Uncut Gems - upcoming Safdie Bros film with Adam Sandler (!)

pixelburp

Captain Red Beard wrote: »

Horrible people shouting at each other.

But enough about Boards, what did you make of the movie?

Captain Red Beard

pixelburp wrote: »

But enough about Boards, what did you make of the movie?

Littered with cliches, full of horrible people, I didn't like it.

cdgalwegian

This leaves little time to catch one's breath, which in the hands of other directors would have been too suffocating; but with the Safdie brothers, it's exhilarating (sounds like some poppers could come in handy :pac:). The incongruent music gave it a slightly surreal feel, where everything is brought back to earth at the climax (there i go again).
Punch Drunk Love and this have shown that Sandler is no uncut gem (boom).

El Duda

Managed to catch a screening of this earlier...

Wow! This is one hell of a film. Those Safdie's aren't f--king about. Over 2 hours felt more like 90mins.

Outlaw Pete

Seen it in the Lighthouse last week and loved it. Phenomenal film. Hope Sandler picks up some awards for it.

Julia Fox is gonna be a star if her performance is anything to go by as I thought she too was excellent.

Whatsisname

Whatsisname wrote: »

Dying to see this. How are people seeing it early as far as I'm aware its not out until the end of January over here?

Well, I finally got to see this last night and holy **** what a film. From the very start of everyone talking over eachother, its pure sensory overload and leads into the suffocating and stressful feeling you're about to endure for the next 2 hours.

With every decision he made, I had my head in my hands. Sandler knocked it outta the park on this. It had me proper on the edge of my seat throughout, noticed people sitting around me quite literally on the edge of theirs too haha.

Last 20 minutes was an absolute rollercoaster and I left the cinema in silence. Last movie to make me feel like I've been uppercut at the end like that was Infinity War.

Utterly fantastic film.

johnny_ultimate

I’ve moved past insisting people should see films in cinemas if they can - the important thing is that by the end of the month everyone will get to see this one way or the other.

But I will say this: if you use the pause button when watching this film you’re basically cheating :pac:

El Duda

Uncut Gems – 9.5/10

Even just from the opening title sequence, you know you’re in the hands of boundary pushing filmmakers. The way the sound design is so off-kilter, with overlapping dialogue and a score that feels like it should’ve died down by now, marks the subtle beginnings of a film that gradually discombobulates its audience. The Safdie’s do a great job of playing around with the conventions of cinema to create a sense of tension and general unease.

The plot itself is highly original and unlike anything I’ve seen; Adam Sandler plays Jeweller Howard Ratner, who specialises in supplying ‘bling’ to sports stars/rap artists. Not only was this world completely alien to me, but the absurdity and lavishness of the lifestyle is completely engrossing. You find yourself baffled that someone like Howard has managed to navigate his way through life and get this far without receiving his comeuppance.

The plot goes places you would never predict, with Howard getting himself into one nail biting situation after another. The Safdie’s took almost a decade to write this and went through multiple drafts and the result is a film crammed full of swearing, violence, humour, smut, sex and music. It builds towards one hell of a crescendo and rarely pauses for breath. This film is why we love cinema. Worth admission for the cinematography and score alone.

MrKingsley

Dónal wrote: »

I struggled to enjoy this - and really disliked the music in it (apart from the credits song!). Sandler was great but it feels almost like a one man play, given how much focus is on him.

I could not agree more Donal.

The thought the music and some of the acting from the smaller parts was like a college produced short film.

I’ve seen it get 5 star reviews everywhere but I just don’t understand it.

Sandler was great and the ending was fabulous but other than that I thought it was meh/annoying

cdgalwegian

The Safdie brothers in interviews have said they took inspiration for the Ratner character from their father's stories of the diamond district in New York, but in the Empire film podcast (https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-empire-film-podcast/e/66488092?autoplay=true) they also say that Ratner's behaviour is largely drawn from a guy called Al Goldstein:

Technocentral

Captain Red Beard wrote: »

Horrible people shouting at each other.

Films dont have to have likable characters to be great, look at Downfall or The Irishman amongst others.

brianregan09

Christ that was excellent , Sandler was so so good in it

PressRun

Finally got to see this. Brilliant stuff. Thought I was going to have a stroke during the last 20 minutes.

Sandler - what do you say about this guy? The man is a mystery. Clearly capable of great performances and knows what a good movie looks like, but chooses not to make them. Bizarre energy.
He's outstanding in this film.

homerun_homer

Loved this film! I don't think I had the same pumped liked I'd been put through the ringer feeling that I had when I stepped out of The Departed years ago, but it gave me stress dreams afterwards so... yeah this film did what had been hyped.

I don't like Adam Sandler's films but am open to him being in a good film like this and Punch Drunk Love, both superb films and performances. It was really hard for me to get anyone to go to this because they just write him off regardless of the film-makers involved. More fool them.

I can't wait to see what the safdie brothers do next.

El Duda

Had I not been baked off my bonce before the screening I think I may have endured a panic attack.

cdgalwegian

cdgalwegian wrote: »

The Safdie brothers in interviews have said they took inspiration for the Ratner character from their father's stories of the diamond district in New York, but in the Empire film podcast

funny that the character surname had the same name as the British jewellers that also had 100's of stores in the US.

The head guy of the same name famously espoused how they were selling "crap" at a meeting with lots of attendees and journalists - not the smartest move in a business supposedly about luxury.

https://businessblogshub.com/2012/09/the-man-who-destroyed-his-multi-million-dollar-company-in-10-seconds/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/22/gerald-ratner-jewellery-total-crap-1992-archive

the whole company was sunk effectively on that ill-judged comment. I'm sure that the directors knew what they were doing picking the name.

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

cdgalwegian

glasso wrote: »

the whole company was sunk effectively on that ill-judged comment. I'm sure that the directors knew what they were doing picking the name.

In the Empire podcast they said they were unaware of Gerald Ratner until they arrived in Britain for their film tour recently, but were delighted with the name and jewelry coincidence.

The brothers also said they had also asked Jonah Hill to star, as well as Howard Stern (?).

yabadabado

homerun_homer wrote: »

I can't wait to see what the safdie brothers do next.

They were attached to a 48 Hours remake but pulled out as they didnt think they could make it work for them.

Think they want to continue making their own original content.

johnny_ultimate

While I assume Good Time is widely seen at this stage, it is worth digging out Heavens Knows What for those who haven't got around to it. I saw it before the other two, so has been interesting to see how the brothers have built on the style and ideas they established earlier (still haven't seen their really early stuff, mind you). Boasts a tremendous lead performance from Arielle Holmes, and as a drug addiction drama boasts the same sort of non-judgmental representation of its 'larger than life' characters as both Uncut Gems / Good Time did.

cdgalwegian

cdgalwegian wrote: »

The brothers also said they had also asked Jonah Hill to star, as well as Howard Stern (?).

I could see Jonah Hill working in the role also. But he would not have worked as well as Sandler. Hill is a bit too young.

yabadabado

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

While I assume Good Time is widely seen at this stage, it is worth digging out Heavens Knows What for those who haven't got around to it. I saw it before the other two, so has been interesting to see how the brothers have built on the style and ideas they established earlier (still haven't seen their really early stuff, mind you). Boasts a tremendous lead performance from Arielle Holmes, and as a drug addiction drama boasts the same sort of non-judgmental representation of its 'larger than life' characters as both Uncut Gems / Good Time did.

Really enjoyed Heaven Knows What.

Their doc about Lenny Cooke is a very good watch if you can find it.

PressRun

I could see Jonah Hill in the role too, Howard Stern is not an actor exactly (though I'm aware he has been in a movie about himself), so I'm not sure what it would have been like with him. Might have still worked, not sure.

There's something chaotic about Sandler though, something nearly off about him, that really works for this film and I'm glad he starred.

Wombatman

Rollicking, often tense, roller-coaster ride following the escapades of degenerate gambler Sandler.
Novel storyline with some convincing characters, dialog and performances.

Loved the farcical scene when Sandler is getting what for in the back seat of the car.

8/10

Fysh

Got to see this tonight at the cinema, and for me definitely worth seeing there - partly the big screen but particularly a proper sound system. I can totally see what johnny_ultimate meant about it being stressful - the pacing is different to the relentlessness and manic energy of Good Time, but I've rarely found my self so on edge watching someone insistently follow a pattern of self destructive behaviour as in this. Gripping stuff, and a phenomenal turn from Sandler.

pixelburp

Man. All this talk of stress and anxiety the film is meant to induce, it's going to give people a complex if they watch this and DON'T suffer the same fate. Is it that inevitable?.

homerun_homer

It's not on Netflix until 31st yet I'm hearing people I've recommended to in work having watched it via other means. Given copies are available this time of year from awards season it's mad that they don't have it out officially sooner.

Fysh

pixelburp wrote: »

Man. All this talk of stress and anxiety the film is meant to induce, it's going to give people a complex if they watch this and DON'T suffer the same fate. Is it that inevitable?.

Are you getting anxious about whether watching it will make you anxious?

speedboatchase

homerun_homer wrote: »

It's not on Netflix until 31st yet I'm hearing people I've recommended to in work having watched it via other means. Given copies are available this time of year from awards season it's mad that they don't have it out officially sooner.

Iirc correctly, they need for the movie to have a cinema run for it to be eligible for Oscar contention (and other awards). Previously, cinemas were quite against Netflix's flimsy initial plans to distribute their Oscar contenders for a week or so before putting them on their platform. That makes sense - the shorter the cinema window, the less likely people would to pay attend a screening. So both sides seemed to have settled on a longer theatrical period.

Basq

Absolutely loved this.. nerve-shredding yet fun with a career best (not that it'd take much) from Adam Sandler.

Easily best movie I've seen the last year!