criterionforum.org

It feels like a movie that could've been made by... anyone. An OK indie movie that nobody would be talking about if it didn't have Coppola's name attached to it.

This movie was an embarrassment. No dramatic stakes or meaningful complications whatsoever. Those two sentences are more discussion than this movie merits.

I thought the film was okay as a streaming platform rom-com (certainly superior to the deluge of Netlfix entries in this category such as The Kissing Booth), but, yes, a disappointment coming from Coppola. I like how the opening off-screen dialog establishes a possessiveness on Murray's part that is resolved by Jones in the final scene...

Spoiler

By replacing the father's watch with the watch given by her husband, she belatedly demonstrates a willingness to extricate herself from her casually domineering father.

... but there's hardly anything in between those two moments that develops that conflict. Murray is asked to deliver some pretty wretched lines, but his performance is the only thing generating any energy.

The whole film is about avoiding any actual conflict in the worst, freshman creative writing way. Take the lousiest scene in the film, where Murray gets pulled over by the cop. It might have been funny to have him bluff his way out of a ticket, but that he actually knows the guy's dad, which is an unlikely coincidence even in the logic of this character as presented, perfectly embodies the contrived refusal to engage in any dramatic stakes. Murray might get punished but instead he prevails in the most asinine, Mary Sue way possible. I don't think the film ends up critical of him at all. Indeed, it like Jones seems to indulge him to the end. But really the worst character (and that's being generous to label him as such) here is easily Marlon Wayans' bland nothing of a wandering husband, whose "confrontation" in the finale is laughable on its own but kinda pathetic when one buys into the readings of the film that identify Jones' character as Coppola

Spoiler

"Actually I love you so much that I don't feel worthy of you!" A response not reflected in the actions or behaviors or outward characteristics of either character for the entire film. Did Sofia Coppola really write in a character who treats her stand-in like Homer wanted Poochie treated? Vom

The cop scene was further troubling for me because the film is has a biracial protagonist (even though race is never mentioned anywhere in it) and there is a scene in which her white father simply gets away for being white but nothing comes out of that situation, and we are lead to believe Jones's character doesn't see anything wrong with that, doesn't - even for a split second, imagine her husband or daughters in the same situation.

domino harvey wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:55 pm The whole film is about avoiding any actual conflict in the worst, freshman creative writing way. Take the lousiest scene in the film, where Murray gets pulled over by the cop. It might have been funny to have him bluff his way out of a ticket, but that he actually knows the guy's dad, which is an unlikely coincidence even in the logic of this character as presented, perfectly embodies the contrived refusal to engage in any dramatic stakes. Murray might get punished but instead he prevails in the most asinine, Mary Sue way possible. I don't think the film ends up critical of him at all. Indeed, it like Jones seems to indulge him to the end. But really the worst character (and that's being generous to label him as such) here is easily Marlon Wayans' bland nothing of a wandering husband, whose "confrontation" in the finale is laughable on its own but kinda pathetic when one buys into the readings of the film that identify Jones' character as Coppola

Spoiler

"Actually I love you so much that I don't feel worthy of you!" A response not reflected in the actions or behaviors or outward characteristics of either character for the entire film. Did Sofia Coppola really write in a character who treats her stand-in like Homer wanted Poochie treated? Vom

Don't you know? Art gallery owners are always friends with uniform cops!

This film is so bad it almost made me wish I was rewatching her mother's film Paris Can Wait instead. Every element is wretched, from
Phoenix's forgettable music to the aforementioned amateurish dialogue to the total lack of propulsion to carry the story from beginning to end.

I wouldn't say On the Rocks was terrible, although that police scene certainly was. As already mentioned, that scene was dreadfully unfunny due to its serious logistical and tonal issues, single-handedly bringing the film down a notch or two. Outside of that scene, it was a hit-or-miss comedy. Nevertheless, On the Rocks is a stain on Coppola's filmography, who (along with Murray) would be a primary reason anybody would watch it to begin with.

The police scene is def the laziest scene in the movie (and it perfectly illustrates most of the film's weaknesses in a couple of minutes) but I wouldn't say it's much different than anything else. Nothing in the film is even remotely amusing or charming, it's just a bland, gossamer-thin excuse for a movie. Bill Murray's fun to watch, but the script is about as funny as cholera.

This is very bad, for some of the reasons discussed above and many more. Rashida Jones' character is utterly rudderless, managing to simultaneously be too intimidated to confront her mild-mannered husband and brazen enough to go along with major violations of his privacy. She does not have the film acting chops to pull off this sort of contradiction even if Sofia Coppola were earnestly interested in exploring it (she isn't). Bill Murray is... off, playing the tabloid, 3D glasses t-shirt "epic" Bill Murray archetype that he's always avoided embodying in his films. Marlon Wayans is really the only person to come out unscathed, as he's a magnetic and likable actor.

This is a story on the small scale of Somewhere told in poorly written dialogue instead of the lyricism of the way life feels between words, which has always been Coppola's greatest strength as a filmmaker. Do you (if you do) remember Lost in Translation fondly for all the "rip my stockings" wisecracks at the expense of the Japanese characters or for the heavy silences and knowing smiles between Scarlett Johansson and Bill Murray? If it's the former, perhaps this is the movie for you.

Should add that The Beguiled's period setting hid nicely how much of a step down Philippe Le Sourd is from the late, great Harris Savides. My lord, is this a flat, mediocre looking film. Watching it on a streaming service was a sobering reminder that most newer television shows look better than this film does.

mfunk9786 wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 5:31 pm

This is a story on the small scale of Somewhere told in poorly written dialogue instead of the lyricism of the way life feels between words, which has always been Coppola's greatest strength as a filmmaker. Do you (if you do) remember Lost in Translation fondly for all the "rip my stockings" wisecracks at the expense of the Japanese characters or for the heavy silences and knowing smiles between Scarlett Johansson and Bill Murray? If it's the former, perhaps this is the movie for you.

Should add that The Beguiled's period setting hid nicely how much of a step down Philippe Le Sourd is from the late, great Harris Savides. My lord, is this a flat, mediocre looking film. Watching it on a streaming service was a sobering reminder that most newer television shows look better than this film does.

Completely agree about how visually uninspired this film is and the patronizing/borderline racist attitude in Lost in Translation nearly put me off of all her films.

Somewhere is pretty clearly her best, looking back on it all - and despite its faults, Lost in Translation is a monumentally memorable film as well. And it's a shame (though somewhat understandable) that she can't make something with that sort of swing-for-the-fences emotional resonance every time out. Every great director deserves a swing and a miss here and there.

I was also unimpressed by this film; I was just about to go see it before the last theatre lockdown was enacted at the last minute, so I dodged that bullet and watched it at home. But, if I'm being honest, the cop scene was the only part I really liked. It just gave off vintage Bill Murray vibes to me, and I couldn't help but be charmed by it.

I hate to pile on but I gave up on this film after 25 mins. I just couldn't bring myself to finish it. I'm much more inclined to seek out Somewhere and maybe it'll be the first Sofia Coppola film I'll love (liked Virgin Suicides and The Beguiled, the first half of Lost In Translation really put me off).

I don't think the film is bad per se, but it encapsulates a score of 6/10 like nothing else. Thanks for the 96 minutes and to never be thought of again.

Walter Chaw’s four star review

https://www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2 ... rocks.html

About four too many

Manhattan Murder Mystery told in the style of Interiors. What an unfortunate failure.

I felt like I was watching an unfinished draft of Lost in translation set in a different context (with slight changes). As if she didn't get that narrative out of her system. The scene with her dad driving in the car by himself was atmospherically enjoyable.

Edit: I think the main issue with this story might be the "overburdening" of the main character with problems. She suspects her husband cheating on her and her family falling apart, she has a writer's block and then a new character is introduced (her father) who she makes no genuine connection with (unlike in LiT), but its the relationship we get to watch throughout the film (the relationship with her husband is more like a catalyst than a main focus), but nothing gets resolved between them really and it ends the same way it began. Instead, her relationship with her husband (shown in cca 5 and a half scenes in total) improves. I think the focus should have been on either her troubled relationship with her father OR with her husband (that's the main difference imo compared to LiT).
The more I think about this film, the more confusing it gets.

It appears this will be released on Blu-ray in October. It’s good to see A24’s deal with Apple is much the same as other production houses for streamers where they retain these ancillary rights starting a year from release. I loved this movie very much but clearly I will find no hospitality for my views on it here going by the general tenor of this thread (which is fine!) but definitely think it appearing on disc is a net positive for the world.

I wouldn't be surprised if Sofia Coppola either has it in her contract or makes it a point to push physical releases of her films

That’s also possible, but I would just generally bet on studios like A24 to have the contractual savvy to make sure they’ve locked up their titles so should anything happen to their planned distributor at any point they don’t sit stuck on a shelf forever and can continue to be monetized.

therewillbeblus wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:41 am I wouldn't be surprised if Sofia Coppola either has it in her contract or makes it a point to push physical releases of her films

Around the release of Criterion's The Virgin Suicides disc, I recall her mentioning in an interview that she asked them if there was still a market for physical media. So I don't think Blu-rays/physical media is priority for her and Ribs is likely correct and A24 retained the optical media rights.

Fair enough, I checked her blus' extras and she's not exactly an active participant so makes sense

Ribs wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:09 am It appears this will be released on Blu-ray in October. It’s good to see A24’s deal with Apple is much the same as other production houses for streamers where they retain these ancillary rights starting a year from release. I loved this movie very much but clearly I will find no hospitality for my views on it here going by the general tenor of this thread (which is fine!) but definitely think it appearing on disc is a net positive for the world.

I liked this movie too. Glad to see that there is at least one other member of the forum who agrees. I don't quite understand the level of vitriol that has been thrown at it. To be sure, it is a lightweight film, hardly of the caliber of Coppola's early masterpieces, but I found it a lovely, breezy, charming hang-out movie. It revisits and reconsiders many of her pet themes (father-daughter relationships, mid-life crises/aging, fidelity/infidelity, male vs. female perspectives) in a way that I found to be thoughtful without feeling belabored. I was surprised when I realized that this is Coppola's first New York movie (if you don't count her Netflix Christmas special). It begs to be read as her homage to the vintage New York comedies of the classical Hollywood period--many of which themselves were fairly lightweight, powered on the sheer charm of their actors, perhaps in a way that invites comparison to how Coppola uses Murray here. It's pure pleasure simply watching him and Rashida Jones as they sit in his convertible, eating caviar and drinking champagne and talking into the night. I guess mileage varies! Tonally it is much more successful and even than Coppola's previous film The Beguiled, which never seemed to find the right note.

See, I think Coppola's greatest strength is her ability to navigate tonal lability under an ethereal energy that grounds any competing moods into a novel kind of consistent tone, aided by her implacable ethos of humanism in unconditional empathy, which is achieved through the inclusive intervention of humble curiosity. So I find that her films always feel incredibly tonally consistent, and often understated or minimalist when they're actually subtly exploring so much ground. On the Rocks felt like a step back in that direction by not only playing it safe but directing the curiosity and empathy towards her own standin, and I guess her dad's surrogate, whilst her husband in the film was a throwaway character, and any other opportunities for expanded awareness, even regarding self-exploration, were ignored in favor of a streamlined expected track of simplified personal development. It's a disappointment when one of our most peripherally-observant active filmmakers essentially adopts a tunnel-vision approach toward self. I didn't care much for the Christmas Special, and I'm still not wild about Lost in Translation on the whole, but otherwise I think every film Coppola has made is some kind of masterpiece.