The Films of Sofia Coppola

Yeah, I wanted to see it through their point of view, to understand how they got so into it. I wanted, in the beginning, to shoot all of this stuff in a really seductive way and make it look fun—you want to be able to be part of it so you understand where they’re coming from. But then by the end of it, you kind of have a shift and take a step back and, you know, kind of look at it.

Smart - it's about empathy not judgment and ridicule. Perhaps it asks "how does a society create such a culture?" Or "why do these kids want this so badly as to be apathetic about consequences - or even blind to them?"

It's a different approach than moralizing and being judgmental.

I've read that Edgar Allan Poe got into a lot of trouble for writing stories like "The Cask of Amontillado" wherein the killer seemingly has little-to-no remorse and yet Poe's tone was not to vilify but to present.

It's funny, too, how when male directors present stories in an amoral way and don't come down harshly by taking a side or adopting a strong tone, they are usually lauded for this.

Sofia, on the other hand, is criticized. Sigh...:innocent:

Having ranted, I should say that I haven't seen the film yet, ha ha ha.:lol:

But I will, and I usually like her stuff, and I have read several articles, interviews and reviews.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, she has a respectable career now, but to this day, there are discussions about whether she actually earned it or not due to what she was famous for prior to becoming a director: nothing significant. (Note: I do think she did cuz Hollywood is a cutthroat place and if you're not liked, you'll know. But I do think her haters have a point: her father has produced all her films. Would her films be half as successful or critically acclaimed if Mary Sue Next Door had made them? I think not.)
[/QUOTE]

Haters?! Strong word: and yet I think you hit the nail on the head here! Funny how people can "hate" someone they don't even know.

her father has produced all her films.
-but arguably that doesn't affect the quality of the films, at least not necessarily; that's just the money. From all I've read, he's a hands-off producer, unlike a lot of other producers.

And as for the whole "famous for being famous" comment - COME ON! :flower: You have to admit that this situation has been amped up to the NTH DEGREE since the advent of the WWW / internet! :blink: Of course people were "famous for being famous" before that, I agree with you - maybe even someone like Edie Sedgwick - but I think Sofia makes a strong point none the less.

The post-modern era has truly ushered in the "anyone can be a star" motif with the rise of mockumentaries, documentaries, reality TV, webcasts, etc etc
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like this review (posted below); it makes the point that the film is both loaded with honesty and frustrating as well - as the kids are kept at a distance (I remember this being said about the characters in Gummo or Kids as well - and there are definitely similarities). It raises interesting questions. What were those kids in the real 'bling ring' after anyhow?

The next high? Fame? Celebrity? All of those?

Or something deeper, something lost, something ... spiritual?

We really have become a society of the spectacle.

I think A.O. Scott's TOTALLY on the mark by referencing Bret Easton Ellis in this review, and in fact, he's one of the writers who has often written crazily amoral and apathetic portraits of a generation and he's been celebrated (well, largely so) for doing it.

Perhaps Sofia keeps us in a liminal place so we think.

For me, black and white viewpoints are usually untrue.

The grey areas are where truth lingers, in the in-between spaces ... but it only lingers after all. And then it flits, morphs, shines, fades and morphs again.

June 13, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW
Twinkly Totems of Fame, Theirs for the Taking

By A. O. SCOTT
In her last two movies — the sublime “Somewhere” and the seductive “Marie Antoinette” — Sofia Coppola has focused her rigorous attention on characters living inside bubbles of privilege, fairy tale precincts where the invisible magic of wealth and power makes wishes come true. Stephen Dorff’s drifting movie star and Kirsten Dunst’s capricious young queen both lead pampered existences of a kind that make them easy objects of envy and resentment, but Ms. Coppola examines them with detached, quiet sympathy, refusing to mock or judge. She anatomizes the spiritual conditions of people who might have seemed to be case studies in shallow, carefree materialism.

“The Bling Ring,” her new feature (and her fifth over all), continues in this vein from a somewhat different perspective. It is not about the paralysis of having more than you could possibly want, but rather about the addictive thrills of wanting what you can’t quite have and trying to get it. The Southern California teenagers at the center of the movie do not reside in a bubble of money and celebrity, though they are not exactly outsiders, either. They can see through the membrane and touch its shiny, thin surface. They can even reach inside.

Mostly rich kids with access to cars, drugs and Internet gossip sites, these low-affect rebels hang out at clubs frequented by Hollywood’s gilded youth — at one point Ms. Dunst herself floats past their table — and believe that anything not already in their grasp should be. And so they start grabbing, breaking into the surprisingly unprotected homes of the beautiful and glamorous and making off with whatever catches their eye: shoes, dresses, handbags, watches, objets d’art, rolls of cash.

It is something other than simple greed that motivates these young thieves, whose leader is a reckless, terrifyingly poised girl named Rebecca (Katie Chang). Already hooked on the rush of petty theft — she casually liberates wallets and purses from cars parked outside a friend’s house during a party — Rebecca is also interested in fame. When she and her new friend Marc (Israel Broussard) pay their first visit to Paris Hilton’s empty mansion, she is not content to help herself to some of the expensive stuff Ms. Hilton has lying around. She wants to linger, to chill, to make herself at home.

Rebecca and Marc, who has recently transferred into her high school in the San Fernando Valley, are the nucleus of a gang that also includes Chloe (Claire Julien), a free-spirited classmate, and Nicki (Emma Watson) and Sam (Taissa Farmiga), friends since childhood who are home-schooled by Nicki’s mother (Leslie Mann). Their M.O. is simple and, for a surprisingly long while, foolproof. The Internet tells them when a given celebrity — Orlando Bloom, Audrina Patridge, Lindsay Lohan and Megan Fox, in addition to Ms. Hilton — is out of town hosting a benefit or shooting a movie. Private security patrols are easily evaded, and the doors are never locked.

“The Bling Ring,” drawn from an article in Vanity Fair by Nancy Jo Sales, sticks to the contours of a true story that seems to have floated out of the early work of Bret Easton Ellis. There is a whiff of tabloid incredulity in Ms. Coppola’s version of the story, and an occasional crackle of appalled satire. Once the main characters are caught, the explanations they offer are at least as disturbing as the crimes themselves. Nicki, the meanest and most ambitious of the group, views the whole experience as “a learning lesson” that will ultimately help her achieve her goal of leading a major philanthropic organization or “a country, for all I know.” For his part, Marc vaguely blames his low self-esteem (he’s “not ugly,” but also “not A-list”) and society’s obsession with Bonnie-and-Clyde-style outlaws.

These moments are funny, and it is often easy to laugh at the blasé attitudes and clueless expressions of the teenage burglars. But “The Bling Ring” is, finally, neither a cautionary tale of youth gone wrong nor a joke at the expense of kids these days. Although Rebecca, Marc and Chloe may be shallow and amoral (Nicki seems more like a true sociopath), they are also acting in the grip of a genuine aesthetic compulsion, feeding an appetite for beauty and intensity that is hardly theirs alone.

And while it would be wrong to say that Ms. Coppola shares or approves of their hunger, she does take it seriously. The film, shot by Christopher Blauvelt and the great cinematographer Harris Savides (to whose memory it is dedicated), has a quiet, sensual glow that communicates the lust that drives its characters. By night, the empty homes of the famous — glass boxes hovering in the hills above the Los Angeles Basin; Spanish castles tucked away on leafy streets — become enchanted places, and flashy swag turns into treasure.

“The Bling Ring” occupies a vertiginous middle ground between banality and transcendence, and its refusal to commit to one or the other is both a mark of integrity and a source of frustration. The audience is neither inside the experience of the characters nor at a safe distance from them. We don’t know how (or if) they think, and we don’t know quite what to think of them. Are they empty, depraved or opaque? Which would be worse?


Scott doesn't say it, but this line I've highlighted may just be EXACTLY how the kids in the bling ring felt about the celebrities' lives that they wanted to touch/take/have so desperately. They weren't safely distant - due to the media - but they weren't close either.

They were stuck in-between - constantly longing but never quite having.

It's like Tantalus.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gosh - 4 posts in a row! I am feeling loquacious on the topic tonight I guess, :blush::lol:

Just wanted to quote another good review of the film, from Rolling Stone:

The Bling Ring is often very funny, but never cruel. Coppola has previously plumbed the depths (or shallows) of spotlight obsession in Lost in Translation, Marie Antoinette and Somewhere, feeling the glare as the daughter of Francis Ford Coppola and one of only four women to be Oscar-nominated as Best Director. But the reality-tabloid culture is a different beast. There's nothing new about people getting famous for being famous. What concerns Coppola is a generation wanting to be just like them. The members of the bling ring don't envy the talent of their idols. They envy their visibility and designer labels. In party scenes, sharply edited by Sarah Flack, celebrity sightings aren't part of the fun, they are the fun. The soundtrack, including Kanye West, 2 Chainz and Phoenix (with Coppola's husband, Thomas Mars), features Frank Ocean singing about "super-rich kids with nothing but fake friends." Coppola is too smart to put it all down to bum times and bad parenting. What she sees are amoral teens longing for some kind of intimacy. In Paris' pumps or Lindsay's jewels, maybe you're not so alone.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/reviews/the-bling-ring-20130613#ixzz2WciOijTv
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Now - here are some genius comments about the whole "bling ring" phenomenon, not to mention some empathetic and insightful comments about Sofia, imo.

First, no wonder Sofia understands celebrity culture and its perils and luxuries. But at the same time, she's a female film-maker in a man's world, and she's also a sensitive one.

Second, the point Travers makes about how some kids now aspire to BE "famous for being famous" as opposed to aspiring to be something of note, or honing talent etc, is an interesting one. And it has to do with how incredibly mediated our culture has become - to never-before-seen degrees.

Third, that bleeds into the last point he makes; perhaps the bling ring kids, deep down, long for intimacy, some kind of connection?

And suddenly it becomes really, really sad. :cry:

Anyhow - looking forward to seeing the film.
 
Hugs to NotPlainJane! I didn't mean to set you off when I posted that article. If I could send you chocolate and chicken soup I would. (Four posts! Four posts! I haven't checked this topic in weeks either. It's like being hit with a freight train.)

Has anybody seen TBR yet? (Judging from the box office sites, it's still only in very limited release though.) I still want to see it, but my enthusiasm has dampened somewhat cuz I've read Emma Watson is miscast. (I come from the Harry Potter fandom, but Emma hasn't sold me on any of her non-Potter films.)
 
Hugs to NotPlainJane! I didn't mean to set you off when I posted that article. If I could send you chocolate and chicken soup I would. (Four posts! Four posts! I haven't checked this topic in weeks either. It's like being hit with a freight train.)

Has anybody seen TBR yet? (Judging from the box office sites, it's still only in very limited release though.) I still want to see it, but my enthusiasm has dampened somewhat cuz I've read Emma Watson is miscast. (I come from the Harry Potter fandom, but Emma hasn't sold me on any of her non-Potter films.)

:lol::lol: prefer salty snacks please!!! :flower::blush::mrgreen:

I still haven't even seen the film, lol, as just too busy.

It's rating 61% at rotten tomatoes, and 6.4 at imdb, so it seems to be on par with Marie Antoinette and Somewhere, i.e., splitting the vote/polarizing.

To this day, her best reviewed/rated films have been The Virgin Suicides and Lost in Translation, which are probably my two favourites.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, so I saw it during the first week of screenings in Montreal, and the theater was fully packed, which was really surprising because I remember going to see Lost In Translation and Marie-Antoinette in a room of five people at most.

I thought the movie was really fun to watch. The other viewers seemed to like it too, because there were lots of laughs. There's a lot of dark humour in it and I liked how Sofia ridiculed some celebrities, as weird as that sounds. I tried to forget that Emma Watson was supposed to portray Alexis Neiers because her acting would've bothered me the whole time! I thought the acting was average and the dialogue kind of weak. It's probably what Sofia was going for but after the repetitive "oh my god, oh my god" " designer name, designer name", it was tiring.
 
I haven't seen this yet (it only played in theaters here for a week!) but thankfully it didn't bomb at the box office (considering it only played in limited release) and it should have no trouble making a slight profit when all is said and done.

I'm excited to see what the users here who frequently discuss it think about it. Two of my friends who've seen it who love Sofia's films have praised it (one even said it was her 2nd best, after Lost in Translation), while another friend who loves Sofia's films hated it.
 
I saw it a while back.. I liked it but I didn't love it like I did with 'The Virgin Suicides'

It was beautifully shot and the scene at Audrina Patridge's was such a standout.. but overall I think Sofia played it too safe.. Choosing to tell the story through Marc's perspective contributed to that. His story, that of the outsider lured into a world of corruption and a false sense of friendship has been told so many times before. I think delving more into Rebecca's story would have done wonders for the film even if it might have led to a lot more inaccuracies. There was a lot under the surface there, with her family history and all..

I loved the Chloe character.. the scene of her eating breakfast was hilarious

Emma Watson was perfectly fine in a limited role, her character didn't require full range of emotions or character depth to be on display. While her character was hilarious and a standout, Emma didn't really bring anything other than what was already on paper.. and her accent was fine
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Emma didn't really bring anything other than what was already on paper

This seems to be the main complaint Emma gets for all her films outside Potter.

Since TBR is nowhere near me, I'm going to see 'Somewhere' first. I'll probably watch it soon. I don't know why the movie is hated, but the premise does sound different from her previous 3 films. So for that, I'm looking forward to it. (I'll probably watch SW within the week, cuz I'm in an indie films mood again.)
 
I have a hunch that you'll like Somewhere much better than Lost in Translation or Marie Antoinette. I think Sofia clearly places accountability on her leading character for his own problems. I never get the sense that she is blaming Hollywood or his surroundings.
 
^ agree KofV - that one is very much a character study.

Just read a good review of the new film; I like what the first paragraph says about her films in general.

‘The Bling Ring’: Sofia Coppola’s luridly compelling cautionary tale

By Ann Hornaday, Published: June 20 (Washington Post)

Few filmmakers working today can create a mood like Sofia Coppola. From her stunning 1999 debut film, “The Virgin Suicides,” through “Lost in Translation,” “Marie Antoinette” and “Somewhere,” Coppola has proved to be that rare filmmaker willing to buck the tyranny of narrative and tidy three-act structure, and instead exploit the cinematic medium for its richest textures, allusions and expressionistic visual depth.

Coppola brings those same poetics to “The Bling Ring,” a modern-day cautionary tale about youth run amok that, for all its ripped-from-the-headlines topicality, still exudes a dreamy, otherworldly perfume. Based on the story of a group of Los Angeles teenagers who cased, then robbed the homes of Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan and other celebrities, “The Bling Ring” taps into the same fears and voyeuristic horror that have characterized teen problem pictures throughout the decades: Whether it’s motorcycles, street gangs, marijuana or sexuality, there’s never been a cultural anxiety that movies couldn’t process into alternately lurid and scolding entertainment.

Today, of course, our concerns center on technology — both for what kids are doing with it and how it’s affecting those malleable frontal lobes with their still-forming moral centers. Throw in proximity to celebrities and a media culture driven by invidious addiction to pictures of other people’s stuff and you get “The Bling Ring,” as chilling a portrait of adolescent amorality as the most alarmist B-flick from the 1950s, albeit with far prettier pictures and better music.

Beginning at the end — with Bling Ring member Nicki (Emma Watson) facing trial and ditzily announcing that her life of crime has been “a huge learning lesson for me” — “The Bling Ring” flashes back to how it all got started in L.A.’s beige, featureless San Fernando Valley. A bored high school student named Rebecca (Katie Chang) meets a misfit new kid named Marc (Israel Broussard), who quickly proves he knows his way around Miu Miu and hair extensions. Soon he’s part of Rebecca’s posse, which includes Nicki, her bestie-slash-sister, Sam (Taissa Farmiga), and Chloe (Claire Julien), all of them schooled in the rhetoric of self-esteem, empowerment and the selfie-centered world of Facebook and its narcissistic satellites.

Powered by free-flowing alcohol, weed and the Adderall that Nicki’s mom hands out every morning like Corn Flakes, the kids realize that, thanks to gossip Web sites like TMZ, they can figure out when various famous people are out of town; thanks to GPS and Google Maps, they can just as easily find out where they live. Lo and behold, stars aren’t just like us — they don’t lock their doors — and before long, Rebecca and Marc are leading their vapid friends on a series of heists of millions of dollars worth of clothing, jewelry and household items.

The robberies themselves take on a monotonous dullness in “The Bling Ring” — a scene set in Hilton’s real-life home, a gauche altar to her persona in which even the throw pillows sport her image — loses punch as the thieves return again and again (presumably she didn’t notice her things were missing at first). And the characters are so shallow, so devoid of self-awareness or genuine soul, that it’s difficult to maintain interest in their exploits. They take on a hardened, exhausted look as their spree wears on, with only Broussard’s Marc exhibiting vulnerability worthy of sympathy. Watson’s Nicki might have been a satirical figure in the mold of Nicole Kidman’s brilliant turn in “To Die For”; instead, she’s content to pose and gloss her lips — perhaps appropriate for the real person she’s playing, but tiresomely repetitive nonetheless.

But Coppola doesn’t have the stinging sense of irony or outrage of a commentator. Instead, she contemplates, and in doing so is able to find improbable transcendence. The film’s finest moment, filmed by the late cinematographer Harris Savides, documents a robbery in a nighttime shot captured across the hill from a glass house, where two thieves steal the finery inside in a silent, weirdly beautiful pantomime.

“The Bling Ring” is full of such visual richness, recalling “Marie Antoinette” in its lush montages of material objects and evocative places. But for all of Coppola’s bravura with images, she never summons the wherewithal to judge her wayward protagonists. (As with “Antoinette,” the viewer sometimes wonders whether Coppola is decrying the materialism and heedlessness she’s chronicling or indulging in it.) If the filmmaker casts blame in “The Bling Ring,” it’s directed squarely at the parents, whether they’re eagerly pushing their kids into acting classes and auditions or, like Leslie Mann’s New Age-y single mom, home schooling their kids with a curriculum based on the self-help book “The Secret.”

The dark irony of “The Bling Ring” is that, while compulsively documenting their crimes for social media, the thieves themselves became famous (at one point Marc compares the ring to a modern-day Bonnie and Clyde), and fame eventually proved to be their downfall. Like a seductively lambent hall of mirrors, “The Bling Ring” lays bare the venality of train-wreck celebrity culture, striving and self-deception by dramatizing a fact that’s as delicious as it is depressing: When one of the Bling Ring members goes to jail, she shares a cell block with another young woman recently arrested for larceny, and it’s Lindsay Lohan herself.
 
Well, I watched 'Somewhere.' Of all the Sofia films I've viewed so far, this is the one I liked the least. Only two things really stood out to me:

1. The cinematography. It was ugly, it was mundane, and I loved it for being that. Sofia sometimes has a tendency to over-prettify her surfaces, and having the ugly cinematography actually helped the storyline (pretty poor lost directionless actor who every woman wants to f*ck apparently but has no idea what to do with his life, outside of his daughter, and even she he doesn't always connect with). (Basically Johnny Marco is Bob in his younger, more carefree days, except Bill Murray is a better actor as communicating "bored stiff with my life kill me now and all these luxuries too.")

2. Elle Fanning. Granted, I didn't get anything from her performance, but she was the saving grace that made the film enjoyable. I can't pinpoint exactly why I liked her so much, but she felt fresh in a very stale film.
 
Finally saw The Bling Ring last night. I loved it. I was really impressed with the cast especially Claire Julien and Taissa Farmiga. Emma was spot on perfect as "Alexis".

There was quite a mix of different aged people in my cinema which surprised me. The storyline about vapid stupid kids obsessed with celebs isn't a lot of people's "cup of tea". Overall the whole thing was really well done. From the way they spoke to the portrayal of how things went down. I really loved the scene of them robbing Audrina's house. I didn't like drooling over Parasite Hiltons wardrobe considering I think she is vile. I think I like this a teeny bit more than Somewhere.

I am SO glad I was a 90s teen and not growing up now in the Facebook world. Like I know where some celebs live in London but I would never ever go turn up at their houses and see if I can get in. I never want to cross over that line of my celeb interests.

7/10.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3920288/?ref_=tt_cl_t5
 
Thanks Label Basher! I still haven't seen it for various reasons, but it's good to know that the tFSers on this thread have liked it well enough so far - no outright "negative" reviews on here yet I don't think...
 
"I think the arguments aimed at Coppola (including claims of nepotism that have followed her ever since she took a role in father Francis Ford’s The Godfather Part III) are rather baseless — it’s hardly her fault that she was born into money. The number of critics that think she should apologise for that is alarming."

Crap like this is what annoys me. Sofia hardly shoves her wealth in our faces. She isn't even on Twitter, FB etc and at least she is making her own money. And why shouldn't her father produce her films. Parents often help their children in businesses. Because it's Hollywood its nepotism.
 
"I think the arguments aimed at Coppola (including claims of nepotism that have followed her ever since she took a role in father Francis Ford’s The Godfather Part III) are rather baseless — it’s hardly her fault that she was born into money. The number of critics that think she should apologise for that is alarming."

Crap like this is what annoys me. Sofia hardly shoves her wealth in our faces. She isn't even on Twitter, FB etc and at least she is making her own money. And why shouldn't her father produce her films. Parents often help their children in businesses. Because it's Hollywood its nepotism.

Oh I know: and it's even worse that some male stars haven't received the same kind of hatred that Sofia has, even though some of them, too, have had help in terms of their careers/familial connections.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,254
Messages
15,177,604
Members
86,006
Latest member
jacur368
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->