Shame

JP Liz V1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1723811/

Steve McQueen (Hunger) teams up with Michael Fassbender and reviews from Venice Film Festival seem give it the thumbs up (sorry couldnt find a trailer or link to one hopefully when it will get a distributor one will be available)

Fassbender seems to be doing very well and building up quiet an impressive array of performances

(Beware some of the reviews below contain spoilers)

http://m.screendaily.com/5031524.article

http://www.altfg.com/blog/movie/shame-sex-addition-michael-fassbender-steve-mcqueen/

libra02

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1723811/

Steve McQueen (Hunger) teams up with Michael Fassbender and reviews from Venice Film Festival seem give it the thumbs up (sorry couldnt find a trailer or link to one hopefully when it will get a distributor one will be available)

Fassbender seems to be doing very well and building up quiet an impressive array of performances

(Beware some of the reviews below contain spoilers)

http://m.screendaily.com/5031524.article

http://www.altfg.com/blog/movie/shame-sex-addition-michael-fassbender-steve-mcqueen/

It does seem to be gettting outstanding reviews from the press alright though I did see one of them commented it was shown at 9am and is pretty heavy going for that hour of the morning.

It seems to be leading in the race for the festivals top award however TTSP also is getting buzz.

This is going to be one those films which will get critical acclaim but be loathed by certain segments of the movie going public. I think if it does get released in US, it getting Oscar nods or even winning may be a long shot given the Academys voting preferences.

Personally I am interested in seeing it and am delighted to see that Michael Fassbender is getting roles and credit he deserves.

JP Liz V1

New Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK1ZcrOqLqI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK1ZcrOqLqI&feature=player_embedded

Michael Fassbender surely has be a safe bet for a best actor nomination

Birneybau

Saw it last night and wasn't that impressed at all. Found it fairly cliched in parts, particularly Carey Mulligan as Sissy, the protagonist's sister -

Ooh, a damaged, transient, promiscuous jazz singer, with added suicide attempt.

Also thought that a bit of backstory, maybe a coda, showing some if any indication of what happened to them earlier in their lives, may have added a bit of emotional punch.

Anyway, left me fairly cold, found it a fairly pedestrian Sex Addiction for Dummies.

Raekwon

Hmmm I don't quite know what to make of this movie, it was like an art students attempt at making softcore porn or something to that effect. Very arty with lots of flesh on display but with very little substance or real plot.

Michael Fassbender's performance was excellent and I can see him picking up a BAFTA or Golden Globe for his performance but the movie itself was terribly slow paced with very little dialogue and seemed to drag in places, for example

Carey Mulligan's rendition of 'New York, New York' seemed to go on forever

.

Overall it made me feel kind of cold and depressed and it's not the sort of film that would stand upto repeated viewings. My mate summed it up as being a film about an Irish man moving to New York, discovering that the local women were fairly gamey then pretty much riding everything in sight to the point where his sexual frustrations come full circle. He backed it up by saying that Fassbender mentioned

that he was from Ireland on his date with his co-worker plus his sister Carey Mulligan left him a voice mail saying "We're not bad people, it's where we are from" ie: Ireland.

Birneybau

Raekwon wrote: »

He backed it up by saying that Fassbender mentioned

that he was from Ireland on his date with his co-worker plus his sister Carey Mulligan left him a voice mail saying "We're not bad people, it's where we are from" ie: Ireland.

I imagined that was a reference to their family/circumstances.

Raekwon

Birneybau wrote: »

I imagined that was a reference to their family/circumstances.

I know that, I was just quoting what my mate thought was behind their sex addiction, rage issues. His opinion should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Birneybau

Raekwon wrote: »

I know that, I was just quoting what my mate thought was behind their sex addiction, rage issues. His opinion should be taken with a pinch of salt.

My mistake

corcaigh07

i saw it about a month ago, couldnt agree more with birneybau and raekwon. fassbender is turning into a star though, he was good to be fair...

blue note

A film about sex addiction staring Carey Mulligan.

I'm there!

corcaigh07

blue note wrote: »

A film about sex addiction staring Carey Mulligan.

I'm there!

dont get excited, you see far more of fassbender than her!

JoeA3

Anyone know why this is on such limited release, despite the fairly heavy advertising campaign for it in the last few weeks? None of the cinemas in Galway are showing it!

Cupcake_Crisis

I'm just back from seeing this and I have to say, I really enjoyed it, but I think I may have been the only one in the screen that did.

It was a little bit slow paced in parts, I don't quite understand the relationship between Brandon and Sissy, and wasn't hugely impressed by Carrie Mulligans performance. But Fassbender played a blinder! He just looked broken by the end. I thought it portrayed sex addiction in a very...... realistic light. I found the part where

he gets the crap beaten out of him then ends up in a gay bar

actually quite moving.

I had a listen to what people were saying leaving the screen, and it wasn't great. But there's much of a grey area with a film like this, you'll either love it or hate it, and I loved it.

johnny_ultimate

Solid enough if lacking... something. Hard to fault on a technical level - gorgeous, dynamic long takes and 2.35:1 cinematography - and Fassbender certainly gave it socks (and words that rhyme with sock). Think there were a few particularly effective moments in it. I had heard people bemoaning the 'jogging' sequence, but given what came before it I think it was a very powerful moment. The

threesome

was also strangely heartbreaking.

Other bits seemed repetitive and lacking in insight. I'd fully agree at least the

final verse could have been cut out of New York, New York

- the point had been well made by the time it went back to Mulligan for a second close-up. The middle half-hour just seemed to rub in his emotional self-destruction over and over - far too many scenes of him pushing his sister and others away, and Mulligan's arc was all a bit formulaic and pointless. WTF was up with the waiter in the restaurant? Bizarre acting.

A visually engaging character study, then, but a film that IMO lacks the force of Hunger. Last year's Guilty of Romance was a far grimier and more unsettling descent into a surreal world of emotionless sex. Definitely worth a watch, though, for some moments of technical showboating, a very strong central performance and a few scenes that resonate much stronger than others.

corcaigh07

as much as i hated this film, im really looking forward to Michael Fassbender in 'A Dangerous Method' thanks to his role in this and his growing stature as an actor

Orizio

Incredible film.

Seomra Mushie

Saw this with the boyfriend tonight. Our verdict? A resolute 'meh'.

Didn't give a crap about the main characters. At all. That's a problem. Didn't find the storyline engaging. Didn't even find the cinematography all that good, which is unforgivable with a canvas like NYC.

duckworth

This was great - Steve McQueen quickly becoming one of my favourite directors, can't wait to see what he does next. His bold and unexpected use of extremely long takes is startling and adds a freshness you only get once in a while at the cinema.

Felt the last section of the movie was a little formulaic i.e.

the sister's suicide attempt, and the will he/won't he ending

- but overall a great piece of work - top 2 or 3 films I've seen over the past couple of years.

Seomra Mushie

Will he/won't he what?

duckworth

Seomra Mushie wrote: »

Will he/won't he what?

Return to his old behaviour.

Seomra Mushie

duckworth wrote: »

Return to his old behaviour.

Oh yes. Mine and BF's feeling at the end was that we couldn't care less whether he did or not. Not an engaging character at all, IMO.

BraziliaNZ

I didn't think any of the scenes were too long it's just McQueen's style. I thought it was really excellent, didn't want it to end, I could watch Fassbender acting like this all night. I liked the scene where he's jogging.

The Black Oil

I haven't seen Hunger and I think the only thing I know Fassbender from is the Guinness ad,

which I thought he was going to re-enact near the end of this.

:pac:

I thought the film was OK, though I can understandable some of the frustrations outlined here. Agreed that the

sister's rendition of New York, New York seemed to drag on a while. Her suicide attempt was no surprise, even if you exclude the earlier signposts ('what happened your arm?' type of remark from Badge Dale's character and her standing at the end of the platform, the audience knew more than Brandon, which is fine and often how these things are, but I'd have preferred if it wasn't as obvious in coming down the track (ahem). Credit to Fassbender as he's pretty damn scary when he wants to be, such as in the verbal and physical confrontations with his sister. Apart from that, he seemed to pretty consumed by self-loathing and I thought the film did decent job in this respect.

titan18

Thought it was fantastic. Some parts were a bit odd such as the waiter in the restaurant, but overall, it was a pretty engaging film imo. Fassbender played his role perfectly, and whilst I thought more could of been done with Sissy, she was still pretty effective at enhancing Fassbender's character.

Whilst I saw the suicide attempt coming, I wasn't expecting it to be that shocking.

kraggy

Really want to go and see this but the fact that Carey Mulligan is in it is putting me off.

I can't stand her. She has a constant blank look on her face and ruined Drive for me. Felt no smpathy nor empathy towards her whatsoever.

Cannot understand why she's getting all the roles that she's getting.

stealinhorses

kraggy, that's what I think of her too, but she was actually quite good in this.

One of the best films to come out in years, truly engaging, very beautifully done. If you liked Hunger, I'd recommend this strongly.

JennyBurke101

On a highly shallow note can I just add this....


MMMMMMHHHHHH Michael Fassbender *drool*

tim_holsters

Fassbender and Mulligan, 2 excellent actors, I'm looking forward to this one.

tunguska

Saw it last night and I thought it was magnificent. Supreme Cinematography, it looks great. Fassbender was off the scale. Theres no other Irish actor whos even close to being this good, He's in Daniel Day Lewis' league now. Thought the jogging sequence was beautifully shot, would've chosen Air on a G-string(no pun) by Bach to score it though.
Great study of damaged people, not everybody will be into it though. Think you have to a little damaged yourself to fully get it.

hollypink

tunguska wrote: »

Great study of damaged people, not everybody will be into it though. Think you have to a little damaged yourself to fully get it.

Kind of agree with the above. I went to see this despite thinking I wouldnt like it, and glad I did. I found it engrossing and desolate and hours later it's still on my mind.

On a side note, saw this in the Lighthouse today which seemed pretty busy. Delighted it has reopened.

candy-gal1

went to see this last night and thought it was quite great, i wasnt sure what fassbender was going to bring to the role, but was very engaging.

the rendition of new york new york was a tad derivitive and prolonged though[SPOILER/]

but tbh, and maybe im the only one here to think like this, i left thinking there wasnt much that was bad or disturbed about what he was doing in the storyline,except maybe the

scene in the bar where he tries seduces the girl away from her bf

but thats just a descency rule imho

tunguska

candy-gal1 wrote: »

went to see this last night and thought it was quite great, i wasnt sure what fassbender was going to bring to the role, but was very engaging.

the rendition of new york new york was a tad derivitive and prolonged though[SPOILER/]

but tbh, and maybe im the only one here to think like this, i left thinking there wasnt much that was bad or disturbed about what he was doing in the storyline,except maybe the

scene in the bar where he tries seduces the girl away from her bf

but thats just a descency rule imho

I dont think anybody was judging Fassbenders characters actions as being bad(except for the scene you mentioned)or whatever. Its more about why he's doing what he's doing. He's acting out and has lost control, thats why its so engrossing, you're watching a guy spiral deeper and deeper into despair.

Warper

Very good film. What is most intriguing is the innuendo implied in the film. It is the past that seems so horrifying but you never know exactly what happened, though you do kinda know. As Carey Mulligan said to Fassbender "We are not bad people", this was a classic line in the film. The jog scene was excellent as was the subway scenes. It is not a film about sex but rather people with demons and their way of dealing with them. Fassbender through sex and Mulligan with blades. Two top class performances from 2 class actors.

Orizio

candy-gal1 wrote: »

went to see this last night and thought it was quite great, i wasnt sure what fassbender was going to bring to the role, but was very engaging.

the rendition of new york new york was a tad derivitive and prolonged though[SPOILER/]

but tbh, and maybe im the only one here to think like this, i left thinking there wasnt much that was bad or disturbed about what he was doing in the storyline,except maybe the

scene in the bar where he tries seduces the girl away from her bf

but thats just a descency rule imho

,,,I mean, the film is about an individual's struggle with addiction, its effects on both himself and his sister. Not really sure what your post has to do with this, its a film completely about the self-destruction.

tunguska

Holy crap Fassbender didnt get nominated for an oscar! That is incredible.

Fitz_BJJ

Was really looking forward to seeing it after all the great reviews but felt it was ok at best. I did enjoy it but feel the hype in the reviews were not necessary.

flamboosh

tunguska wrote: »

Holy crap Fassbender didnt get nominated for an oscar! That is incredible.

Although I'm raging that he didn't get a nomination, I'm not completely surprised - the Academy Awards have always given the impression that they're the stick-up-their-arses, ultra-conservative type. Shame probably wasn't their cup of tea, to put it mildly - despite Fassbender's incredible (imo) performance. :rolleyes:

Glad to see Gary Oldman FINALLY getting an Oscar nomination though, it's ludicrous he hasn't been up for one before. Will definitely be rooting for him on the night!

tunguska

flamboosh wrote: »

Although I'm raging that he didn't get a nomination, I'm not completely surprised - the Academy Awards have always given the impression that they're the stick-up-their-arses, ultra-conservative type. Shame probably wasn't their cup of tea, to put it mildly - despite Fassbender's incredible (imo) performance. :rolleyes:

Glad to see Gary Oldman FINALLY getting an Oscar nomination though, it's ludicrous he hasn't been up for one before. Will definitely be rooting for him on the night!

Agreed. Delighted for Gary Oldman, he should've been nominated for state of Grace (and probably a few others). I should've expected the academy to blank Fassbender, the oscars are very conservative but also very political. Theres way too much canvassing that takes place in the trade magazines like variety. Its pathetic really, studios taking out adds to "remind" voters to consider their films and actors. A film like Shame would'nt have the budget for such self promotion, besides, steve mc Queen doesnt strike me as the kind of guy who'd involve himself in such undignified shananigans.

Seren_

Yeah, I'm not overly surprised either that Fassbender didn't get an Oscar nomination. Shame really isn't the sort of film that wins Oscars.

I really enjoyed the cinematography in this. Although it has been a bone of contention, I think the long running shot is probably the best scene in the movie. It's interesting how Brandon couldn't perform sexually with the woman he actually knew and had spoken to beforehand, but the nameless, faceless women to him were grand. There was a lot of interesting psychology in this anyway, without even looking at Carey Mulligan's character.

Sad Professor

Yeah, he had a Madonna–whore complex. He was incapable of having an emotional relationship with a woman he was sexually attracted to, and similarly couldn't have a sexual relationship with a women he had an emotional connection with. It's very common among men and is apparently a result of being raised to believe that sex is dirty and shameful.

Although I don't even think sex was his main problem. His real problem was that he couldn't have an emotional relationship with anyone, not even his sister, who he treated very badly. Not only does he view women as being either whores and Madonnas, he shuns the "Madonnas" altogether. I guess this is why the sister character is in there: to demonstrate just how messed up he is.

Anyway I liked this a lot. McQueen is a master of cinematic cool. I find his visual style incredibly refreshing. In addition to the long takes, there’s some fantastic profile two-shots. He really challenges the popular convention that says all dialogue scenes needs to be shot in over-the-shoulder medium shots.

Oh and did anyone notice how the composer totally ripped off Hans Zimmer's Journey to the Line from The Thin Red Line soundtrack?

tunguska

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yeah, he had a Madonna–whore complex. He was incapable of having an emotional relationship with a woman he was sexually attracted to, and similarly couldn't have a sexual relationship with a women he had an emotional connection with. It's very common among men and is apparently a result of being raised to believe that sex is dirty and shameful.

So this is whats wrong with me. Damn parents, they're to blame for everything really.......

Sad Professor wrote: »

Although I don't even think sex was his main problem. His real problem was that he couldn't have an emotional relationship with anyone, not even his sister, who he treated very badly. Not only does he view women as being either whores and Madonnas, he shuns the "Madonnas" altogether. I guess this is why the sister character is in there: to demonstrate just how messed up he is.

I dont think he treated her badly. She was obviously somebody who refused to take responsibilty for her own life and who put the owness onto her brother for her wellbeing. Brandon took her in, let her stay with him, I think he went out of his way for her. At one stage Sissy even says that he(Brandon) was responsible for her, which is absolute crap. Even if you're related to somebody it doesnt mean you're responsible for them, especially somebody who uses you as a meal ticket.

Sad Professor wrote: »

Oh and did anyone notice how the composer totally ripped off Hans Zimmer's Journey to the Line from The Thin Red Line soundtrack?

I knew it sounded familiar, I'll check it out.

Sad Professor

I dont think he treated her badly. She was obviously somebody who refused to take responsibilty for her own life and who put the owness onto her brother for her wellbeing. Brandon took her in, let her stay with him, I think he went out of his way for her. At one stage Sissy even says that he(Brandon) was responsible for her, which is absolute crap. Even if you're related to somebody it doesnt mean you're responsible for them, especially somebody who uses you as a meal ticket.

That's unfair. She refused to take his offer of money, so I don't think she was using him as a meal ticket. She came to him because she was hurting and needed his help, but he shuns all her attempts to establish a connection with him and his later words to her are what push her over the edge. I'd call that treating her badly and a reflection of his messed up emotional state. As f**ked up as Sissy was, he was far worse. Being responsible and having a job, etc, isn't anything to be proud of when you are also wandering the streets at night looking for a blow job from any willing passerby.

LuckyLloyd

Sad Professor wrote: »

That's unfair. She refused to take his offer of money, so I don't think she was using him as a meal ticket.

Given the way in which he asked her though, there is a clear implication that he had given her money in the past, that it was an expected part of instances where she turns up on his doorstep.

Sad Professor wrote: »

As f**ked up as Sissy was, he was far worse. Being responsible and having a job, etc, isn't anything to be proud of when you are also wandering the streets at night looking for a blow job from any willing passerby.

He is also barely holding down the job in many respects (a common byproduct of any sort of obsessive / addictive behaviour). He frequently turns up late, stares off into space while there and has polluted his hard drive beyond recognition by indulging in his extra curricular interests while in work. That he is smart, affable and good looking keeps him there - and allows him to 'nail it' during a pitch early on in the film.

tunguska

Sad Professor wrote: »

That's unfair. She refused to take his offer of money, so I don't think she was using him as a meal ticket. She came to him because she was hurting and needed his help, but he shuns all her attempts to establish a connection with him and his later words to her are what push her over the edge. I'd call that treating her badly and a reflection of his messed up emotional state. As f**ked up as Sissy was, he was far worse. Being responsible and having a job, etc, isn't anything to be proud of when you are also wandering the streets at night looking for a blow job from any willing passerby.

He did ignore her attempts at contact alright but I get the impression that she's hit Brandon up for money and in general been a leech on his life for a while. Being responisble for yourself is a basic necessity, sissy couldnt or wouldnt even do that much. Even If Brandon was cruising the streets at night it still doesnt detract from the fact that he didnt sponge off anybody else or try to put the owness of his self care onto another person. As for Brandon's words pushing Sissy over the edge, I dont agree. Nobodys words have the power to push anybody over the edge unless you give that power away. Sissy was just too dependent, on Brandon and on this other guy who she leaves drama-queen like voicemails for. She even comes out and says that Brandon should be responsible for her, which I think is absolute nonsense.

Sad Professor

I don't recall her saying that he was responsible for her. Brandon says this, putting words in her mouth, and in the heat of the argument she says yes. But she clarifies that they are family and are supposed to take care of each other. I think she's talking as much about her taking care of him as him taking care of her.

I don't think his treatment of her has anything to do with her being irresponsible. In fact he seems quite happy to give her money. It's when she starts flirting and sleeping with his boss, threatening to upset his carefully constructed facade, that he starts getting pissed off with her. But the real reason he's so angry at her is because she reminds him of his own wounded state, except unlike him she doesn't hide it so well. Starting with the song, she wakes things in him that he would much rather stay buried.

TobyZiegler

Saw this film last night and enjoyed it. There isn't a huge storyline and its very slow moving so I wouldn't be watching it again any time soon but despite that I found it a really grim realistic look at someones emotional decline and at two damaged people struggling in the world.

What I found interesting is the depiction of his addiction as being as engulfing as any other addiction. These days every celebrity who gets caught having an affair says that they are a sex addict and are seeking counselling. This has sort of watered down the meaning of sex addiction and makes you almost roll your eyes if you hear someone has that problem. This gave a bleak and lonely view of what its really like.

paddyismaddy

ballsy performance from fassbender

NewFrockTuesday

I went to see this on my own as I had a bit of tie to kill and it was freezing outside.

I thought it was brilliant -

the 3some scene was so sad, he looked like a completly broken junkie at the end of the scene - like he got no gratification from achieving his addictions feed.

I left the cinema and travelled home on the luas. I felt very lonely and....dunno....aware...acutely aware of being around other people after feeling so isolated in his world in the cinema.

Irish Aris

Sad Professor wrote: »

Although I don't even think sex was his main problem. His real problem was that he couldn't have an emotional relationship with anyone, not even his sister, who he treated very badly. Not only does he view women as being either whores and Madonnas, he shuns the "Madonnas" altogether. I guess this is why the sister character is in there: to demonstrate just how messed up he is.

I agree with you on this one. Actually at certain points in the film, it got me thinking that he also doesn't allow himself to get emotionally involved, this behaviour being like a shield around himself. I don't know, as if he was afraid of the consequences of letting go (???). Thus I felt he broke down hard in the end.
Very engaging and thought provoking. I didn't mind the slow pace, it gave me time to think what I was seeing. And definitely Michael Fassbender is the biggest asset of the film.

united_lmc

I Actually found this movie interesting. Some scenes were disturbing but Fassbender was excellent throughout the whole movie. Was disappointed with the ending though.

unreggd

Saw this the other night

Wasn't mad about it, or just didnt get it

For me its just a bit of a showcase for the actors / what they're willing to do

and the character of Sissy was a bit too predictable