Yours was the ONLY review I was expecting to watch for this movie, specifically, just as I did for The Substance. Even if I sometimes disagree with your opinion, I really think you have a special eye that no one else seems to have. Most of “critics ” only have opinions like “it sucks” or “I don’t get it”.
This is why it's so important to watch a film for yourself. Your review is the polar opposite of the first one I watched. They literally said DO NOT watch this movie. I'll be watching so I can make my mind up. Thanks
@@carlosalegria4776 it's not the worst movie ever ofc, but man was that a mess (and not a beautiful one!). It wasn't the pretentious side of it that really bothered me (Coppola is one of the few who can allow to be pretentious, cause he's made cinema history). It was the poor acting, the awful mistakes, the crappy CGI, the unoriginal megalon architecture and the sloppy concept of a modern Rome (to name a few of the flaws of this movie) to really make me feel embarassed for having paid to see it. Now, there's some beautiful shots here and there... that woman's body made from other bodies, all the dream-like sequences, the internal design, the photography... and literally nothing else. But yet I see pretentious people not even arguing their own opinion by just addressing others as "slop enjoyers".
@@luca7329 why would I argue with a pleb whose understanding of cinema is so superficial- slop enthusiast mad because he was called out as a slop enthusiast who got filtered
I could say that I was never bored during the movie; very similar pace to Bram Strokers Dracula thankfully. It also felt very much like a 80 year made it in both the absurd and sincere ways that it's hard for me to dislike it even for all of its shortcomings. We don't get movies like this anymore.
I kinda feel bad for him, having to suffer through how much the film is being panned for what may end up being his last... But I love how you were so pleased when "Megalopolis" popped up on the screen in adoration for him finally getting it done. Having a passion project can be incredibly hard work and every movie is a gamble, so going for it and sticking to it is half the battle. So much more of it comes down to some degree of serendipity of the right things falling into place at the right time.
@@m0thdm he'll be fine. Yes, Godfather 1 and 2 will be well regarded for all time as some of the best movies ever made... I'm just saying that no filmmaker wants a project they pour their heart into to be handed a barrage of disappointment, no matter how much that filmmaker does it for the sake of their own fulfillment. And going out on that kind of relatively sour note does have an impact on one's legacy in the grand scheme of things - the impetus of a passion project might not be praise yet ending with praise is a much welcome bonus. But yes he'll always be remembered for Godfather so he has that going for him regardless. I look forward to seeing Megalopolis, good or bad.
@@claranimmer7349 yeah it's the aspect of filmmaking that most people take for granted and don't understand. The greatest screenplay ever helmed by a director with an incredible vision for it can nonetheless be plagued by key elements of it (e.g., cast and crew availability, weather cancellations, losing light, running out of time/money, etc) not falling into place. Yes, a great director knows how to make the best of each moment and pivot onto happy accidents, but there's millions of decisions to be made so even the best directors have their share of setbacks they don't quite overcome. The key is to make the amalgam of alternative decisions feel like that was the plan all along..but the effectiveness of that relies on both talent and some amount of serendipity.
@m0thdm you say that as if he didn't spend 10 years of his life not doing anything but selling wine, because he couldn't make profit on his last film. But yeah, I guess when you're "rich" we're not allowed to show any empathy. 🙄
Saw this last night and it is 30 years to late. It isn’t a slight on Coppola but as a story it’s a disaster. Way to all over the place and doesn’t have a through line to really bring it all home. Moments and concepts work so well but it eventually gets way to preachy for it own good. Pacing is a nightmare. At any point it could end or keep going forever. It’s a problem. All that said it’s beyond appreciated. The passion is there but it’s a sketchbook of manic ideas that never go beyond that.
After many decades of movie-watching here is where I've landed...I really enjoy films made with a singular vision. With them, you get some unique ideas and scenes, but also horrible ideas and scenes as well. But what do they both have in common? You remember them. Made-by-committee films are always "pretty good", but very rarely memorable. I love when someone is swinging hard for the fences, you'll either get a home run or a spectacular strikeout. But you'll remember it.
Themes and ideas that are either obvious and repeated or abstract and obscure, fantastical abilities that aren't relevant to the plot, wild shifts in tone and acting style, breaking the fourth wall and characters with names like Wow Platinum... who'd have though that Francis Ford Coppola would end up having so much in common with Hideo Kojima?
@@nighttrain1236 An earnestly intentioned hugely ambitious flawed film with some beautiful moments made outside the Hollywood studio system - good comparison.
@@nighttrain1236 It is 100x worse than Cloud Atlas. I got that Cloud Atlas feeling from this movie too, but it is above and beyond the cringe in that movie. This is next level garbage. It's so bad that we need to invent a new word for how bad a movie is. You couldn't write a worse movie if you used prompted ChatGPT to write the worst movie of all time.
This is the kind of review I wanted to hear, and thank you for that. :) Most movie critic / review RUclipsrs are strongly bashing the movie, saying it's confusing, has no clear message, the acting was bad and horrendous... Your review on the other hand clearly says why it might be great, and even though some people might not like it, it can still be great. It's kinda neutral while also telling people what you appreciate about it and what not.
I’ve been following your channel for years, and nice to know that no matter how crazy it gets out in the world I’ve been able to come back to watch new videos by you. Great review. I’ll have to check this film out.
Thank you for the best review I’ve seen yet on Megalopolis. Your reviews are always smart and fair. Don’t necessarily agree with everything you said, but know you’re coming from a place of movie knowledge. You mentioned D. W. Griffith, and I immediately thought of ‘Intolerance’. Lots of nods to silent era films. Hell, FFC even quoted John Wilkes Booth ! Lots of stuff (overstuff ?) I really appreciated in this movie. Love to see you revisit this in 10 yrs, see how your opinion might change. You’re the most thoughtful reviewer out there.
Have you ever seen Richard Kelly’s follow up to Donnie Darko, Southland Tales? From what I’m hearing about Megalopolis, it’s sounds very reminiscent of Southland Tales- a movie I absolutely love, despite its wild, messy nature.
Thank you for being kind and respectful to the work of one of our greatest filmmakers. AND honest! Great artists’ take risks and that means missing the mark sometimes. Coppola doesn’t make fast food. Bless him for that. You’re my favorite critic, BTW. Thanks for your insights and deep-felt love for the art of filmmaking.
An excellent review of relative auteurism. I will look forward to plundering its depths and running a ground in the shallows myself. Thank you for what you do and how you do it.
I definitely fall in the category of not liking this- for many reasons you pointed out.. but I agree this may grow on me with subsequent viewings- it happened with apocalypse now, clerks, Donnie darko, etc- the more I watched them, the more I fell in love with them
It’s not the Fall of the Roman Empire. It’s the Roman Republic. A time of decadence, yes, but also of optimism. It’s the most forward looking film in a long time. Many will be calling Megalopolis a masterpiece 20 years from now.
I respect that you didn’t hate on it like most have been doing and I knew you would appreciate it. I felt the same pride in him but for me it was when it ended. My partners only words at the credits were WOW. I liked it a lot more than you, and I do think at this time in America, this is such an important film. I also do think it will grow on you in time (I cant wait for my second screening) - I think part of that growing is submitting to the film and letting it speak to you on its own terms. Too many reviewers (and yes even you a little) seem to be cirticizing it for what it isn’t, or what they think it could be. Fair enough, but I am old school and an artist too and so maybe I feel a bit more deference and awe is accustomed to a director who is (not has been, is) one of the great artists of our time. Thanks for the great / thoughtful review! Y
I think I was somewhat spoilt by cinema in the nineties, in that it came thick and fast, and it was all over the map in terms of genre, themes, and style, so much so that ingrained in me the principle need to emerge from the cinema feeling like I'd really seen.... something. I may not always have been able to exactly say what that something was, but just... something. Something I'd not seen before, was risky, and innovative. Perhaps not always successfully so (In fact, often a failure of experimentation or daring), but at least they dared to do so. And this new century I find disappointing in this regard, in the main, especially for headline features, in that, although they even be excellent, the central line of popular culture, the are generally nothing new, let alone daring. So my interest was aroused by this one, especially because of the divisive view people have of it, and the more opinions differ, the more it makes me want to see it. It certainly, at the very least, seems like it might really be... something.
Made perfect sense to me, including the plot, which I found to be consistent. If you took Catilina to be some kind of hero, then the movie made no sense. If you took him to be as corrupted as those around him, and trying to change, then it made more sense. Also, realizing that the movie contained a boat load of both symbolism and cynicism, helped. That it was really about the depth our current culture had fallen to, and how to get out. That all the different factions (the greedy Crassius and his treacherous wife, the power hungry and skeptical Cicero, the power hungry nephew and Trumpian populist Clodio) were blocking the people's vision of what could be. Just as things are today in America. That said, the movie never explained why Catilina and Julia were the only ones who could "see", the possible future, while no one else could. Of course, there was Catilina's guilt ridden drunkeness over his wife committing suicide, after finding him in bed with another woman...
This is the kindest review I have heard on the film. I think Coppola here is doing is own personal Atlas Shrugged opus that is bewildering to most and genius to himself and a select few admirers. I will say that this is not the first time he has put up his winery for a movie which he did for Apocalypse Now. That film broke him as a person and artist. The severe mental breakdown he suffered in the jungle and his serious financial problems seemed to have sapped him of that special spark he had in the Godfather through the 80s and 90s. The one thing in Megalopolis that would have helped is getting John Milus to co write with him again. Milius would have given the story more discipline and focus and given his work on HBO Rome series an excellent fit.
I remember how critics trashed Friedkin's Sorcerer when it first premiered (I opted for it over Star Wars line in Times Square at the time) and it destroyed his career. Now it is viewed as a masterpiece and classic. Same with Dylan's Self Portrait album. OTOH, Cimino's Heaven's Gate is still viewed as a disaster.
Totally agree with most of your points, but I found the performances and style to be tongue in cheek and thought the movie overall was very humorous...especially Driver like you said. Whether or not that was intended tho I'm not sure haha. Totally understand the mixed reviews tho, I feel like you either are gonna be on board and have fun with the grandiose goofiness or take it serious and think it's bad and cringey.
I enjoyed the tongue-in-cheek performances as well (I laughed a LOT actually, and I think most of the time the laughs were intended), but I do think each actor is playing in a different key. Aubrey Plaza is probably my favorite part of the film just because her style of comedy feels perfect for this sort of high-camp self-serious aesthetic, but then when you put that next to what Jon Voight is doing, it feels like two separate movies stuck together. Shia LaBeouf is similarly humorous, but he also has to operate as a serious character at points, and it just doesn't fit given what he was doing two scenes prior, etc. I think if the tone was more consistent in the making of the film, it would have cohered a LOT more. Just my opinion, though!
I think the issue is with human world modelling and expectations. We want some amount of novelty, but within a predictable and well established framework. The story of the film must exist within the stories we tell ourselves about film itself. When something truly novel and new comes along, we attack it like white blood cells attacking a pathogen, it irritates people, it causes cognitive dissonance. Films like Southland Tales and Enter The Void are good examples. This is a “pretentious” sounding idea, but it takes a certain amount of intelligence and creativity to not be annoyed by that which is different, it requires a brain capable of reinterpreting reality on the fly, and adjusting our world models and narrative frameworks. One of the most consistent critiques of media that I hear these days is- “why isn’t it just more like everything else?!!” We have so many rigid rules and conventions that we defend and uphold to the point of banal creative homogeneity. I’ve not seen this film, I may hate it, but I’m sure that many people are simply annoyed that it’s not playing by the “rules”.
wow, i just checked, and DFL has been posting and cranking out great videos esp movie and cinema reviews on RUclips , consistently since 2007 !! great job, keep up the sincere and honest work. (very rare on YT.)
Kermode is about Kermode. (His rants are kind of enjoyable, though you need a humongous amount of salt which renders them practically worthless.) She is about movies.
I enjoyed it, makes a change from endless reboots and superheroes, it reminded me a bit of Citizen Kane, a bit fantastical, over the top, interesting camera work and dissolves, and then the camera zooms out of a snowglobe 😂 worth a watch to decide for yourself
I love "Brazil". Gilliam peaked with that film. I wonder if Coppola ever read the French graphic novel _Jodelle_ , which is set in a futuristic Roman Empire.
Brazil was a totally dystopian film. Megalopolis (especially its end/climax) is a completely utopian film. They’re both great, but this has softness and visual poetry / beauty, not as much of that in Brazil.
one of the best movie reviews, awesome. I liked the movie, but I think talks to people that already know part of the concept and philosophy the movie shows, I don't think mainstream audience will easily get it, or take something for themselves, and that's the problem with the movie.
Went to see it after watching a load of reviews- including this one. I went with low expectations because the reviews were mainly bad- but I really enjoyed it! It totally worked for me! I was even quite moved at the end. I just felt like I got it. Its weird reading mainly bad reviews- I think people could be a bit less cynical and more open minded. (not you- you gave it a chance)
First off, you are one of the best reviewers out there - my favorite, hands down. Thoughtful, knowledgeable, and fair. I saw this movie twice, and will own it the micro second it comes out. I loved it for all the reasons you said you loved it, and all the reasons you said you didn’t. Be very interested to have you review Megalopolis 5 years from now, and see if you opinion has changed, and how. This situation reminded me of a story about Vincent Van Gogh. He painted a portrait of a person, and asked them how they liked it. They said it didn’t look like them. His response ? “It will…” Years later, the portrait looked exactly like them. Maybe we’re just not ready to know how to feel about this film. Time will tell…
The story was alot of platitudinous wheel-spinning for me. And the digital cgi aesthetic did not work for me either. Im not really a huge FFC guy so this didnt let me down, but it just wasnt for me. Im happy he got to make what he wanted, though
@@movingvisionmotiongraphics5110 Sure. I just meant that style is very unappealing to me, so hurt my ability to enjoy the movie on a purely stylistic level, let alone the story
To me it made sense - it felt like it was a parody of Americas fake plasticity. And the sort of perfect art deco facade was like a mix of art deco America and nazi fascism
The first review that put me onto you was Guy Maddin's 'The Forbidden Room'. And from there I knew I was dealing with a girl who is on the right wavelength. That said, your review of MEGALOPOLIS was the one I've really been waiting for! This film is clearly very Jungian and is CoppoIa's soul on full exhibition. To your point, I think Adam Driver was never lost on that fact and he clearly gives it his all in his performance, even if the end result is unintentionally comedic! I little find myself laughing out loud at some of his lines in the trailer. But I'm here for it. Partly on the strength of your review, and partly as an ode to Mr. Coppola and Artistic Ambition, I'm definitely gonna go see his parting message to the next generation.
100% agree. It was a great movie but I did not feel any empathy rising from inside me for any of the characters in it. I also did not feel any real thrill. But it was a trip. A philosophical parable set to spectacle. I really laughed when Jon Voight took out his little bow and arrow. It took me awhile to remember Alice Vanderwaal's name. Yeah, yeah, that's the little girl who won in a contest with her Ukulele.And wait isn't that Trump and Elon uniting in the end. :)
Really enjoyed this fair and spirited review. I will watch Megalopolis because even the weakest Coppola films I've seen have flickers of genius. For example, I found that One From the Heart completely failed as a romantic melodrama, yet it had some of the most beautiful shots I've ever seen, which kind of made it worthwhile.
Bravo I’ve seen 1.5 times on IMAX. I felt more comfortable and happier the second time but loved my feeling of inquisitiveness in first viewing. Glad you made the reference to Welles’ works. I saw it too. Hitchcock dream sequence like. The second time u connected more. It helped to watch interviews with Driver and Coppola and realize that Driver is largely rportrqying Coppola like character. It is my favorite movie in awhile
Finally a reviewer who doesn’t completely trash the movie and everything in it. I had fun with Megalopolis. It’s not a masterpiece, but I found it entertaining and interesting and will likely watch it again.
It’s an INCREDIBLE FILM. One will likely need to see it again to “get it”. It IS A MAJOR SPECTACLE-a PERFECT FILM. Not “butchered” AT ALL!!! It’s WAAAAAY better than “Babylon” that sucked. You just aren’t sophisticated enough to appreciate the artfulness, the depth of ideas, the amazing imagination to create this MASTERPIECE- wonderful performances and aesthetics. Not at all as you have described. This is an original and important film that the dumbed down will not get. Like you apparently.
I'm a huge fan of F.F. Copolla. It's clear he wanted to heap a whole lot into 3 to 4 hours. I'll still watch it. I'm sorry that many won't have the patience I'll give him.
Remember when this movie was called 'Titus' and it was directed by Julie Taymor? (I agree, cinephiles should see it, except that I can't recommend that anyone should see it, save those who are determined to go despite every warning that they should not. Megalopolis doesn't fit on a good/bad scale, or a star rating scale. Praise to the actors, as they really gave it what they could and tied it up enough to keep it from falling completely apart. I actually had a good time, but I was a little drunk, laughed a lot, got up for snacks and restroom trips much more than I would for any other movie, took a short nap, and spent the last 40 minutes checking my watch.)
I thought Megalopolis reminded me of Federico Fellini's Satyricon (1969). Satyricon is a "loose adaptation of Petronius's classic Roman satire". I didn't like the narrative in this movie, the same can be said about Megaloplis but both films visuals exceed my expectations. Mr. Coppola should have called it the 'Beautiful Confusion' the original title of Fellini's 8 1/2.
I completely agree. I liked the film very much and I liked Adam Driver very much in it. I was really touched by it. This hope for the better future of mankind despite all the dark signs of decline comes from the heart and I loved it.
I couldn't wait to see your take on the movie, but I disagree. This movie was horrible, whether or not it's somewhat intentional is the question. It wanted to say so much and ended up saying nothing at all to me. If nothing else, I kinda want to see the movie that Aubrey Plaza and Shia LaBoeuf thought they were in instead of this one. That trainwreck would be a more interesting one at least. I genuinely hope that Coppola is happy with it even if no one else is.
It would be absolutely impossible if the next level abomination of cringe in this movie was unintentional. Making a movie would have unintentional accidents in it. Every single scene in this movie is embarassing and cringy. I refuse to believe that is an accident. It must be intentional.
Dude made Part 1&2. If he wants to take a dump and film the contents for two hours then he can as far as I'm concerned. I'll have his back even if no-one else will 😂
Thank you for your outstanding review of this super-ambitious mess of an 'experimental/art-film' by Coppola. Like you referenced, the film does remind me of a film that Orson Welles would make, esp. his 'unfinished' last film 'The Other Side of the Wind' w/its psychedelic editing, which Coppola used in that over-long 'circus'-like spectacle event scene, which got very redundant for me. All in all, your review captured just about everything I thought about his film, as a cinephile & a filmmaker myself.
I really enjoyed Megapolis and found it to be the big-budget counterpart to his most recent art house films (Youth Without Youth, Tetro, and Twixt). Initially, I was somewhat thrown off by the parody-style acting used in certain scenes (or by certain actors) but nevertheless, I think this is arguably Coppola's most beautiful film. I look forward to a second viewing after I completely digest everything from the first go-round...
Smart, thought provoking, funny, cinematically rich… a fable, crafted by a master. Deserves critical reassessment. There are enough triangles to fill a few Fritz Lang films. I was the only person in the last theater at the end of the hall.😢 It’s a great film.
I think the #1 question I have is what will this movie be like when it comes out on VOD? I haven’t seen the film yet but I hope he puts out a 3hr cut that improves the story. Also I didn’t like Babylon the first time viewing but seeing it a second time I love that film even more now and I think I’ll appreciate it more and more each viewing.
Reminded me a little of Southland Tales and Cloud Atlas; all 3 movies seemed to get a lot of negative reviews, but I found them all to be quite rewarding for their uniqueness.
I love weird, I love the unexpected, I love movies that sometimes require multiple viewings, but man, Megalopolis was so boring, did I hate it? No, will I ever watch it again? Hell no, there’s nothing I found even remotely intriguing about this film, and here I was, ready to be one of the people propping this film up, being one of the few that maybe thought this film was misunderstood, or secretly a masterpiece…but no, it’s shallow beyond shallow, it’s not as intellectually stimulating as it’s trying to be.
"I'm making an extravagant $120 million movie based on the Catilinarian Conspiracy, an attempted coup in 63 BC that was put down through the violation of due process and was indicative of the decay of the Roman Republic. You heard me."
@@nathanreiber6819 someone who's only there for in the moment entertainment and not for intellectual stimulation. The mainstream, the majority, won't be looking into the intended meaning or trying to understand the allegory.
I can't fathom spending over $100 million of one's own money just to make...this. The fact that we live in a country where someone can do this is more of a commentary on society than anything actually in the film.
I think it shows a commitment to artistic freedom of expression, is what. Others with far less money are also allowed to make whatever they want, too, you know.
Sounds like the writing and the story are the main problem. Look, you can do almost anything with a film, as long as the writing is A-Game, and you got a good story. And you don't have to spend a lot of money as well. You don't even have to hire A-grade actors. If you got a well written script, the film almost does itself. I think Francis' ego is the real bloat here.
I just watched it and I liked it, I see a lot of things that what movie could do better but at the end is a movie that I don’t fully understand but I love this Shakespeare style, art and those lights that sometimes look like mid movie from 2000s.
Yours is one on the better reviews of this film out there. I liked this movie warts and all and see it as an inevitable cult classic that WILL influence bright mined future filmmakers.
I don’t think Coppola lost his way he just has his own style of film making which has changed over the years. And he made his passion project the way he saw it nothing more nothing less
"ultimately, the the art is your mark on the world not your explanation of it" - the really threw me. i'm going to have to go and think about that one for a bit, not least because of the lack of engagement on the work i've already created and that i'm eager to explain.
Roses to you for spotting the Red Shoes references... The scene where Julia goes to Caesar to retrieve her letter with the funny picture is a re-enactment of the Red Shoes scene where the composer Julian goes to the Lermontov to retrieve his letter where he accuses him of stealing his music...
A small point defending Welles here: Ambersons (as you state yourself) was butchered with even scenes being written and shot out of thin air while Welles was in Brazil so to put down to Welles’ over-ambition is unfair. We’ll never know how great that film could have been, but by what survives of the Welles’ section of the film indicates it would’ve been equal to Citizen Kane. I haven’t seen Megalopolis but it seems to me it suffers from what you’re stating: he’s a man far passed his prime with his younger self’s courage and ambition and that if he had made it at his 1970’s height it most likely would’ve been great - like all his 1970’s. I feel the same way about his Dracula(which I do like for its great aspects) but if made 15 years earlier it would’ve undoubtedly been far better. I want to see Megalopolis just to support the artistic risk & effort
What are you babbling about, she knows all that, and so do half the people on this page. She said it was butchered! Obviously not by him! There's no need to "defend" Welles; everyone knows what happened! Especially her!
@@TTM9691 Is everything ok at home? Is there a number you need anyone to call? If everything is hopefully ok, have you ever considered switching to decaf😬? Now the wellness check is done with.. I start off by saying “a small point here” pointing to the fact that in my own opinion it’s of minor significance. Now to my reasons why i wanted to make “my small point” which is all of two sentences of “rambling”. That she lumps Ambersons in with two recent films that have been denigrated due to budget, ambition, and the pretentious grand ambitions of the directors, while Welles film was taken away and destroyed after he finished it. Obviously she knows, cuz she says it in her review, which I acknowledge before taking an entire sentence explaining why I feel it is separate from those two. Am I overly sensitive about Welles? Sure, but there’s so few films, fewer with an actual budget, and fewer that weren’t messed with after he finished them - and not an insignificant contingent that want to say he’s less than what has survived. I’m aware of this over sensitivity, which again, is why I start my small point with “a small point here” as I embarrassingly defend a man long dead with no connection to me at all. At no point am I insulting or angry at her and keep it strictly about film on a film channel; The nerve of me! This is further illustrated by my using my other two sentences stating that although I haven’t seen it yet what she’s saying sounds right to me - I even point to an earlier Coppola film where I see some parallels - and I end by agreeing to the see the film for the reasons she says you should. What’s the issue?
@@mr.moonmouth4404 And now you're going to cop an attitude because you didn't understand the video. 😆 No, but seriously, why don't you regurgitate all you picked up from the "It's All True" documentary they ran on HBO in the 90s while I sing "Nowhere Man"🤣
@@TTM9691 Attitude? I’m not the unhinged dork that made ranting reply with “!” acting as if I was attacking someone, I’m the mild manner dork who had a minor “small point” and admitted as such on a movie review which I largely agreed with that you took offense to. I’ve never seen the doc or if I have I don’t remember so I’m not sure what that has to do with anything nor if I had seen it why I would be something to my demerit. It seems there’s some strange subtext going on here that I’m not aware of. My best guess is you’re not just an unhinged dork, but a colossal one, and therefore feels that his internet lady fair was beset upon by a brute with a 4 sentence banal post which brings up a bit of film history(cuz the review does) and now you’re seeing your opportunity to ride in on your white laptop to save the day with your vast film knowledge to put said brute in his place. Is the field to be littered with cinematographers, gaffers, and locals of this or that scene, to prove who is more mighty in their Welles knowledge in some desperate “cinephilic” battle to win said lady? Have we devolved to that point, sir laptop? Say we haven’t, for Christ’s sake
It’s hard to comment a film god. Too bad for Coppola. This movie went everywhere. There are moments. There are moments not experienced. Some Blade Runnery? Some one from the heart? Still he da man.
I thought it seemed more like a Roman than Francis Coppola movie. It was a very “second unit” style movie. Certainly a must for anyone truly fascinated by cinema or whatever visual storytelling has become.
If this film was directed by Darren Aronofsky you would've bashed it beyond recognition.... but since is Francis I think you just really, really want to like it
I saw this with THE SUBSTANCE, which I loved for a Hollywood film… I loved hearing Bernard Herman’s VERTIGO score at one point. MEGAOPOLIS looks great but it’s a little emotionally flat. I wonder if trying to have it feel like a stage play / Shakespearean play.
The film reminded me at times of Cloud Atlas and The Fountain, but what threw me off was how “made for tv” it felt. It had a mid 90s tv lighting feel that brought the production value down significantly. A movie I remember not liking much is Meloncholia, but it still felt cinematic, despite being shot on digital. Towards the end of the movie, it stopped feeling so cheap.
I enjoyed it. Some of the special effects were iffy like the scene where Julia walks around his model city. It works when it focuses on the romance. His love for his wife being his source of inspiration. The philosophical parts were ok. Pretty shallow but earnest. Aubrey plaza and Shia LaBeouf give the film spark. They’re great. Tbh the only thing I didn’t like was whole subplot of the “teenage” singer. That was weird and pointless
The movie was definitely a wild ride. I honestly appreciate Coppola taking a risk. So few movies take risks these days.
Yours was the ONLY review I was expecting to watch for this movie, specifically, just as I did for The Substance. Even if I sometimes disagree with your opinion, I really think you have a special eye that no one else seems to have. Most of “critics ” only have opinions like “it sucks” or “I don’t get it”.
Most of critics are payd or go with the common thing. In this time of age, you not riding easy if you give direct critic on goverments.
This is why it's so important to watch a film for yourself. Your review is the polar opposite of the first one I watched. They literally said DO NOT watch this movie. I'll be watching so I can make my mind up. Thanks
This movie is amazing and the hivemind of slop enjoyers couldn't cope because they were filtered by it.
@@carlosalegria4776 it's not the worst movie ever ofc, but man was that a mess (and not a beautiful one!). It wasn't the pretentious side of it that really bothered me (Coppola is one of the few who can allow to be pretentious, cause he's made cinema history). It was the poor acting, the awful mistakes, the crappy CGI, the unoriginal megalon architecture and the sloppy concept of a modern Rome (to name a few of the flaws of this movie) to really make me feel embarassed for having paid to see it.
Now, there's some beautiful shots here and there... that woman's body made from other bodies, all the dream-like sequences, the internal design, the photography... and literally nothing else. But yet I see pretentious people not even arguing their own opinion by just addressing others as "slop enjoyers".
@@luca7329 why would I argue with a pleb whose understanding of cinema is so superficial- slop enthusiast mad because he was called out as a slop enthusiast who got filtered
I could say that I was never bored during the movie; very similar pace to Bram Strokers Dracula thankfully. It also felt very much like a 80 year made it in both the absurd and sincere ways that it's hard for me to dislike it even for all of its shortcomings. We don't get movies like this anymore.
Thank you
Def gonna watch it.
Hopefully we won't get them anymore soon
I kinda feel bad for him, having to suffer through how much the film is being panned for what may end up being his last... But I love how you were so pleased when "Megalopolis" popped up on the screen in adoration for him finally getting it done.
Having a passion project can be incredibly hard work and every movie is a gamble, so going for it and sticking to it is half the battle. So much more of it comes down to some degree of serendipity of the right things falling into place at the right time.
he lived his life making amazing movies, is rich famous loved and made a passion project that he funded with his own massive wealth. POOR GUY
@@m0thdm he'll be fine. Yes, Godfather 1 and 2 will be well regarded for all time as some of the best movies ever made... I'm just saying that no filmmaker wants a project they pour their heart into to be handed a barrage of disappointment, no matter how much that filmmaker does it for the sake of their own fulfillment. And going out on that kind of relatively sour note does have an impact on one's legacy in the grand scheme of things - the impetus of a passion project might not be praise yet ending with praise is a much welcome bonus.
But yes he'll always be remembered for Godfather so he has that going for him regardless. I look forward to seeing Megalopolis, good or bad.
Serendipity, what a nice word. I fully agree. (this is the wrong thread)
@@claranimmer7349 yeah it's the aspect of filmmaking that most people take for granted and don't understand. The greatest screenplay ever helmed by a director with an incredible vision for it can nonetheless be plagued by key elements of it (e.g., cast and crew availability, weather cancellations, losing light, running out of time/money, etc) not falling into place.
Yes, a great director knows how to make the best of each moment and pivot onto happy accidents, but there's millions of decisions to be made so even the best directors have their share of setbacks they don't quite overcome. The key is to make the amalgam of alternative decisions feel like that was the plan all along..but the effectiveness of that relies on both talent and some amount of serendipity.
@m0thdm you say that as if he didn't spend 10 years of his life not doing anything but selling wine, because he couldn't make profit on his last film. But yeah, I guess when you're "rich" we're not allowed to show any empathy. 🙄
Saw this last night and it is 30 years to late. It isn’t a slight on Coppola but as a story it’s a disaster. Way to all over the place and doesn’t have a through line to really bring it all home.
Moments and concepts work so well but it eventually gets way to preachy for it own good. Pacing is a nightmare. At any point it could end or keep going forever. It’s a problem.
All that said it’s beyond appreciated. The passion is there but it’s a sketchbook of manic ideas that never go beyond that.
Sounds like you been watching to many reviewers try to form your own opinions 🤔
@@JamesThomas-dn6ee Sounds like you have been reading too many commenters - try to form your own replies.
At least it’s not another sequel/ remake/prequel/reboot. Gotta celebrate that.
Exactly what I was thinking!!
This movie felt closer to a marvel movie than i want to admit
Let not play dumb and act like all films released are remakes/prequels/ and reboots
Doesn’t make it good though
And independently made.
After many decades of movie-watching here is where I've landed...I really enjoy films made with a singular vision. With them, you get some unique ideas and scenes, but also horrible ideas and scenes as well. But what do they both have in common? You remember them.
Made-by-committee films are always "pretty good", but very rarely memorable. I love when someone is swinging hard for the fences, you'll either get a home run or a spectacular strikeout. But you'll remember it.
Themes and ideas that are either obvious and repeated or abstract and obscure, fantastical abilities that aren't relevant to the plot, wild shifts in tone and acting style, breaking the fourth wall and characters with names like Wow Platinum... who'd have though that Francis Ford Coppola would end up having so much in common with Hideo Kojima?
It sounds like he's gone a bit Cloud Atlas?
This really is the MGS4 of movies
@@nighttrain1236 An earnestly intentioned hugely ambitious flawed film with some beautiful moments made outside the Hollywood studio system - good comparison.
@@nighttrain1236 It is 100x worse than Cloud Atlas. I got that Cloud Atlas feeling from this movie too, but it is above and beyond the cringe in that movie. This is next level garbage. It's so bad that we need to invent a new word for how bad a movie is. You couldn't write a worse movie if you used prompted ChatGPT to write the worst movie of all time.
Kojima is a hack
This is the kind of review I wanted to hear, and thank you for that. :)
Most movie critic / review RUclipsrs are strongly bashing the movie, saying it's confusing, has no clear message, the acting was bad and horrendous... Your review on the other hand clearly says why it might be great, and even though some people might not like it, it can still be great. It's kinda neutral while also telling people what you appreciate about it and what not.
The main reason I want to see this is because I found out Ron Fricke was the second unit photographer who DOP'd Koyaanisqatsi and directed Baraka.
Ah that explains a lot, you can almost pickpoint where he might have worked and where definitely not
I’ve been following your channel for years, and nice to know that no matter how crazy it gets out in the world I’ve been able to come back to watch new videos by you.
Great review. I’ll have to check this film out.
Thank you for the best review I’ve seen yet on Megalopolis. Your reviews are always smart and fair. Don’t necessarily agree with everything you said, but know you’re coming from a place of movie knowledge. You mentioned D. W. Griffith, and I immediately thought of ‘Intolerance’. Lots of nods to silent era films. Hell, FFC even quoted John Wilkes Booth ! Lots of stuff (overstuff ?) I really appreciated in this movie. Love to see you revisit this in 10 yrs, see how your opinion might change. You’re the most thoughtful reviewer out there.
I'm glad it exists, and I wish more artists were willing to blow it all on making the movie they want to. It's an interesting mess.
Have you ever seen Richard Kelly’s follow up to Donnie Darko, Southland Tales? From what I’m hearing about Megalopolis, it’s sounds very reminiscent of Southland Tales- a movie I absolutely love, despite its wild, messy nature.
@@eyespy3001 yeah it's somewhat similar to Southland Tales.
@@MacSmithVideo My interest is piqued
I absolutely love Megalopolis! It's a mess, but it's a beautiful mess!
The cinematography is tolerable. The acting and the writing is the worst I've ever witnessed in my life.
Kino
It's a great film.
@@RightNowManis it?
@@aliofly yes.
Thank you for being kind and respectful to the work of one of our greatest filmmakers. AND honest! Great artists’ take risks and that means missing the mark sometimes. Coppola doesn’t make fast food. Bless him for that. You’re my favorite critic, BTW. Thanks for your insights and deep-felt love for the art of filmmaking.
An excellent review of relative auteurism. I will look forward to plundering its depths and running a ground in the shallows myself. Thank you for what you do and how you do it.
I absolutely loved Megalopolis. Saw it in IMAX last night, and will undoubtedly purchase on bluray.
I definitely fall in the category of not liking this- for many reasons you pointed out.. but I agree this may grow on me with subsequent viewings- it happened with apocalypse now, clerks, Donnie darko, etc- the more I watched them, the more I fell in love with them
It’s not the Fall of the Roman Empire. It’s the Roman Republic. A time of decadence, yes, but also of optimism. It’s the most forward looking film in a long time. Many will be calling Megalopolis a masterpiece 20 years from now.
I agree
Catilinarian conspiracy
I respect that you didn’t hate on it like most have been doing and I knew you would appreciate it. I felt the same pride in him but for me it was when it ended. My partners only words at the credits were WOW. I liked it a lot more than you, and I do think at this time in America, this is such an important film. I also do think it will grow on you in time (I cant wait for my second screening) - I think part of that growing is submitting to the film and letting it speak to you on its own terms. Too many reviewers (and yes even you a little) seem to be cirticizing it for what it isn’t, or what they think it could be. Fair enough, but I am old school and an artist too and so maybe I feel a bit more deference and awe is accustomed to a director who is (not has been, is) one of the great artists of our time. Thanks for the great / thoughtful review! Y
I think I was somewhat spoilt by cinema in the nineties, in that it came thick and fast, and it was all over the map in terms of genre, themes, and style, so much so that ingrained in me the principle need to emerge from the cinema feeling like I'd really seen.... something.
I may not always have been able to exactly say what that something was, but just... something.
Something I'd not seen before, was risky, and innovative. Perhaps not always successfully so (In fact, often a failure of experimentation or daring), but at least they dared to do so. And this new century I find disappointing in this regard, in the main, especially for headline features, in that, although they even be excellent, the central line of popular culture, the are generally nothing new, let alone daring.
So my interest was aroused by this one, especially because of the divisive view people have of it, and the more opinions differ, the more it makes me want to see it. It certainly, at the very least, seems like it might really be... something.
Made perfect sense to me, including the plot, which I found to be consistent. If you took Catilina to be some kind of hero, then the movie made no sense. If you took him to be as corrupted as those around him, and trying to change, then it made more sense. Also, realizing that the movie contained a boat load of both symbolism and cynicism, helped. That it was really about the depth our current culture had fallen to, and how to get out. That all the different factions (the greedy Crassius and his treacherous wife, the power hungry and skeptical Cicero, the power hungry nephew and Trumpian populist Clodio) were blocking the people's vision of what could be. Just as things are today in America. That said, the movie never explained why Catilina and Julia were the only ones who could "see", the possible future, while no one else could. Of course, there was Catilina's guilt ridden drunkeness over his wife committing suicide, after finding him in bed with another woman...
Damn girl, you’ve been stuck in that room old boy style for like better part of a decade now. Hope you get out one day!
Tom Servo and Crow T. Robot are in the background somewhere.
Lmao
Wouldn’t have her any other way, 😂. I see her there, I feel at home.
@@interestedparty7523 my friends say she doesn't have legs and honestly im not even sure either
I’m more concerned that she’s living in the backward universe, judging from the titles on her books.
This is the kindest review I have heard on the film. I think Coppola here is doing is own personal Atlas Shrugged opus that is bewildering to most and genius to himself and a select few admirers. I will say that this is not the first time he has put up his winery for a movie which he did for Apocalypse Now. That film broke him as a person and artist. The severe mental breakdown he suffered in the jungle and his serious financial problems seemed to have sapped him of that special spark he had in the Godfather through the 80s and 90s.
The one thing in Megalopolis that would have helped is getting John Milus to co write with him again. Milius would have given the story more discipline and focus and given his work on HBO Rome series an excellent fit.
I remember how critics trashed Friedkin's Sorcerer when it first premiered (I opted for it over Star Wars line in Times Square at the time) and it destroyed his career. Now it is viewed as a masterpiece and classic. Same with Dylan's Self Portrait album. OTOH, Cimino's Heaven's Gate is still viewed as a disaster.
Who considers Self Portrait a masterpiece?!
@@aliofly It has been completely reevaluated and even given the full deluxe bootleg treatment.
Totally agree with most of your points, but I found the performances and style to be tongue in cheek and thought the movie overall was very humorous...especially Driver like you said. Whether or not that was intended tho I'm not sure haha. Totally understand the mixed reviews tho, I feel like you either are gonna be on board and have fun with the grandiose goofiness or take it serious and think it's bad and cringey.
I enjoyed the tongue-in-cheek performances as well (I laughed a LOT actually, and I think most of the time the laughs were intended), but I do think each actor is playing in a different key. Aubrey Plaza is probably my favorite part of the film just because her style of comedy feels perfect for this sort of high-camp self-serious aesthetic, but then when you put that next to what Jon Voight is doing, it feels like two separate movies stuck together. Shia LaBeouf is similarly humorous, but he also has to operate as a serious character at points, and it just doesn't fit given what he was doing two scenes prior, etc. I think if the tone was more consistent in the making of the film, it would have cohered a LOT more.
Just my opinion, though!
@@looney1023good points, i agree 👍
I think the issue is with human world modelling and expectations. We want some amount of novelty, but within a predictable and well established framework. The story of the film must exist within the stories we tell ourselves about film itself. When something truly novel and new comes along, we attack it like white blood cells attacking a pathogen, it irritates people, it causes cognitive dissonance. Films like Southland Tales and Enter The Void are good examples.
This is a “pretentious” sounding idea, but it takes a certain amount of intelligence and creativity to not be annoyed by that which is different, it requires a brain capable of reinterpreting reality on the fly, and adjusting our world models and narrative frameworks. One of the most consistent critiques of media that I hear these days is- “why isn’t it just more like everything else?!!” We have so many rigid rules and conventions that we defend and uphold to the point of banal creative homogeneity.
I’ve not seen this film, I may hate it, but I’m sure that many people are simply annoyed that it’s not playing by the “rules”.
wow, i just checked, and DFL has been posting and cranking out great videos esp movie and cinema reviews on RUclips , consistently since 2007 !! great job, keep up the sincere and honest work. (very rare on YT.)
Saw it last night, I don’t know what to think. There were parts I loved and parts I disliked. I’m glad I saw it and I hope all cinefiles see it
I’m not worry, it will soon be available free somewhere
thanks for an actual review of this movie - sounds like what I thought it was .. moments of cool ideas and weirdness and glimpses of greatness.
Just watched Mark Kermode’s review butchering this movie an hour ago and wanted to see your take. Perfect timing 😂.
I agree less and less with Kermode these days, but I don't think I'll watch these until it's on streaming.
Likewise. I've watched three reviews and all very different takes.
He got pleb filtered lol
Kermode is about Kermode. (His rants are kind of enjoyable, though you need a humongous amount of salt which renders them practically worthless.) She is about movies.
@@dave3076 I watched one review with five different takes. Dan Murrell delivered a perfectly balanced review.
I enjoyed it, makes a change from endless reboots and superheroes, it reminded me a bit of Citizen Kane, a bit fantastical, over the top, interesting camera work and dissolves, and then the camera zooms out of a snowglobe 😂 worth a watch to decide for yourself
Its Copallas version of Brazil but I prefered Brazil
I love "Brazil". Gilliam peaked with that film. I wonder if Coppola ever read the French graphic novel _Jodelle_ , which is set in a futuristic Roman Empire.
@@johnpjones182 12 Monkey’s for me.
Brazil was a totally dystopian film. Megalopolis (especially its end/climax) is a completely utopian film. They’re both great, but this has softness and visual poetry / beauty, not as much of that in Brazil.
@@dancochrane5577no other film gives me the feelings that the tone of 12 monkeys achieves
I love these videos of yours, thanks so much for sharing these. Some real meaningful work here on RUclips. Real value. Much appreciated.
one of the best movie reviews, awesome. I liked the movie, but I think talks to people that already know part of the concept and philosophy the movie shows, I don't think mainstream audience will easily get it, or take something for themselves, and that's the problem with the movie.
You are one of The Best Movie Reviewers Now!
Went to see it after watching a load of reviews- including this one. I went with low expectations because the reviews were mainly bad- but I really enjoyed it! It totally worked for me! I was even quite moved at the end. I just felt like I got it. Its weird reading mainly bad reviews- I think people could be a bit less cynical and more open minded. (not you- you gave it a chance)
First off, you are one of the best reviewers out there - my favorite, hands down. Thoughtful, knowledgeable, and fair. I saw this movie twice, and will own it the micro second it comes out. I loved it for all the reasons you said you loved it, and all the reasons you said you didn’t. Be very interested to have you review Megalopolis 5 years from now, and see if you opinion has changed, and how. This situation reminded me of a story about Vincent Van Gogh. He painted a portrait of a person, and asked them how they liked it. They said it didn’t look like them. His response ? “It will…” Years later, the portrait looked exactly like them. Maybe we’re just not ready to know how to feel about this film. Time will tell…
Thanks for sharing your review. You articulated yourself so well highlighting the pros and the cons. Well done
One of the best reviews out there. Thank you.
The story was alot of platitudinous wheel-spinning for me. And the digital cgi aesthetic did not work for me either. Im not really a huge FFC guy so this didnt let me down, but it just wasnt for me. Im happy he got to make what he wanted, though
This movie reminded me of Southland Tales, tbh. But less fun
I think the dodgy CGI was intentional- to gve it a magical realism stylee
@@movingvisionmotiongraphics5110 Sure. I just meant that style is very unappealing to me, so hurt my ability to enjoy the movie on a purely stylistic level, let alone the story
To me it made sense - it felt like it was a parody of Americas fake plasticity. And the sort of perfect art deco facade was like a mix of art deco America and nazi fascism
The first review that put me onto you was Guy Maddin's 'The Forbidden Room'. And from there I knew I was dealing with a girl who is on the right wavelength. That said, your review of MEGALOPOLIS was the one I've really been waiting for! This film is clearly very Jungian and is CoppoIa's soul on full exhibition. To your point, I think Adam Driver was never lost on that fact and he clearly gives it his all in his performance, even if the end result is unintentionally comedic! I little find myself laughing out loud at some of his lines in the trailer. But I'm here for it. Partly on the strength of your review, and partly as an ode to Mr. Coppola and Artistic Ambition, I'm definitely gonna go see his parting message to the next generation.
Was hoping it would be an instant classic upon release, but I'm not surprised at the mixed results. Still looking forward to seeing it.
That was an amazingly kind review.
100% agree. It was a great movie but I did not feel any empathy rising from inside me for any of the characters in it. I also did not feel any real thrill. But it was a trip. A philosophical parable set to spectacle. I really laughed when Jon Voight took out his little bow and arrow. It took me awhile to remember Alice Vanderwaal's name. Yeah, yeah, that's the little girl who won in a contest with her Ukulele.And wait isn't that Trump and Elon uniting in the end. :)
I wanted to listen to a review of Megalopolis and went straight here, was not desappointed and looking forward to seeing the film. Very intringued.
Really enjoyed this fair and spirited review. I will watch Megalopolis because even the weakest Coppola films I've seen have flickers of genius. For example, I found that One From the Heart completely failed as a romantic melodrama, yet it had some of the most beautiful shots I've ever seen, which kind of made it worthwhile.
Bravo
I’ve seen 1.5 times on IMAX. I felt more comfortable and happier the second time but loved my feeling of inquisitiveness in first viewing. Glad you made the reference to Welles’ works. I saw it too. Hitchcock dream sequence like. The second time u connected more. It helped to watch interviews with Driver and Coppola and realize that Driver is largely rportrqying Coppola like character.
It is my favorite movie in awhile
me too
Did you get a new camera? The quality is much improved and crystal clear.
Finally a reviewer who doesn’t completely trash the movie and everything in it. I had fun with Megalopolis. It’s not a masterpiece, but I found it entertaining and interesting and will likely watch it again.
From what I have gather, the movie is more or like mediocre than anything, not awful not great or even good, just like okay.
Definitely a risk. It’s unconventional and not an easy watch. It isn’t bad but experimental and sometimes hit and miss.
It’s an INCREDIBLE FILM. One will likely need to see it again to “get it”. It IS A MAJOR SPECTACLE-a PERFECT FILM. Not “butchered” AT ALL!!!
It’s WAAAAAY better than “Babylon” that sucked. You just aren’t sophisticated enough to appreciate the artfulness, the depth of ideas, the amazing imagination to create this MASTERPIECE- wonderful performances and aesthetics. Not at all as you have described. This is an original and important film that the dumbed down will not get. Like you apparently.
Hi Francis...
I'm a huge fan of F.F. Copolla. It's clear he wanted to heap a whole lot into 3 to 4 hours. I'll still watch it. I'm sorry that many won't have the patience I'll give him.
Remember when this movie was called 'Titus' and it was directed by Julie Taymor? (I agree, cinephiles should see it, except that I can't recommend that anyone should see it, save those who are determined to go despite every warning that they should not. Megalopolis doesn't fit on a good/bad scale, or a star rating scale. Praise to the actors, as they really gave it what they could and tied it up enough to keep it from falling completely apart. I actually had a good time, but I was a little drunk, laughed a lot, got up for snacks and restroom trips much more than I would for any other movie, took a short nap, and spent the last 40 minutes checking my watch.)
I thought Megalopolis reminded me of Federico Fellini's Satyricon (1969). Satyricon is a "loose adaptation of Petronius's classic Roman satire". I didn't like the narrative in this movie, the same can be said about Megaloplis but both films visuals exceed my expectations. Mr. Coppola should have called it the 'Beautiful Confusion' the original title of Fellini's 8 1/2.
Classy review. I'll see it! Maybe even in theaters if it manages to hold out two weeks.
I completely agree. I liked the film very much and I liked Adam Driver very much in it. I was really touched by it. This hope for the better future of mankind despite all the dark signs of decline comes from the heart and I loved it.
He knows what's really up and was trying to tell us
In a time where IP rules I'm glad this exists.
I couldn't wait to see your take on the movie, but I disagree. This movie was horrible, whether or not it's somewhat intentional is the question. It wanted to say so much and ended up saying nothing at all to me. If nothing else, I kinda want to see the movie that Aubrey Plaza and Shia LaBoeuf thought they were in instead of this one. That trainwreck would be a more interesting one at least. I genuinely hope that Coppola is happy with it even if no one else is.
It would be absolutely impossible if the next level abomination of cringe in this movie was unintentional. Making a movie would have unintentional accidents in it. Every single scene in this movie is embarassing and cringy. I refuse to believe that is an accident. It must be intentional.
@@r.davidsenmeh, that's your OPINION
he needed a good studio to back him and also reign him in, work with him to make a coherent script and execute it properly
Dude made Part 1&2. If he wants to take a dump and film the contents for two hours then he can as far as I'm concerned. I'll have his back even if no-one else will 😂
You are one of my favorite movie reviewers and real as f*ck for being a ufc fan on top of that
An Ulta Francis Coppola fan?
Thank you for your outstanding review of this super-ambitious mess of an 'experimental/art-film' by Coppola. Like you referenced, the film does remind me of a film that Orson Welles would make, esp. his 'unfinished' last film 'The Other Side of the Wind' w/its psychedelic editing, which Coppola used in that over-long 'circus'-like spectacle event scene, which got very redundant for me.
All in all, your review captured just about everything I thought about his film, as a cinephile & a filmmaker myself.
The pledge at the ending brought a tear to my eye, after the movie broke me down over the course of it's runtime. Hypnotic.
I really enjoyed Megapolis and found it to be the big-budget counterpart to his most recent art house films (Youth Without Youth, Tetro, and Twixt). Initially, I was somewhat thrown off by the parody-style acting used in certain scenes (or by certain actors) but nevertheless, I think this is arguably Coppola's most beautiful film. I look forward to a second viewing after I completely digest everything from the first go-round...
it was amazing, I wanna take shrooms and watch it
Smart, thought provoking, funny, cinematically rich…
a fable, crafted by a master.
Deserves critical reassessment.
There are enough triangles to fill a few Fritz Lang films.
I was the only person in the last theater at the end of the hall.😢
It’s a great film.
I think the #1 question I have is what will this movie be like when it comes out on VOD? I haven’t seen the film yet but I hope he puts out a 3hr cut that improves the story. Also I didn’t like Babylon the first time viewing but seeing it a second time I love that film even more now and I think I’ll appreciate it more and more each viewing.
I couldn't agree more
Always the best movies divide critics
I dont know why people are saying its a 'mess' - it hung together pretty well for me...
You must be a film savant
@@imnottellingyoumyname3050 Im not usually- this one just worked for me
Reminded me a little of Southland Tales and Cloud Atlas; all 3 movies seemed to get a lot of negative reviews, but I found them all to be quite rewarding for their uniqueness.
I love weird, I love the unexpected, I love movies that sometimes require multiple viewings, but man, Megalopolis was so boring, did I hate it? No, will I ever watch it again? Hell no, there’s nothing I found even remotely intriguing about this film, and here I was, ready to be one of the people propping this film up, being one of the few that maybe thought this film was misunderstood, or secretly a masterpiece…but no, it’s shallow beyond shallow, it’s not as intellectually stimulating as it’s trying to be.
I have to agree I’m afraid
Agreed, multiple viewings aren't possible- it was that bad, surprisingly terrible.
"I'm making an extravagant $120 million movie based on the Catilinarian Conspiracy, an attempted coup in 63 BC that was put down through the violation of due process and was indicative of the decay of the Roman Republic. You heard me."
"Whaddaya mean Metropolis-envy?"
The only reviewer I was waiting for
Just saw it, loved it. Mainstream viewers probably too much for them.
You are oh so very clever to see genius in mess
what were you on ?
@@PatrickMAT-c4e nothing. My wife was with me.
What's a "mainstream" viewer? Lol
@@nathanreiber6819 someone who's only there for in the moment entertainment and not for intellectual stimulation. The mainstream, the majority, won't be looking into the intended meaning or trying to understand the allegory.
I can't fathom spending over $100 million of one's own money just to make...this. The fact that we live in a country where someone can do this is more of a commentary on society than anything actually in the film.
Amazon Prime spent nearly a billion on rings of power, let that sink in
I think it shows a commitment to artistic freedom of expression, is what. Others with far less money are also allowed to make whatever they want, too, you know.
Dude, ur comment is gold. GOLD.
it’s his minute made the film he wanted to make. nothing hard to understand about that
I'm guessing you're not an artist
Big movies sometimes take years for our minds to unfold over them. Giving it to the tiktok generation was the mistake.
Sounds like the writing and the story are the main problem. Look, you can do almost anything with a film, as long as the writing is A-Game, and you got a good story. And you don't have to spend a lot of money as well. You don't even have to hire A-grade actors. If you got a well written script, the film almost does itself. I think Francis' ego is the real bloat here.
I just watched it and I liked it, I see a lot of things that what movie could do better but at the end is a movie that I don’t fully understand but I love this Shakespeare style, art and those lights that sometimes look like mid movie from 2000s.
Thank you for your take on this. I was considering skipping it but based on your review, I’m thinking of going, now.
Yours is one on the better reviews of this film out there. I liked this movie warts and all and see it as an inevitable cult classic that WILL influence bright mined future filmmakers.
I don’t think Coppola lost his way he just has his own style of film making which has changed over the years. And he made his passion project the way he saw it nothing more nothing less
Movie of the year. GET FILTERED.
"ultimately, the the art is your mark on the world not your explanation of it" - the really threw me. i'm going to have to go and think about that one for a bit, not least because of the lack of engagement on the work i've already created and that i'm eager to explain.
buying this for sure, Rome reborn and an unpersoned non woke Coppola count me in, of course critics hate it its all one clique
Kino
Yeah FFC non woke okay.
@geert574 Which aspects of Coppola's politics are you taking umbrage with?
i love that this movie is making Americans feel things at least, and talk about them.
And subscribed!
Finally someone intelligent to talk about movies!🙏
Roses to you for spotting the Red Shoes references... The scene where Julia goes to Caesar to retrieve her letter with the funny picture is a re-enactment of the Red Shoes scene where the composer Julian goes to the Lermontov to retrieve his letter where he accuses him of stealing his music...
A small point defending Welles here: Ambersons (as you state yourself) was butchered with even scenes being written and shot out of thin air while Welles was in Brazil so to put down to Welles’ over-ambition is unfair. We’ll never know how great that film could have been, but by what survives of the Welles’ section of the film indicates it would’ve been equal to Citizen Kane. I haven’t seen Megalopolis but it seems to me it suffers from what you’re stating: he’s a man far passed his prime with his younger self’s courage and ambition and that if he had made it at his 1970’s height it most likely would’ve been great - like all his 1970’s. I feel the same way about his Dracula(which I do like for its great aspects) but if made 15 years earlier it would’ve undoubtedly been far better. I want to see Megalopolis just to support the artistic risk & effort
What are you babbling about, she knows all that, and so do half the people on this page. She said it was butchered! Obviously not by him! There's no need to "defend" Welles; everyone knows what happened! Especially her!
The comparison was about the feeling of "what might have been". Try to keep up , doofus.
@@TTM9691 Is everything ok at home? Is there a number you need anyone to call? If everything is hopefully ok, have you ever considered switching to decaf😬? Now the wellness check is done with.. I start off by saying “a small point here” pointing to the fact that in my own opinion it’s of minor significance. Now to my reasons why i wanted to make “my small point” which is all of two sentences of “rambling”. That she lumps Ambersons in with two recent films that have been denigrated due to budget, ambition, and the pretentious grand ambitions of the directors, while Welles film was taken away and destroyed after he finished it. Obviously she knows, cuz she says it in her review, which I acknowledge before taking an entire sentence explaining why I feel it is separate from those two. Am I overly sensitive about Welles? Sure, but there’s so few films, fewer with an actual budget, and fewer that weren’t messed with after he finished them - and not an insignificant contingent that want to say he’s less than what has survived. I’m aware of this over sensitivity, which again, is why I start my small point with “a small point here” as I embarrassingly defend a man long dead with no connection to me at all. At no point am I insulting or angry at her and keep it strictly about film on a film channel; The nerve of me! This is further illustrated by my using my other two sentences stating that although I haven’t seen it yet what she’s saying sounds right to me - I even point to an earlier Coppola film where I see some parallels - and I end by agreeing to the see the film for the reasons she says you should. What’s the issue?
@@mr.moonmouth4404 And now you're going to cop an attitude because you didn't understand the video. 😆 No, but seriously, why don't you regurgitate all you picked up from the "It's All True" documentary they ran on HBO in the 90s while I sing "Nowhere Man"🤣
@@TTM9691 Attitude? I’m not the unhinged dork that made ranting reply with “!” acting as if I was attacking someone, I’m the mild manner dork who had a minor “small point” and admitted as such on a movie review which I largely agreed with that you took offense to. I’ve never seen the doc or if I have I don’t remember so I’m not sure what that has to do with anything nor if I had seen it why I would be something to my demerit. It seems there’s some strange subtext going on here that I’m not aware of. My best guess is you’re not just an unhinged dork, but a colossal one, and therefore feels that his internet lady fair was beset upon by a brute with a 4 sentence banal post which brings up a bit of film history(cuz the review does) and now you’re seeing your opportunity to ride in on your white laptop to save the day with your vast film knowledge to put said brute in his place. Is the field to be littered with cinematographers, gaffers, and locals of this or that scene, to prove who is more mighty in their Welles knowledge in some desperate “cinephilic” battle to win said lady? Have we devolved to that point, sir laptop? Say we haven’t, for Christ’s sake
It’s hard to comment a film god. Too bad for Coppola. This movie went everywhere. There are moments. There are moments not experienced. Some Blade Runnery? Some one from the heart? Still he da man.
I thought it seemed more like a Roman than Francis Coppola movie. It was a very “second unit” style movie. Certainly a must for anyone truly fascinated by cinema or whatever visual storytelling has become.
I think you should review Angst a 1983 psychological horror film that is one of gaspar noé's favourite films
crazy i just searched for this video 10 minutes ago amazing timing
Mee too! Just saw the film and thought: I need to hear from Maggie
If this film was directed by Darren Aronofsky you would've bashed it beyond recognition.... but since is Francis I think you just really, really want to like it
she’s a fan of his so of course she wanted to like it
I saw this with THE SUBSTANCE, which I loved for a Hollywood film… I loved hearing Bernard Herman’s VERTIGO score at one point. MEGAOPOLIS looks great but it’s a little emotionally flat. I wonder if trying to have it feel like a stage play / Shakespearean play.
The film reminded me at times of Cloud Atlas and The Fountain, but what threw me off was how “made for tv” it felt. It had a mid 90s tv lighting feel that brought the production value down significantly. A movie I remember not liking much is Meloncholia, but it still felt cinematic, despite being shot on digital.
Towards the end of the movie, it stopped feeling so cheap.
It’s his answer to citizen Kane…
I enjoyed it. Some of the special effects were iffy like the scene where Julia walks around his model city.
It works when it focuses on the romance. His love for his wife being his source of inspiration. The philosophical parts were ok. Pretty shallow but earnest.
Aubrey plaza and Shia LaBeouf give the film spark. They’re great. Tbh the only thing I didn’t like was whole subplot of the “teenage” singer. That was weird and pointless
I wish it was longer.