We Need to Talk About Kevin

ponyo

Hi!

I don't know if I am on the good thread but I need to talk about the movie and get points of view.
I already had a look on the thread about the book but I'll say I would like to talk about something different than the main topic of the thread.

I am gonna talk about the end of the movie now so if you don't know about it and want to keep it as a surprise, may be you shouldn't read the rest of that thread.

I went to the cinema to watch that movie. I thought it was really well filmed specially the fact that the director use the red colour so much. Sometimes I was really impressed and thought it was clever to be able to give the impression

that the mother has blood on her hands and all over her.

But it more about the end. The conclusion of the story.... I found out that my opinion was different to my parents one.
I just wanted to have other impression about Kevin.

Well my point of you is that Kevin does have a problem and just try to hurt his mother from the beginning consciously and unconsciously (for when he was a baby) untill the end. Specially by killing his dad and sister.
I felt like at the end the mother does finally wash the blood that her son shed. And that on the last conversation they have, he kind of realise what he did. I thought there was a bit of sadness in his face. And so she's comforting him for that reason.

Am I wrong, or right? What is your point of view?

krudler

........what?

Mickeroo

I guess they're on about this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1242460/

IamtheWalrus

Saw this last night. Didn't pick up on the

red meaning the mother had blood on her hands, because as the watcher knows, she didn't. Kevin was disturbed. The mother (Eva) did nothing wrong.

Enjoyable film if a little depressing.

xalot

am a massive fan of the book so it's hard to watch the film without being biased but thought it was a brilliant film in it's own right. Very disturbing and thought provoking. Would highly recommend.

ponyo

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Didn't pick up on the red meaning the mother had blood on her hands, because as the watcher knows, she didn't.

She's not the murderer but she definitely is involved in what Kevin did. People look at her like if she was guilty as well like when the 2 women ask her how she is before punching her.

Do you not think the director used the red colour that much in the movie to remind the blood?

Sad Professor

Try and be conscious of spoilers please, everyone. I haven't seen the film so I'm not sure if any of this is really a spoiler but I've added tags as best I could.

JP Liz V1

Mickeroo wrote: »

I guess they're on about this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1242460/

Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLRgAe2jLaw

I havent read the book so might read that first

IamtheWalrus

ponyo wrote: »

She's not the murderer but she definitely is involved in what Kevin did. People look at her like if she was guilty as well like when the 2 women ask her how she is before punching her.

Do you not think the director used the red colour that much in the movie to remind the blood?

Yes, the red seemed to mean blood alright. Just can't see how much else she could have done. Heartbreaking to see her unable to help her own son.

johnny_ultimate

I'll suggest discussion of visual motifs doesn't necessary constitute a spoiler in this case, but skip this paragraph if you want to err on the side of caution (I'm not spoilering it because it will screw up my italicising :pac:) IMO, the colour red definitely symbolises that she thinks she has blood on her hands. It, for me anyway, was a very effective way of visually portraying a character's deep inner guilt and uncertainties. It, for me anyway, was a very effective way of visually portraying a character's deep inner guilt and uncertainties - society is constantly punishing her for her perceived role in the tragedy, and interpreting her memories she's concluded for herself that she is heavily responsible (whether she is or not is up to the viewer, really). For many I can see it being an overused trick - it is probably the film's most distinctive visual gimmick, and it pervades almost every frame (in the first half at least) to a point that borders on overkill. Once you "get it", you start to spot it everywhere, and I can see some people getting a bit frustrated with that. But yeah, I thought it worked, and was able to probe the character without resorting to cheaper traditional tactics like voiceover.

The film itself: certainly fascinating, as is to be expected from Ramsey. The pretty 35mm cinematography is a highlight for sure, and aside from the red there's plenty of other compelling visual symbolism

(the shot of the target in Kevin's eye really worked for me)

. I'd express a small level of disappointment that the film became more linear after a while - it just seemed a shame to abandon the compelling structure they'd established. But the story (having not read the book) was unique and unexpected. Fascinatingly unPC take on the mother-son relationship, and boy Kevin is a piece of work

(the masturbation scene was hilarious yet deeply disturbing at the same time)

. Swinton is simply superb, and nice to see J.C. Reilly flexing his dramatic muscles again.

Reminded me of the Diving Bell and the Butterfly in many ways: a hyper-stylistic but emotionally involving adaptation. Ramsey is simply a fascinating director, and has crafted another intriguingly offbeat movie here.

RubyRoss

Ramsey is simply a fascinating director, and has crafted another intriguingly offbeat movie here.

I agree with you about Ramsey but I'm inclined to think the material got away from her here - she's very good with the interior lives of characters out of sync with the world but I thought the comic-horror of the child was a bit much and didn't sit with the tone of the first third. And what was going on with the music choices?

Apart from that, I was mesmerised by Erza Miller - which I feel guilty for admitting because he is probably a teenager. eck

johnny_ultimate

RubyRoss wrote: »

I agree with you about Ramsey but I'm inclined to think the material got away from her here - she's very good with the interior lives of characters out of sync with the world but I thought the comic-horror of the child was a bit much and didn't sit with the tone of the first third. And what was going on with the music choices?

I also wouldn't go as far as some of the more gushing critical responses out there. And yeah, there's no escaping that the first third is by a distance the strongest: visually, thematically and just generally speaking really.

I still think there rest of the film is consistently interesting. Cartoonish? Definitely. Kevin is a horrifying creation, and I think it helps create a sense of moral ambiguity to Eva's character. How responsible she was is a conclusion left up to the audience. And there's still some great moments: the image of the roadworks is priceless :P

Some of the five star reviews I've read might be over-enthusiastic. But definitely one well worth watching. In the hands of anyone other than Ramsay, we probably wouldn't have got that glorious opening half though!

o1s1n

Did anyone else find the directing in this film overly contrived?

I enjoy when a director uses less than ordinary cinematography. However this tried far too hard to be arty and intellectual for the sake of it (which made things like the red paint/blood comparison even more cringe worthy due to its obviousness).

It really annoyed me as the acting was superb and I enjoyed the storyline a lot. Ezra in particular was really fun to hate.

In fact, I found as the film went on I enjoyed it more as Ramsay seemed to step back from the 'Look how great I am at directing oddly shot scenes' self gratification and let the actors do their thing.

Ending really let me down too.

I've never read the book, so don't know how that goes, but it should have ended on a down note. The light at the end of the tunnel bit almost had me booing in disgust

Oh and the music was beyond ****.

johnny_ultimate

Hmm, I'd personally rather a bit of directorial flair, even if it's not entirely successful. There's certainly a strong argument here that Ramsey over did it. But aside from the red, there was much to like: the non-linear structure and some great visual moments and symbolism

(the pram and the roadworks, the target in Kevin's eye)

.

If it had all been to waste, maybe, but I think it captured the confused state of the character to a tee. I definitely wish she'd been more consistent with the structure, though: one could argue the 'arthouse' beginning felt ill-at-odds with the rest of the film.

There are loads of great character moments throughout, and maybe for many they do get drowned out by Ramsey's bold direction.

o1s1n

I also like directorial flair, and there were some fantastic shots. Even little things like

the out of focus giant flashing red dots, which slowly focused in on a digital clock.

(that one made me 'wow' out loud).

But I think it needs to be dispersed within the production with more tact. As it is, the first 1/3 comes across as arthouse directorial masturbation. Which I just cannot take seriously. At one point I was rolling my eyes in a 'for the love of god, do something with this film other than fapping or I'm leaving' way.

Which thankfully, the final 2/3 did.

Still, overall it was a good watch. My girlfriend (a primary school teacher) wasn't as impressed. Stating it was pretty offensive towards those who have to deal with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (I gave her the 'stop getting offended on other people's behalf speil!) but that's for another thread

Ape77

I'd definitely rank it as one of the most searingly joy numbing films I've ever seen. Franklin's empty headed, knuckle whiting incompetence as a father is difficult to watch. When Kevin refers to how a cat has it's nose stuffed in **** in order for it to comprehend and fully understand household decorum, is telling, we remember how when he was flung against a wall how he then urinated mannerly before bed. Parental incompetence bred this monster, Swinton's selfishness and Reilly's s insufferable idiocy should ignite choleric reactions from any would be parents out there. 'Oh, Our child is misbehaving, lets buy an enormous, alienating and sterile house for him to incubate himself in his room, buy him malicious, murderous weaponry (not only that, but praise his prowess on said instrument of doom, Reilly, again..). Unspeakably detached and glacial parenting fractured my soul after watching this film. Upsetting, disturbing, acidly tense, disenchanting.

irishh_bob

Ape77 wrote: »

I'd definitely rank it as one of the most searingly joy numbing films I've ever seen. Franklin's empty headed, knuckle whiting incompetence as a father is difficult to watch. When Kevin refers to how a cat has it's nose stuffed in **** in order for it to comprehend and fully understand household decorum, is telling, we remember how when he was flung against a wall how he then urinated mannerly before bed. Parental incompetence bred this monster, Swinton's selfishness and Reilly's s insufferable idiocy should ignite choleric reactions from any would be parents out there. 'Oh, Our child is misbehaving, lets buy an enormous, alienating and sterile house for him to incubate himself in his room, buy him malicious, murderous weaponry (not only that, but praise his prowess on said instrument of doom, Reilly, again..). Unspeakably detached and glacial parenting fractured my soul after watching this film. Upsetting, disturbing, acidly tense, disenchanting.

havent seen this and dont intend to , that tilda swinton one freaks me out with her ice cold , expressionless features

Watched this last night and thought it was one of the most disturbing films i have seen in a while . Though the book ultimately gives more insight as to whether kevin is a product of nature or nuture .

Excellent performance by tilda imo but she is an aquired taste .

Would reccomend but it is a bit of a downer.

Tipsy McSwagger

Best bit is when young Kevin sh#ts his pants on purpose and then turns his head and gives his mother a fcuk you look.

Warper

irishh_bob wrote: »

havent seen this and dont intend to , that tilda swinton one freaks me out with her ice cold , expressionless features

Tilda Swinton is excellent in this film - she should have gotten an Oscar for her performance as i havnt seen anyone better the past year. This is one of the best films of last year - top notch.

Snake Plisken

Yeah watched this just now and pretty heavy going and disturbing,

If that was my son and he had killed his dad and sister I would not have visited him, I also don't understand the hate for Tilda's charecter as she had lost the rest of her daughter and husband so she was a victim as well, I took from the ending that the cleaning of the red paint from her hands symbolized her washing away her inner guilt, also Kevin had taken a couple of beatings in prison and maybe this was making him understand the wrongs he had done similar to the broken arm incident when he was a child

anyway thats my thoughts after watching it strong believable performance from Tilda Swinton and the rest of the cast!

dark crystal

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Yeah watched this just now and pretty heavy going and disturbing,

If that was my son and he had killed his dad and sister I would not have visited him, I also don't understand the hate for Tilda's charecter as she had lost the rest of her daughter and husband so she was a victim as well, I took from the ending that the cleaning of the red paint from her hands symbolized her washing away her inner guilt, also Kevin had taken a couple of beatings in prison and maybe this was making him understand the wrongs he had done similar to the broken arm incident when he was a child

anyway thats my thoughts after watching it strong believable performance from Tilda Swinton and the rest of the cast!

Yeah, just watched it there now and I have to agree with your points.

I also didn't understand the vitriolic hatred towards Swinton's character, who was just as much of a victim of Kevin's psychosis as anyone else affected by his actions.

That woman smacking her in the face, after she had lost her own husband and daughter just didn't make any sense to me at all. Why was she regarded as the bad guy by the townsfolk

Saying that, I was hugely impressed by the film and thought both Swinton and Miller were suberb. How neither of them garnered an Oscar nomination is a mystery to me.

kitakyushu

Rule of thumb: movies that use multiple time lines for no apparent reason (or should that be all too apparent reasons) should be judged harshly as they're often just trying to paper over the cracks of an uneven script.

Personally I liked the film and especially Tilda Swinton but it certainly wasn't as good as a lot of the critics having been making it out to be.