Just watched it (recut/remix) not sure but the description said it follows the graphic novel storyline https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otIUX9CHZ94
... and then saw an analysis (9:17min) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422411861&v=UkVS5A5gfGs&x-yt-cl=84924572
which didn't change my opinion, but it does show you a few things you didn't catch from the initial viewing.
Not sure how different this recut/mix is from the original release version. It's got a good cast and the production values are rather high, with a very 'rich' look to it.
That said, I doubt I'll ever watch it again. I agree with a previous post about the similarity to an alchemist treatment of this idea, which is to hide it in symbolism instead of revealing it in plain sight, so plain that hardly anyone notices due to its simplicity, which, given our times, might seem more appropriate and effective. As 'coach' said in Adachi's Cross Game: 'Simple is best!
Is it me, or doesn't this type of treatment seem a little self-serving? :/
All the usual symbols are used, so many that I'm reminded of that line by the prince in 'Amadeus': 'Perhaps too many notes'.... or something like that.
Another comparison would be a sports analogy.... such as the early years of Michael Jordan's tenure with the Chicago bulls basketball team... he could score 50 points and the team still lost the game.
Which leads me to wonder again if this was designed as an 'art house' project from the start? As it sure ends as one, something the marketing team no doubt foresaw and I would guess that its advertising budget foresaw that distribution reality.
I'm thinking it would work better as a series and not a film, as such treatments need more room to breathe.
But then, perhaps it was the 'recut/remix' version I saw? :/
Doubtful.... but possible. :D
... and then saw an analysis (9:17min) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422411861&v=UkVS5A5gfGs&x-yt-cl=84924572
which didn't change my opinion, but it does show you a few things you didn't catch from the initial viewing.
Not sure how different this recut/mix is from the original release version. It's got a good cast and the production values are rather high, with a very 'rich' look to it.
That said, I doubt I'll ever watch it again. I agree with a previous post about the similarity to an alchemist treatment of this idea, which is to hide it in symbolism instead of revealing it in plain sight, so plain that hardly anyone notices due to its simplicity, which, given our times, might seem more appropriate and effective. As 'coach' said in Adachi's Cross Game: 'Simple is best!
Is it me, or doesn't this type of treatment seem a little self-serving? :/
All the usual symbols are used, so many that I'm reminded of that line by the prince in 'Amadeus': 'Perhaps too many notes'.... or something like that.
Another comparison would be a sports analogy.... such as the early years of Michael Jordan's tenure with the Chicago bulls basketball team... he could score 50 points and the team still lost the game.
Which leads me to wonder again if this was designed as an 'art house' project from the start? As it sure ends as one, something the marketing team no doubt foresaw and I would guess that its advertising budget foresaw that distribution reality.
I'm thinking it would work better as a series and not a film, as such treatments need more room to breathe.
But then, perhaps it was the 'recut/remix' version I saw? :/
Doubtful.... but possible. :D
