his last
I hope it's just bad final cut and more sense was cut off.
@@kre_dopeprod.3766 would that even be better? He had final cut? It was all his decision
@@TheWhills I thought that is distribution rule etc
@@kre_dopeprod.3766 nope. Coppola was in full control. The movie was never made with a distro already connected. He finished the film and THEN took it to distros
@@TheWhills oh I see. Sad 😔
Checked out him a while ago. Scorsese too. Big snores now. 1971 was a long time ago.
Yet they gonna make movies till they can’t no more
Killers of the Flower Moon was solid. Maybe a little slow at times though.