Lena Dunham

[zedz]

[thinks out loud]Do we really need eight pages of discussion about Tiny Furniture? Especially when hardly any of that discussion is actually about Tiny Furniture?[/shuffles off to stare at the wall for a while]

[knives]

It is less productive than staring at a wall I admit, but it's at least as fun.

[domino harvey]

[thinks out loud]Do we really need eight pages of discussion about Tiny Furniture? Especially when hardly any of that discussion is actually about Tiny Furniture?[/shuffles off to stare at the wall for a while]

That's not really accurate, since most of the discussion I can see on a quick re-browse is on topic (for better or worse)

[Buttercream]

Sorry, I didn't mean to argue that women fundamentally make different films, only that people outside of dominant representations in cinema sometimes do, including queer cinema(s) and non-white filmmakers. This is a gross oversimplification to be sure, but I do think that some women filmmakers who are telling stories of women perspectives in a predominately patriarchal matrix consciously step outside the traditional modes of narrative filmmaking. This isn't to deny agency to anyone who thinks the film is crap, only that I felt the aesthetic decisions were a deliberate choice, and for me, it worked. I would say that Chantal Akerman, Helke Sander, Sadie Benning, and Miranda July often do this (though not always). But then again, Varda, Coppola, Denis, Sanders-Brahms do not, and remain within a western tradition of narrative filmmaking. I never meant it as a universal justification for any bad film directed by a woman.

[Cold Bishop]

but I thought Bujalski's Beeswax was a genuinely good (maybe even great) movie.

I always feel slightly uncomfortable calling Bujalski "mumblecore". The fact that he insists shooting on film alone speaks volume about what separates him from the aggressively-unpleasant navelgazers he gets lumped in with.

Aaron Katz also has something of an eye for mise en scène, but it's no mistake that Cold Weather is head and shoulders above his previous films: the inclusion of an aesthetically-pleasing camera, as well as the confines of genre, goes a long way in softening the more obnoxious elements that effected even his films.

[bearcuborg]

This is an exceptional film from a talented writer/director/actor. It also has some amazing photography by Jody Lee Lipes (NY EXPORT: OPUS JAZZ). I saw it at SXSW and didn't expect or even want to like the movie - however, with most films from the current indie filmmakers, they're pretty compelling once you get away from the hype or preconceived notions.

[tarpilot]

But can she bake a cherry pie?

[domino harvey]

If you can't get enough Dunham, she's coming to HBO and she's dragged good things like Chris Eigeman and the Naked and the Famous down with her

[Tom Hagen]

Haha, beat me to it. "I'm the voice of my generation" y'all.

[The Narrator Returns]

Like Sex and the City, except smart and funny.

I think the author meant to say this:

Like Sex and the City, except agonizingly twee and even more painful to watch.

[mfunk9786]

Oh shit, your-vagina-is-great-because-you're-in-your-20s humor? This is so much more smart and funny than Sex and the City

[Gregory]

I've gotten really sick of everything being described as "smart and funny," that often being the only praise. Oh, this comedy is smart and funny? I should watch it!

It's starting to remind me of how every other book I look at has the word "witty" somewhere in the back-cover praise.

[Mr Sheldrake]

This turned up on Netflix instant streaming today. I thought I'd take a quick look to see what the hubbub was all about, and ended up watching the whole thing. I've seen much worse movies in the mumblecore mode, but its definitely many rungs lower than the genre's masterpiece Funnyhaha. Dunham can be mildly amusing, I wish her success, but the real star in the making may well be the cinematographer, the movie looks great.

Dunham's criticism of James Mason's distracting "acting" style in Bigger Than Life struck me as odd, as Tiny Furniture is punctuated throughout with jarring explosions of melodramatic anger, the actors exercising their chops before quickly reverting to the cool, hipster vibe where Dunham seems far more comfortable.

[onedimension]

My girlfriend said it looked like an indie version of 'The Hills', which seems about right- same vapidity, but in hip(ster) garb, and the same staging-of-reality where the actor/participant/character-s transparently/proddedly reenact the dramas of their own lives. The photography was excellent, and nearly redeems everything else- and it's pretty clearly a different mind than Dunham's placing the camera. The writing dully stylish, obvious, not bad but entirely unmemorable.

Dunham is very charming, I admit, and willing to be filmed in authentically unflattering ways that end up flattering her Inner Beauty. Her lack of vanity is itself a kind of vanity- not enamored with her own prettiness but enamored with her willingness to be not-pretty. More kindly, you could say it captures the ethos of self-deprecation, I guess, since it's nearly Christmas.

Reminded me of 'The New Girl': quirkily-charming female lead, stylish camera work, fashionable sets, clothes (the cliches you've just met), competent underplaying, but nothing substantial or interesting being said or done.

[inneyp]

Normally I wouldn't compare two films as disparate as Certified Copy and Tiny Furniture, but because that's what everyone's been doing I'm going to indulge. To me Certified Copy was full of strained, pseudo-intellectualism and self-conscious attempts at profundity. In contrast Tiny Furniture- which for the record I expected to loathe- is at the very least honest. It's not epochal or esoteric by any means but it doesn't try to be, even if its characters do. The frumpy, flawed female protagonist is also a welcome presence in an industry where women are so frequently marginalized (if not always intentionally). Lambasting Lena Dunham and CC for the film's inclusion in the collection is just childish; in fact it's characteristic of the very immaturity with which the movie's been leveled.

That said I didn't love Tiny Furniture. I probably won't buy it. But the collection has largely maintained its standards. A contested entry here and there is small fries.

[jouvet]

I saw this last night on streaming Netflix and pretty much concur with a lot of what's being said here. The photography is great, with a real eye for abstract composition: one shot of her in the shower,

Spoiler

cleaning up after the pipe sequence (you all remember that delightful scene),

is brilliantly designed, with half the apartment in silhouette.

But the content of the film, its material, is really thin. The first thirty minutes is ok, but it gets so vapid and generically American indie; yet more introspections from pampered precious post-film school kids stuff. Why this gets the Criterion treatment is beyond me. Great for a female-authored American film to get any kind of profile, but this was really disappointing. I'd take a Valerie Donzelli, or Valeria Bruni Tedeschi, or pretty much any French female-directed dramedy over this kind of vacuous project.

[knives]

Valerie Donzelli

Glad I'm not the only fan. Her directorial debut was surprisingly excellent.

[Thomas Dukenfield]

But the content of the film, its material, is really thin. The first thirty minutes is ok, but it gets so vapid and generically American indie; yet more introspections from pampered precious post-film school kids stuff.

Yeah, it's set up okay, but doesn't go anywhere. The "drama" is essentially a couple of scenes of the family yelling at each other for no reason. And the humor is really lame, like when the younger sister says she's inviting 6 friends over, and cut to 25 kids hanging out in the kitchen. Ho ho.

Lena is affable enough to make it watchable, but it feels like mumblecore trying to sell out. Or, if you prefer, a Woody Allen movie without Woody Allen and without the movie.

[Lee Roy Tree]

I am new here, so take this opinion of mine with a grain of salt. I of course read this thread when I found out it was going to be added to the collection, just to see what some people thought of it. I admittedly usually end up liking these 'mumblecore' films that not a lot of people like, simply because I have a very personal set of standards, and I tend to find at least a few things that grab me enough to make me think or just entertain me. It doesn't mean I love most films of this sort, it just means I like and/or at least appreciate them. I am a fan of 'The Future' which is the big one that this movie keeps getting compared to. That movie is one that I like, though I found I despised the main character's actions. It stuck in my head for at least a week, and I still find myself pondering certain aspects of it. That was a movie that I had to watch twice in a short amount of time even though it beat me up a bit emotionally.

Now, this brings me to this film. I saw that it was streaming on netflix, and I just had to watch it. I don't wish that I didn't, but I admit that I could have used my time to watch something better. This movie was useless. I could not find anything redeeming about any of the characters. There was no insight sparked by watching the behaviors of these characters. The main character was just another whiny and annoying cliche that I could not identify with at all, though I too have been in a few similar situations. But, maybe that was what she was going for. Maybe this was a film that is supposed to warn us away from making a relationship of any kind with people like this. If so, then she is a genius.

I thought that the cinematography was pedestrian, and reeked of high school photography class. The music was ok, but very unsurprising. It seems she used some sort of generic recipe for indie film making when she wrote this. It was not at all attempting to say or do anything new with film language. I really wanted to like it, but about half way through I knew almost exactly how the rest of the movie would proceed. Also, the acting was the pits, aside from one or two supporting characters. When she threw her little tantrum I actually felt embarrassed for her. It seemed so stagey and insincere. Most of the dialogue also seemed forced and faux-natural.

The only thing I took away from this film was that I learned a few more things not to do in film making. Maybe I am not the target audience for her though, being a 28 year old male in the lower middle class financial bracket. But, that might be giving her a little too much slack. This movie just seemed that it was meant for a narrow (I hope) audience, raised to believe that name-dropping famous artists gives them high-brow street cred, that ignoring people is the best way to deal with them, and thinking that just because you live with your parents, that it is your house to do as you please in. I hate to say this but I think that the only reason she is able to make films is because of the opportunities that are available only to the rich and well connected. This is all I have to say about this film, and I admit that it may only make complete sense to me.

[Crusser]

Hmmmm.... I'm also 28 and male (honest!) and extremely poor (I work at Barnes and Noble and not just for the sale), and this movie resonated with me just the same. Maybe it's because I also try to make art? I don't know, but I think Dunham captures the disconnect that any intellectually motivated young person has when he/she has to come home to roost with an uninterested family.

Whoever compared it to the New Girl has more than a couple screws loose... that scene with her shrieking was CLEARLY meant to be shrill... and any Criterion fanboy speaking ill of it sight-unseen, or is snap-judging its wherewithal because it takes up a precious spine number when your favorite samurai movie could do the same, secretly has some kind of beef with women that can't be resolved in this forum anyway... This is a fairly light-hearted movie and I'm confounded as to how it has elicited such bashing here!

[matrixschmatrix]

and any Criterion fanboy speaking ill of it sight-unseen, or is snap-judging its wherewithal because it takes up a precious spine number when your favorite samurai movie could do the same, secretly has some kind of beef with women that can't be resolved in this forum anyway... This is a fairly light-hearted movie and I'm confounded as to how it has elicited such bashing here!

Really? I mean I do think some of the attacks slid into uncomfortably near-misogynist territory, but it strikes me as an unwarranted assumption to presume that anyone who hasn't seen this but doesn't think it worth Criterion's notice is acting out of gender issues.

[onedimension]

I hope that I am not guilty of latent, unexamined misogyny just for disliking a movie by a woman.

But what is the mysterious calling compressed into the phrase "make art" (or "try to make art"), as if that's what happens when you're white, in your 20s, and disappointed by your first paychecks on the bottom rung? What evidence is there in the film of Dunham's character's artistry or ambition, or intellectual motivation? The challenge is to keep and preserve those things while compromised by reality, whether deprivation or luxury.

If anything, resentment of Dunham seems more class than gender fueled. She's connected, her success is clearly indebted to those connections, and Dunham's/her character's plight is to come home after four years in college with an impractical major to a large, stylish New York City apartment, attend parties, take and quit a lame job, and mope around for a few weeks.

I think Dunham also has a certain star quality that accounts for the film's reception, which is why she's heading an HBO show produced by Judd Apatow, and she could make a good movie someday, but it's not this one.

[Mr Pixies]

I saw this movie and I laughed, it was really cool, it was entertaining as fuk. The YouTube short featured in the movie (the fountain scene, was that made for this movie, or a real previous Dunham short?) was simultaneously a good short on its on, (like a good Bas Jan Ader film, performance art as living sculpture as movie/videoart) and uh, it just summarized the current world (of aesthetics) that art and life is now encompassed in. Her mom is a real artist and can be seen in the last Art21.

[knives]

I'll assume this is a parody of what a real fan might say.

[domino harvey]

Typical male response to a womyn's film