Looks like I missed something in "Black Swan"

[UTUSN]

Goes to show how shallow and over-inflated I am (with my negative "review"). The detail they go to in movies for MOMENTS that are rushing by while I try to focus on the characters and storyline is incredible. All the “beauty” of the the costumes and sets was a BLUR to me as always. Quite apart from the beauty blur below, my main reaction was to the dreary and oppressive New York apartment, the spooky dance practice studio, the disgusting bathtub for marinating-in, and the yucky little toilets for throwing up in.

Who is missing the point here----me, or the people who make movies? The video of the crystals is inside the link:


**************QUOTE*********

http://stylenews.peoplestylewatch.com/2011/01/20/video-the-making-of-black-swans-crystal-studded-costumes/
VIDEO: The Making of Black Swan’s Crystal-Studded Costumes

It wouldn’t be a ballet without tutus, and the making of the exquisite tutus in psycho-thriller Black Swan was no easy task. In this video, costume designers from Kate and Laura Mulleavy of Rodarte (who designed the ballerina outfits for the film) and others talk about the intricate design of the costumes and the incorporation of Swarovski crystals throughout the movie, from the tutus Natalie Portman wears on stage to the six magnificent chandeliers used on set. Swarovski—known for their precision-cut luxury crystal– provided over 250,000 crystals for the making of the film, adding to the dark, romantic aesthetics of the pivotal ballet scenes. “There is something amazing about crystals that is indescribable,” said Thérèse DePrez, Production Designer for the film. And with 250,000 of them, it must have been quite a sparkling set. –Kim Peiffer


************UNQUOTE*********

[siligut]

1. You showed me something I hadn't considered

That you were aware of the "dreary and oppressive New York apartment, the spooky dance practice studio, the disgusting bathtub for marinating-in, and the yucky little toilets for throwing up in." And then that you post a video about the amazingly beautiful costumes, made me realize some of what the film makers wanted to show us.

The reality versus the dream. The hard work and tortured feet, the starving and striving that it takes to be a ballerina, that never shows on stage. Ballets are written as dramatic, fanciful and romantic, but never shabby, dirty or wrecked. Thanks for this, I really liked the movie, and am considering seeing it again, I will be more conscience of the physical aspects this time.

[UTUSN]

3. I was going to let the thread slip away, didn't want to kick it back up, but since it's up,

I'll post.

"what the film makers wanted to show us." Well, I approached this movie (& I'm still trying not to post spoilers) totally discounting the external features of the art and theater of ballet---that would be: The extreme beauty of it all, music and performance, costuming and scenery. I expected, as I said in my original post/"review" (who am I to review?!1), that the horrible expectations that are put upon the dancers of this particular genre regarding weight, appearance, and physical torture and competition would be a given, a given being automaticaly assumed. Relegated OUT.


But this other o.p. about the 250,000 crystals is sort of more generic: That is, the DETAILS that movie makers take pains to include. With yards of film (do they still use film?!1) flashing by, WHO would be paying attention to much of the "beauty" of the costumes and scenery in a film like this when horrific falling-apart is happening to a character or two?!1

I said that I had STARTED OUT with discounting the "beauty" of ballet and all its external components---all of the costumes, the make-up, the stage decoration, everything---as IMMATERIAL to the character's falling apart.

As for the film makers wanting to give us a contrast, uh, like, who doesn't already realize this contrast between the external beauty of the ballet and the torture the dancers endure?!1 What we are looking at is this ONE character's personal story, and we don't need 250,000 crystals and six exquisite chandeliers. In fact, I say that the screenwriters succeeded BECAUSE the crystal chandeliers were ciphers in the movie while the "ugly" things popped out.

I don't know what to make of your realization that I was "aware" of the "oppressive apartment, toilets, bathtub," etc. Those things were central to the character's personal story, GRIPPING ME the viewer in a way those exquisite chandeliers did not (they were automatically DISCOUNTED, remember?!1). I'll be danged if I can even remember any of the six chandeliers except as a FLASH in a couple of flashing-by dance scenes.

My point in the 250,000 crystals was really mundane: Like, WHY *that* kind of DETAIL that 99.9% of viewers WON'T SEE except as a blur of light?!1 Might as well show ONE crystal in close-up and then a cut-out of mirror with a light flashing on it to simulate a chandelier!1 O.K., I'll stop now.

I'll say again, I "got" the movie, what it was about. My reference originally to "Rosemary's Baby" (regarding atmosphere) is largely because of the NY apartment.

As for you're wanting to see it again, I'm really aghast. And I say this, not because I thought it a bad movie. It is an excellent movie. But it was emotionally draining and pitiful and I wouldn't want to go through it again for the supposed voyeuristic sake of stacking up contrasting details and ironies.

There are plenty of good movies, even those that are not so demanding on the nerves, that I don't want to see again, including "feel-good" type movies: Yesterday and today "An Officer and a Gentleman" was showing on satellite. I saw it once BACK WHEN, I liked it, but I don't want to see it again. And by "see it again" I mean "GO THROUGH it again."

I'll dig up my original "review". -----ON EDIT: Here's the original thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x9600636

[siligut]

5. When I feel stressed, I watch animated children's films.

If I have a good deal of stress in my life, I don't need a film demanding any more energy. Right now, I don't have that sort of stress. However, I agree, Black Swan is an emotionally exhausting film. Because of the emotional/psychological demands of the film, I missed the visual images. So I thought to see it again. I find this is true of any good film, each time you watch it, you get something more or different from it.

[tigereye]

2. I missed what the big deal was- it was well done, but a

rather trite plot. I do think the acting was very good, though.

[UTUSN]

4. & Natalie told everybody on all the talkshows it took TEN YEARS to make.

By "make" I don't mean filming. Plus, there were a couple of lines that were laughable. That is, I would have laughed if the overall dread of it all didn't overwhelm everything, including a klinker or two.

[tigereye]

6. I couldn't help thinking, why remake Bergman films when

there are already Bergman films? (or Polanski films for that matter) :rofl: