Random Entertainment Topic

The overall storyline itself is quite simple even to those who are confused, like Bollocks, or like me, since events themselves are quite simple. Of course this evident plot is somewhat "f***ed up". Overall order of sequences is intact to give the minimal level of information to audiences (and which is why we kind of understand what is happening), but scenes inside each sequence are generally messed up. I don't know if this analogy works, but it is like a normal brick wall, except that each brick looks somewhat strange. All of this is to give us the effect of ... something.

I'm lost at this "something", or, as to what the director was trying to do with this "f***ed up" style. Strange style, just like a normal one, must have been employed for something. Let's think of movies like, well, what about Un Chien Andalou? That movie is basically a hot mess that does not make sense. But this mess makes sense because this is actually quite hilarious. What about notorious jump cuts in Breathless? It is supposed to be distracting and strange choice, but somehow it feels like a quite natural way to sum up the passage of time. I'm also thinking of the song "A Real Hero" used in Drive. Lyrics accompanied with the scene feels cheesy, but I think that actually works, because the movie suggests that characters are partly aware that this is a movie by playing with digetic and non-digetic .

Shaken timeframe in Upstream Color, well... I would appreciate it if someone can understand and explain the purpose of this style. This is not the kind of thing to do for no reason at all, and I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. That is why I am doubtful about this film.
 
Shaken timeframe in Upstream Color, well... I would appreciate it if someone can understand and explain the purpose of this style. This is not the kind of thing to do for no reason at all, and I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. That is why I am doubtful about this film.

Well I think there's a few reasons Carruth might have done it. I mean, I'm not sure or anything, but...

I guess practically speaking, the shaken time frame is just a different way of telling a story. For example when Jeff and Kris first start falling in love (or whatever) on the train. It's not a montage and it's not a single scene. I think it's a pretty interesting way to show a developing relationship over a fairly long period of time, but doing it in about 5 minutes. It seems like some important parts are left out of their story here, but we still know what's going on.

I guess Carruth might just also being playing around with time and space, just experimenting. I always liked what Richard Linklater said about movies: "The most unique property of cinema is how it lets you mold time, whether it's over a long or a very brief period." I don't think there's any responsibility on Carruth to make the movie comprehensible either, sometimes as an audience I guess we just have to go with the flow. I actually think it is fair to compare it to French New Wave stuff, but I know what you mean when you say that at least Goddard and co seemed to have some kind of grounding in traditional movies first.

Interesting point about diegetic and non-diegetic stuff. That sort of reminds me of the Sampler, who seems aware of the sounds in the movie. Kris cuts her sewing thread and then he loses this? Strange stuff. It's things like that which makes me feel the Sampler is representative of audiences or of the filmmaker.

Another thing about the time frame might be how it relates to the theme of broken memory or broken stories. There are a few in the movie, obviously Kris has her traumatic experience that she can't remember, and even though she can't understand what happened (maybe like the audience) she finds a kind of refuge with Jeff because they lubby wub each other or close enough anyway. Plus when we first see Kris, she's having trouble editing a movie, a Shane Carruth movie. Haha, even the director is having trouble putting things together.

The heavily-promoted image of the two of them cradled in the bathtub gives me the impression that nobody knows what's going on but, to put it waaaay too bluntly, that human emotions like say... compassion are what is important (off topic: I feel like this might sort of tie in with the credit crisis stuff in the movie). So I guess maybe the movie is saying that inexplicable emotion is more important than understanding a story. In movies anyway. I guess? This is flimsy, I know.

Maybe the movie is just designed to feel like a dream, god knows I was struggling to remember what had happened just minutes after seeing it, like trying to remember a dream after you wake up. And on a probably-too-literal interpretation the title of the movie is Upstream Color, so that sort of gives me the vibe that it's a very fluid and... well, dreamy movie that isn't necessarily supposed to be something we can take in our hands. Even though in the movie, there is literally literally a scene with upstream colour so I guess I'm reading too much into that.

I'm just spit-balling here of course. I'm not being graded on this am I? My dog ate my thesis.
 
Bollocks and team56th

First of all Im not a big movie guy but I do like to take apart movies and books from an anthropological and sociological standpoint.
there are so many layers to this onion and so many people can take take a very different view or experience from it. I want to discuss some particular holes or questions and perhaps the director was consciously being vague or I missed something;
1. does the thief work for the sampler? and..
2. what is the physiological significant between the white, blue and yellow orchids? ( i get the white and blue, but does the yellow signify enlightenment or knowledge?)
3. I am going to assume here that the thief drove Kris to the pig farm for the, uhhh "transfusion". this scene felt like a timeline jump, she seemed to be back to normal after gorging out the refrigerator, sleeping for a few days and then waking up to try and cutting out (whether real or not) those crawling worms….
I felt like this was a jumbled mess of time, didn't really follow the same pace (if you can call it that) as the rest of the movie perhaps Carruth was showing us that the altered state is also in a altered timeline.
4. why does Kris have a stronger connection then anyone else? was her "possession" any different then anyone else's?
5. the shooting scene; who gets away with murder and inherits a pig farm? WHO?
6. I have no idea what the office fight scene was all about. did it drive the plot? because I felt like it didn't even need to be in there.
7. The bearded man and his wife; i understand the repetative front door scene as I do the starling comments and the blended memories, but was this representing something else? is it perhaps that if one person had been drugged then they cannot coexist with someone who hasn't?
8. I still haven't gotten to the kid roles in this movie and need to see it again to comment. but quickly, are they guinea pigs of the Thief (and perhaps the Sampler)? Are they taking a less powrful form of this "earth drug"? Carruth could have kept kids out of the picture without losing any of the movie's message or feeling. And who really wants to see kids taking drugs?

yea , i ve got more questions. but definitely worth a lot of discussion and I just love symbolism and this film is rife with it.
anyway
the scene with the sampler, Kris and Jeff all sitting at the table was very very powerful and gave me goosbumps and Amy Seimitz does a great job playing Kris.
 
well you guys make me feel like I'm out of my league.. "non diegetic" Ive got to look that up now!
 
Ok. I just got done watching it and I'm just baffled.:confused:

I will have to have a little think about it and also read up on some of the other opinions already here. A few things I will say though...... It is extremely well shot, and the acting is great. Especially from the female lead ( one to watch).
 
well you guys make me feel like I'm out of my league.. "non diegetic" Ive got to look that up now!

Ahaha yeah, it's just a fancy way of talking about music (usually music anyway, but it can be about dialogue and sound effects, narration etc.) that is within the "world" of the movie. Like in a battle in LOTR, the chanting orcs and battle drums would be diegetic, because the source of that sound is coming from within the movie. But the big grand sweeping score is non-diegetic, because otherwise Aragorn and co would be looking around asking "where the f*** is that orchestra music coming from?".

5. the shooting scene; who gets away with murder and inherits a pig farm? WHO?

Just spat out my tea laughing. I'll try to get back to you and answer some of your questions as best I can later but honestly, for most of it your guess is as good as mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rankandfile
I'll be all over this if it ever gets finished.



Snow White the rabbit is stuck in a sadistic man's pet store, she craves for love but nobody wants to take her home. But one day the animals wreck havoc and they all escape, including Snow White. She gets lost with her newfound freedom and almost dies, until the nice old lady Alice saves her. Snow White would've had a bright future if not for Alice's jealous and vindictive dogs, who call on their friend Flash, a shady and devious pimp cat. Together they plan to transform Alice's apartment into a brothel for animals, and force Snow White and even the human Alice into prostitution.

We R Animals is a comic adventure, filled with drug using cats, horny dogs, cat-ninja assassins, vampire bats, cruelty and magic. In essence We R Animals is a love story told with warmth, where sometimes the laughter sits in the throat and forces us to question the morals and views of both animals and man.​

https://www.facebook.com/pages/We-R-Animals/146646298708409

nYOUbVl.jpg

vnz5D7d.jpg

nhDJi4Z.jpg

UA2J31U.jpg

srEtByS.jpg

hAorDnq.jpg

yerYrtO.jpg

tUaDWMB.jpg

E1r2hOi.jpg

KbLvReI.jpg

FDX0RQK.jpg

02NcpHo.jpg

I0vWux3.jpg

pTNjmgM.jpg

FuuLmBg.jpg
 
Bollocks and team56th

First of all Im not a big movie guy but I do like to take apart movies and books from an anthropological and sociological standpoint.
there are so many layers to this onion and so many people can take take a very different view or experience from it. I want to discuss some particular holes or questions and perhaps the director was consciously being vague or I missed something;

4. why does Kris have a stronger connection then anyone else? was her "possession" any different then anyone else's?

6. I have no idea what the office fight scene was all about. did it drive the plot? because I felt like it didn't even need to be in there.



yea , i ve got more questions. but definitely worth a lot of discussion and I just love symbolism and this film is rife with it.
anyway
the scene with the sampler, Kris and Jeff all sitting at the table was very very powerful and gave me goosbumps and Amy Seimitz does a great job playing Kris.

#4 - I'm not sure she does have a stonger connection, but given that the movie shows her as the most recent victim perhaps things are simply clearer for her.

#6 - That whole office fight scene is because of the Sampler isolating their piggy counterparts and taking their piglet children. That whole scene as well as Kris's scene ( punching the glass. Going to Jeff's workplace) all the way up to the huddled in the bath is all a result of that.
 
So read pretty much everything said and it seems that nobody caught ( at least didn't seem to mention) That the Thief actually bought his plants from the 2 ladies hiking and finding those blue Orchids. This also made clearer by the Blue orchids no longer being resent and the Thief's frustrating look right near the end as he examines the plants.

Which to me seems to give at least an ending to the cycle that the movie is based on.
 
So read pretty much everything said and it seems that nobody caught ( at least didn't seem to mention) That the Thief actually bought his plants from the 2 ladies hiking and finding those blue Orchids. This also made clearer by the Blue orchids no longer being resent and the Thief's frustrating look right near the end as he examines the plants.

Which to me seems to give at least an ending to the cycle that the movie is based on.
It was part of the comment I made when I mentioned the "cycle of life," and that it reminded me of The Tree of Life. The cycle was undoubtedly broken when the victims confronted The Sampler.
 
I only watched the ad for this. Very first thing it reminded me of was Tree of Life. I used to love these wanky arthouse movies but they just don't seem to do it for me anymore.
 
It was part of the comment I made when I mentioned the "cycle of life," and that it reminded me of The Tree of Life. The cycle was undoubtedly broken when the victims confronted The Sampler.

Yeah I see it. Think I just glanced over that as it was directly aimed at bollocks and referencing TTOL. My bad.
 
So read pretty much everything said and it seems that nobody caught ( at least didn't seem to mention) That the Thief actually bought his plants from the 2 ladies hiking and finding those blue Orchids. This also made clearer by the Blue orchids no longer being resent and the Thief's frustrating look right near the end as he examines the plants.

Which to me seems to give at least an ending to the cycle that the movie is based on.

For me, this to be most easiest story line to follow so I didn't think to comment on it. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet. How would all of you rate this to Tree of Life? better, worse? Too different to rate them together?
 
For me, this to be most easiest story line to follow so I didn't think to comment on it. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet. How would all of you rate this to Tree of Life? better, worse? Too different to rate them together?

Found this movie far more interesting than the tree of life.
 
Tree of Life was my favorite movie of 2011. I own it on Bluray. There's no plot. It's an experience and observing movie. It's not a movie working towards an ending.
 
Bollocks and team56th

First of all Im not a big movie guy but I do like to take apart movies and books from an anthropological and sociological standpoint.
there are so many layers to this onion and so many people can take take a very different view or experience from it. I want to discuss some particular holes or questions and perhaps the director was consciously being vague or I missed something;
1. does the thief work for the sampler? and..
2. what is the physiological significant between the white, blue and yellow orchids? ( i get the white and blue, but does the yellow signify enlightenment or knowledge?)
3. I am going to assume here that the thief drove Kris to the pig farm for the, uhhh "transfusion". this scene felt like a timeline jump, she seemed to be back to normal after gorging out the refrigerator, sleeping for a few days and then waking up to try and cutting out (whether real or not) those crawling worms….
I felt like this was a jumbled mess of time, didn't really follow the same pace (if you can call it that) as the rest of the movie perhaps Carruth was showing us that the altered state is also in a altered timeline.
4. why does Kris have a stronger connection then anyone else? was her "possession" any different then anyone else's?
5. the shooting scene; who gets away with murder and inherits a pig farm? WHO?
6. I have no idea what the office fight scene was all about. did it drive the plot? because I felt like it didn't even need to be in there.
7. The bearded man and his wife; i understand the repetative front door scene as I do the starling comments and the blended memories, but was this representing something else? is it perhaps that if one person had been drugged then they cannot coexist with someone who hasn't?
8. I still haven't gotten to the kid roles in this movie and need to see it again to comment. but quickly, are they guinea pigs of the Thief (and perhaps the Sampler)? Are they taking a less powrful form of this "earth drug"? Carruth could have kept kids out of the picture without losing any of the movie's message or feeling. And who really wants to see kids taking drugs?

yea , i ve got more questions. but definitely worth a lot of discussion and I just love symbolism and this film is rife with it.
anyway
the scene with the sampler, Kris and Jeff all sitting at the table was very very powerful and gave me goosbumps and Amy Seimitz does a great job playing Kris.

#1. They seem to be rather on contract, where thieves get the money and pay the Sampler somehow, though how they pay is not explained in the film. So maybe they just know the Sampler throws down the infected pigs there, and the Sampler just know some people come to him so that he can harvest parasites again.

#2. Yellow orchids? Where was a yellow one? I only remember white and blue ... but anyways, what do you think is the real form of parasites? I have a feeling that the worms are not the parasite, and even these worms are infected from parasites. The blue powder form must be what they really are. Sort of like the real form of alien organism in Prometheus.

#5. Doesn't Kris kill the sampler, send mails to victims, so that the penniless victims can start the new life by inheriting the pig farm? Actually my question about this scene is, WHERE DOES THIS HAPPEN?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rankandfile
For me, this to be most easiest story line to follow so I didn't think to comment on it. I haven't seen Tree of Life yet. How would all of you rate this to Tree of Life? better, worse? Too different to rate them together?

TTRL gets upper hand for me. That movie moulds time to the extreme - but actually every movie does. When we consider that Richard Linklater is more traditional director than, say, Shane Carruth or Terrence Malick, I think Linklater was thinking about just about any movie in existence. A car that should take around 1 hour to arrive in real life usually takes just one or two cuts in films, for example.

Anyways, both UC and TTRL goes one step further than that, but the two are little different. In UC, as we said, timeline is shaken. It takes place presumably for months, 2 years at most, but turn of the events are shaken and there is no indication as to how long time has passed by. TTRL in contrast... It takes place in a chronological order, but it starts at the Genesis and ends at the end of time :eek: So shots might be all random and does not seem to connect to each other very well, but that is all because the movie's scope is really, truly big. Once you get that scope, TTRL makes sense. That, to me, is the biggest difference; I know how to get TTRL. Not this film. Yet.
 
edit: I meant to quote your reply regarding the yellow orchid.

#5. Doesn't Kris kill the sampler, send mails to victims, so that the penniless victims can start the new life by inheriting the pig farm? Actually my question about this scene is, WHERE DOES THIS HAPPEN?

If my memory is correct, I am pretty sure that when Kris and Jeff are reciting Thoreau at the pool for the final time , Kris encounters a yellow orchid in the deep end and touches it repeatedly, causing her to glimpse at what the Sampler has seen or touched. its another powerful moment.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's been almost two weeks since I've seen it so my memory is hazy but the yellow orchid seems to be very important. The colour yellow in general seems to be pretty significant. Kris and the other victims paint the grey bars of the pig farm yellow after taking it over. I'm sure there's more but can't recall right now. Honestly, I am struggling to come up with anything I can say about the swimming pool scenes. More than any other scene in the movie they left me sitting there thinking "the fuq am I watching?"

And this is a movie featuring pig surgery.
 
i could not get my head wrapped around the rocks or broken up cement that she seems to use as diversion(or is it the healing process?) by diving for them and depositing them at the edge or anything about the constant pool time for that matter.(maybe water is the conduit just like it is for the cycle?). but the yellow orchid did seem pretty straightforward when compared to anything else in the movie. As if it was a moment of clarity (as was the joint reciting of A Life in the Woods) and provided them a road map back to the Sampler.
As far as the psychology of colors, yellow can mean the mind or the intellect and also could mean cowardice.
but that is a quick reprisal of college psych and a quick google search to confirm.
yet I don't know what is the significance here in the movie, oh my head hurts
 
Yeah, it's been almost two weeks since I've seen it so my memory is hazy but the yellow orchid seems to be very important. The colour yellow in general seems to be pretty significant. Kris and the other victims paint the grey bars of the pig farm yellow after taking it over. I'm sure there's more but can't recall right now. Honestly, I am struggling to come up with anything I can say about the swimming pool scenes. More than any other scene in the movie they left me sitting there thinking "the fuq am I watching?"

And this is a movie featuring pig surgery.


Well she does the Swimming pool thing and Jeff did that weird Straw package thing. Perhaps these are residual effects of the opening scenes where Kris is told the water is good and the best she ever had and she has to work( hence the retrieving of rocks) to get more. ? Cause the Jeff thing is also very similar to the writing out of the Walden book and making that paper chain.
 
edit: I meant to quote your reply regarding the yellow orchid.

If my memory is correct, I am pretty sure that when Kris and Jeff are reciting Thoreau at the pool for the final time , Kris encounters a yellow orchid in the deep end and touches it repeatedly, causing her to glimpse at what the Sampler has seen or touched. its another powerful moment.

Now I remember where it came from, but what seems significant to me is that yellow orchid is the only one that is not real in this film. The other colors are seen in real life by orchid collectors and thieves, while yellow one is (presumably) in Kris's hallucinations only. We know that the parasite leaves some trauma to those who are previously infected, and the yellow orchid must be one of them. Her traumatic connection to the parasite lets her see orchids, but in a somewhat distorted form, turning the color yellow which is not in 'real life'. Might be too convenient, but I think it would be hard to find anything else, unless like Bollocks said there might be some more significance in the yellow color itself.
 
Such a shame.

Do you think we will get a Capone spin-off ? I mean his story is really only just taking off.
 
They should have focused more on Chicago and less Chalky/Daughter in season 4.
 
They should have focused more on Chicago and less Chalky/Daughter in season 4.
This is why I'm thinking the show is coming to a Premature end. Most of the other characters are only just getting started. Chalky was pretty much background noise for 2 seasons. Capone ( as mentioned) is just getting started. Knuckies Nephew has only really just come in to the mix. They just started a new side story with Margaret and Rothstein....etc
 
Finished season two last week. I can't say I'm looking forward to season three. Originally I thought the series was boring. I gave it another shot a month or so back. While I got into it more, season two bored me to tears. Does it pick up at all after season two?