Focus isn't exactly all over the place, but it is incoherent, and before you know it, storytelling begins to lose a sense of progression and devolves into aimlessness, even though it's not too hard to figure out what stands at the end of this meandered path, thanks to the familiarity of the path that even those who are unaware of the story of Ian Curtis will find. The film gets to be a bit dull, as well as repetitious at times, yet dragging is also emphasized by a certain other aspect, and that is unevenness, for although I give this film a lot of credit for having the guts to tackle most every key aspects within the brief life of Ian Curtis, and often doing this subject matter justice through effective areas in resonance, storytelling has a tendency to, for too long of a time, intensely meditate upon one layer of this intricate character study, - whether it be Curtis' career, or relationships, or internal conflicts - rather than organically bond the layers, thus making the eventual shifts in layers to prove jarring and ultimately detrimental to your investment within any aspect of this story. Perhaps repetition could have been obscured by dynamics within the kick of director Anton Corbijn's atmospheric storytelling, but I suppose we'll never know, because while Corbijn's storytelling has plenty of effective areas, limpness in plot structuring goes much too emphasized by atmospheric limpness that looms over the film all but throughout it, watering down kick so much that when you're not blandly disengaged, you're bored. Pacing is nothing if not problematic in this film, with limp areas in momentum being the most recurring issue, but not without some company from hurried occasions, which can at least be found within expository areas of storytelling that are generally well-fleshed out, but have their share of glaring underdeveloped moments that could have easily been made up for if this film didn't pay so much attention to bloating storytelling with excess material that gets to be repetitious. That being said, this film is a decent one, even though it can't quite gain enough "control" on storytelling to do away with some flaws.
Well, "I'm Not There" wasn't too much more commercially successful that this film, but I still give it plenty of credit for being downright awesome, as opposed to this biopic. Jeez, Curtis just couldn't catch a break, so I reckon it's fitting that this film didn't catch too much of a break, so much so that it wasn't even as big of a success as a certain other experimental biopic of a popular musician in 2007, and if you don't know what I'm talking about, well, that's exactly my point. Yeah, I'm not entirely sure on what Ian Curtis had control of, because it wasn't like he had all that tight of a grip on an attractive vocal style. probably because the band, while alright, still wasn't too much better than Sex Pistols. Well, at least Joy Division wasn't quite as obnoxious as Sex Pistols, and yet, plenty of people have kind of forgotten Joy Division. Well, I reckon I figured out a way to make this film's title less bland and formulaic, though maybe this film should just stick with the title the filmmakers settled on, because Joy Division was only original in their being a post-punked-up version of The Doors, only, you know, a little duller ("Oh, yeah, Jim Morrison made Mick Jagger look tedious, he was such an exciting frontman"). "Sid and Nancy II: The Ballad of Some Other Underwhelming Late-'70s Punk Band With a Tragic Story That People Forgot About".
0 kommentar(er)
