we need to talk about we need to talk about kevin

intense film

I really want to see this for obvious reasons and I wish it was coming out here sooner. Even in the trailers, Tilda looks stunning in it.

this film is terrible fyi

Loved this, looking forward to a rewatch.

I can't imagine receiving this film fresh, ie not having read the novel/knowing what the plot was, so am leaving wiggle room for it being suspenseful in that circumstance. but just so brash, exactly as brash and ott as the book.

i kinda love lynne ramsey as a human being but i don't know why i have to feel more disdain for people with office jobs than i do for her indulgent music use

this film is terrible fyi

― mid-song laughing elvis (schlump), Sunday, October 23, 2011 7:28 PM (19 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Loved this, looking forward to a rewatch.

― Simon H., Sunday, October 23, 2011 7:28 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark

Every ILM thread in two posts.

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/lynne-ramsay-to-direct-sci-fi-version-of-moby-dick

I still wonder what her version of Lovely Bones would have been like - she was less than taken with what Peter Jackson wound up doing with the material (and rightly so).

Not read the book but saw the film yesterday. Tilda is predictably amazing. Great casting of the three actors who play Kevin. Very unsettling film.

did it really not seem a lil over-portentous to anyone else that the bad kid was an uncomplicatedly, innately, precociously and preternaturally ~BAD~KID~ in every scene? 'bad kid' via glower & smirk? like even in its treatment of sociopathy it didn't seem like it had been made in a post-the-dark-knight world, in which at least the texture of such stereotypical portrayals might be interesting.

Dunno, not seen it and not going to, but: This seemed a first in that the kid seems not to be represented by the basic "kid=SATAN!!" o-noe for the Parents.

It funny, there's a bunch of films that are 'too close'..

My nephew has aspg, although is much older who needs this "uh oh, kid might become a psychopath" as they treated him with kid gloves at the time for this very reason I kid not.

"Lovely bones", well we have a daughter of the same age and not dissimilar looking.

In fact, "Contagion" GPaltrow looks too much like my wife, but then again it's not exactly a laff-riot goodtime satnight out anyway.

I guess because I was never a 'horror' fan, and even "Thriller" films I sort-of resent for mostly being 'button-pushers'

I saw this last night and I really, really, really hated it. I was squirming in my seat within the first few spoken lines of dialogue (and it's a long two hours). Overwritten, ham-fisted, shallow, stupid - I really couldn't find a beat in it that didn't feel completely bogus. I liked the other two Lynne Ramsay movies, and I love looking at Tilda Swinton, and Ramsay clearly has a pretty well-stocked iPod... but I hated almost every single shot in this movie.

yeah otm; I pretty much "don't walk out" but I just wanted to leave it was so OTT. I read the book, & had hated how pointed and portentous that was, also, so maybe am limited in my ability to demand a refund, etc. I am curious about what it was like for people who hadn't read it, as the structure must have worked totally differently, but all the same it just seemed way too signpost-laden.

I didn't read the book, but yeah - between the film school 'red/blood' leitmotif; the scene with Buddy Holly's "Everyday" over the top of emotional turmoil; the hideously cartoonish co-worker/townie goon hicks (to say nothing of the actual writing/plotting/characterizations) - this thing ticked all the boxes.

i actually thought red/blood was convincing + full-throated enough to be interesting - i know it was probably as OTT as everything else but it kinda did seem true that people have otherwise abandoned/shown great restraint in playing with red on screen, so perhaps I just thought it was one of the more individual/owned parts.

i love the book, and am v glad i read it before reading lionel shriver's terrible columns - can't wait to see the film, was gonna go on fri but plans were undone by other people's flakiness

It really irritates me that Shriver is popping up and offering the big thumbs up to the adaptation in every paper that will let her. Authors should learn to stfu and get out of the way and let the film do its job.

misread thread title as "what we talk about when we talk about kevin"—I'd see that film

did it really not seem a lil over-portentous to anyone else that the bad kid was an uncomplicatedly, innately, precociously and preternaturally ~BAD~KID~ in every scene? 'bad kid' via glower & smirk?

Yes, it did - but then I came to feel the film had a very specific perspective, one slightly unraveled in the final scene. (This sense was confirmed in a talk w/ Ramsay and Swinton after the film.)

thought this was a good film - flawed direction carried by incredible acting. tilda swinton's FACE! it WAS the film, the way she'd convey so much in just a fraction of a move - reminded me strongly of kristin scott thomas in il ya longtemps que je t'aime (another film centred on a woman haunted by guilt & bloodshed, i guess - but both focus on her relentlessly).

i didn't mind all the portentous foreshadowing - i'd read and loved the book, and it meant i could anticipate scenes coming a mile off, but i appreciated the stylish/creepy tension lynne ramsey created anyway. i think i did mind how she erased the book's central ambiguity and just made kevin a str8-up evil psycho, which made for a more visceral film but that complexity was kinda key i thought.

how similar is this to happiness/how much would i hate it (answer to both q's is same)

Not similar to Happiness in any way.

Haven't read the book, but after seeing the film is Tilda's character possibly an unreliable narrator? Makes the whole thing more ambiguous if so.

...tilda straight-out said she was at the q&a last night.

i think i really liked this, still sort of mulling it over.

i am sort of surprised this is popular where it is, when i worked in waterstones this was like a richard and judy book or something.

the characterization of the kid was a bit bothersome, tho, yes. "i AM the context" was kind of an eye-roller

xp i think the book barely made a dent here (the author's british, yeah?), though i first heard about from john waters, he wrote a bit about it in his most recent book

xp to LG

That was kind of my impression too, until my gf read it recently and went through a weeklong trauma.

I did enjoy the film a lot, even though it's carried by Tilda Swinton's physical acting (as Lex already said) and some major parts are treated as blunt objects (yes we still get it SHE HAS BLOOD ON HER HANDS). The first hour or so left me feeling physically pummelled, and I'm always impressed when a film has this kind of effect on me. I just wish Kevin was a proper character rather than Machiavellian Demon Child. I get that this is balanced by the unreliable narrator effect in the book, but on screen there wasn't really any nuance here.

it seemed pretty clear to me, watching the film, that it was Tilda's character's version of events that she was remaking in her head - the comedy EVIL KID-ness of the son, the blank angelic sweetness of the daughter, and the blind self-centeredness of the dad all seemed to point to it. i guess also the way her guilt seemed to swing between self-recrimination and self-justification?

i had not read the book prior and so the ending was a total punch.

I'm not done with the book yet but I'm loving it so far. but wondering how the hell the translation will work to the screen, since it starts out mostly introspective and doesn't become a forward-driven narrative until about midway through.

as I said in the sandbox, this is the only film I stopped midway in years. If I'd gone to a screening I would've had to leave.

My sunny take on it is that only someone as talented as Ramsay could make something this atrocious.

i haven't seen it yet, morbz. what turned you off to it? was it just boring/bad? or was it actually offensive?

Words fail me. It was like being stuck inside a big bass drum as it was being whaled on for 55 minutes. Just one thundering note over and over.

Theme song should get some Oscar love, at least.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdW0UXYgZKA

Just one thundering note over and over.

morbs deeply otm

Kevin's behavior throughout the book closely resembles that of a sociopath, although reference to this condition is sparse and left mostly up to the reader's imagination. He displays little to no affection or moral responsibility towards his family or community, and commonly distances himself from people to avoid attachment. Kevin seems to regard virtually everyone with contempt and hatred. Eva, his mother, makes frequent attempts to enter Kevin's mind and identify some reason for his detachment and his actions. He engages in many acts of petty sabotage from an early age, from seemingly innocent actions like spraying ink with a squirt gun on a room painstakingly wallpapered by his mother in rare maps, to possibly encouraging a girl to gouge her eczema-affected skin. Rationalisation for his behavior is one of the central themes of the story: when asked the simple question "Why?" after the massacre, he responds that he is giving the public the excitement and scandal that they secretly crave. Only in rare instances does another side of Kevin emerge: in childhood when he becomes very ill, and later, just before he is transferred to an adult prison and is evidently nervous. Near the end of the book when asked for the first time by his mother "Why?," he responds, "I used to think I know. Now I'm not so sure." In these instances, he displays the simple need for love and comfort that all children seek.

he is giving the public the excitement and scandal that they secretly crave

deep shit to think on. almost as if the people are in fact...sheeple of a sort

what

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOyFTeBcmww&feature=player_embedded

i like it when they play "in my room" when his ... in his room

it was alright. disappointing in the context of her other films both of which I love, but it was ok.

don't know the book but this movie has zero depth and takes itself way too seriously. an honest horror movie with all the various damiens being rude to TS would have been a nice update of the omen with great franchise potential I think. the oh so symbolic red plus the father being clueless for comedy relief would make some sense too but no, all we get is black swan the mother era minus the fun / stupid.

Haven't seen the film or read the book, but a Facebook acquaintance liked it yesterday. The acquaintance's son murdered her daughter a few years back. So I guess that's a vote for emotional accuracy, if nothing else.

i thought this film was funny, tho i'm not sure i was supposed to

author of the book is taking ecstasy live on tv tonight in a "drugs experiment"

Oh dear. She's probably the only one of them that hasn't taken it under less controlled circumstances.

nah, there was a former soldier who didn't fancy it at all

i thought this film was funny, tho i'm not sure i was supposed to

me too, but i'm pretty sure i was supposed to. i don't think the filmmakers took themselves too seriously, it felt like they had a sense of humor about the melodrama.

"Out, damned spot!"

I don't think I can recall something like this happening before. If she's doing a no-show because of an issue with the producer then her US career is toast. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/mar/20/lynne-ramsay-no-show-natalie-portman

Toast globally, i would imagine, for the forseeable.

this is bizarre but totally the kind of thing i would do (and have done, without there being so much, financially, at stake, of course).

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2013/03/whos-the-bad-guy/
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2013/03/jane-got-a-gun-producer-scott-steindorff-soliciting-positive-comments

man this film is fucked up

this thread title is one of my favorites
i think about it frequently (more frequently than i have thought about kevin)

http://www.nerdlikeyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/home-alone-kevin-and-gun.jpg

it did seem really pointless in its one-note-ness, it's very inert in that way. otoh this is like a parental nightmare, having a monster for a child, so in that sense it functioned as a proper horror movie for me (without all the silly Catholic nonsense of the Omen etc.)

I dismiss the haters. This movie was fantastic.

I did think the bow-and-arrow aspect of this was lame/unrealistic. Was that just in there cuz author is a britishes?

don't think she is

The author is American, but lives in London.

I dunno maybe the book handles it differently. The morbidly detailed part of me just thought instinctively that a) you can't really kill that many people that quickly with a bow and arrow, I don't care how good a shot you are and b) if that was the only weapon he had someone would have totally been able to stop him and fuck him up and c) given how many actual high school killing rampages there are, almost all of them involve guns/bombs why go for this stupid archaic angle

otoh the part where he vengefully shits his pants as a young child was just too real

Ugh. This was even worse than the book, which at least had Shriver's occasionally dazzling prose to sorta recommend it. Some of the "ironic" soundtrack choices ("In My Room," "Everyday") were so eye-rolling I was actually amazed to see them being utilized in a movie from the current decade.

Liked this a lot, though I doubt I'd be interested if Lynne Ramsay hadn't directed it. She prizes images over words. A rarity unfortunately.

Haven't read the book so I'm assuming this is from the text but some of Kevin's vocabulary is hilariously anachronistic. "Are you gonna ask me what chick I balled in the hallway?" and "I bought them for a song" ...what is this, 1970?

We Need To Talk About Kevin's Vocabulary

I mean yeah, it might be time

sadly the climax felt very tame after a decade of increasingly brutal mass shootings. a bow & arrow in a school? it's almost quaint.

In the book, Kevin is less one dimensional. He seems to crave stimulation that he can't find in the normal things people enjoy.

His first words happen at like age 4 and they're merely to tell his mom to turn off the tv show that's on because he doesn't like it. He does dumb trolly things in school like writing essays with only three letter words, or repeatedly using words that sounded adjacent to racial slurs (i.e. niggardly) in them.

Any time he does something destructive, he often slips a detail that makes it obvious he did it to his mother, because he knows his dad will never believe him.

The book is less horrific in what Kevin actually does, but more the inevitability of it. The dad continually ignores troubling signs that are obvious to other people. Kevin plays into his dad's naivety and taunts his mother by showing his other side to her.

Mom is too afraid of losing her husband to actually do *enough*, she gives in when he pushes back too much for her liking.

The film for obvious reasons focuses more on his big, destructive moments where he physically hurt people, and only some of the things he did to psychologically control and torture people (the intentional pants shitting being one they included).

But on the plus side the movie didn't give you a florid description of the makeup and viscosity of Kevin's turds as the book did