Sucker Punch - Symbolic? It's more likely than you think! (spoilers)

DSGamer wrote:

I love that so many people think the movie is trash and yet all this time later it's still being discussed.

Just because something is confusing, doesn't mean it's deep.

lostlobster wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I love that so many people think the movie is trash and yet all this time later it's still being discussed.

Just because something is confusing, doesn't mean it's deep.

Talk are you whating about?

lostlobster wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I love that so many people think the movie is trash and yet all this time later it's still being discussed.

Just because something is confusing, doesn't mean it's deep.

I am hoping the rated R cut will make a bit more sense. I am patiently waiting for the "Director's Cut." It tanked in the box office, it shouldn't be too long a wait.

heavyfeul wrote:

It tanked in the box office, it shouldn't be too long a wait.

Box Office KO: 3 Reasons Sucker Punch Flopped

The film seemed to be trying to sell itself based on the sexiness of its female characters, but what exactly is sexy about a twenty-something dressed up like a little girl in a sparkly sailor outfit? Sucker Punch has an uncanny ability to make girls with guns spectacularly unsexy. Maybe those TV spots played well to the barely legal porn crowd, but they left everyone else sitting on the couch next to their daughter feeling vaguely uncomfortable. There's a reason no one outside of creepy guys who live in their parents' basement has ever heard of Sailor Moon.

Officially a haterade thread now that those of us who liked the movie have gone from being called stupid to being called pedophiles. Have fun drinking the haterade. I have better things to do.

Jayhawker wrote:
heavyfeul wrote:

It tanked in the box office, it shouldn't be too long a wait.

Box Office KO: 3 Reasons Sucker Punch Flopped

The film seemed to be trying to sell itself based on the sexiness of its female characters, but what exactly is sexy about a twenty-something dressed up like a little girl in a sparkly sailor outfit? Sucker Punch has an uncanny ability to make girls with guns spectacularly unsexy. Maybe those TV spots played well to the barely legal porn crowd, but they left everyone else sitting on the couch next to their daughter feeling vaguely uncomfortable. There's a reason no one outside of creepy guys who live in their parents' basement has ever heard of Sailor Moon.

There's plenty of girls in their 30's that have heard of it as well. Hell, I think there are more 20-30 year old women at this point that remember the show fondly or even still watch it.

Also: if you're going to criticize the sailor uniform you also need to address the catholic school girl uniform. According to the porn industry, plenty of men of all ages are into that. We're just switching it from one culture to another.

There's a difference between "bad" and misunderstood.

Seriously, this isn't the greatest film ever, but it's not trash.

I've not seen it (although I do want to, I just haven't been able to convince anyone else that they do too), but it's apparently the subject of next weeks How did this get made?. Funny, from what I've read here it doesn't seem as though this one should be ranking alongside Old Dogs or All about Steve (some of the films previously covered), which I've sat through just for the experience.

ccesarano wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
heavyfeul wrote:

It tanked in the box office, it shouldn't be too long a wait.

Box Office KO: 3 Reasons Sucker Punch Flopped

The film seemed to be trying to sell itself based on the sexiness of its female characters, but what exactly is sexy about a twenty-something dressed up like a little girl in a sparkly sailor outfit? Sucker Punch has an uncanny ability to make girls with guns spectacularly unsexy. Maybe those TV spots played well to the barely legal porn crowd, but they left everyone else sitting on the couch next to their daughter feeling vaguely uncomfortable. There's a reason no one outside of creepy guys who live in their parents' basement has ever heard of Sailor Moon.

There's plenty of girls in their 30's that have heard of it as well. Hell, I think there are more 20-30 year old women at this point that remember the show fondly or even still watch it.

Also: if you're going to criticize the sailor uniform you also need to address the catholic school girl uniform. According to the porn industry, plenty of men of all ages are into that. We're just switching it from one culture to another.

There's a difference between "bad" and misunderstood.

Seriously, this isn't the greatest film ever, but it's not trash.

Preach it!

I think the popularity of the school girl uniform in the category of "Things that are supposed to be sexy" (TM), is a bit weird, but it basically amounts to a woman in a short skirt, so I fail to see how enjoying such images make you a pedophile. Personally, I didn't find Baby Doll sexy either, but it wasn't because of the sailor outfit; it was because of that dumb, confused look on her face the entire move. Dumfounded does not equal sexy.

Oh, and I like the implication of the guys argument.

no one outside of creepy guys who live in their parents' basement has ever heard of Sailor Moon.

This guy has heard of Sailor Moon. Therefore, he is a creepy guy who lives in his parents' basement.

The problem with the movie is character development (there isn't any) and there appears to be a lack of any comprehensible theme, despite the fact that the movie is all metaphor. If you are going to sexualize young women as a storytelling device, then you need to be more clear on how it is important to the character. Snyder is really trying to say something, I am just not sure what. He is taking his lumps for it, but outright dismal of the movie's portrayal of sexual/gender politics seems like knee jerk reaction to what is essentially a basic story and character problem. There is nothing inherently wrong with sexy young women. In fact, because of the context, the sexiness is completely removed from the women's persona and maybe that was the point to begin with. Maybe his "Sucker Punch" was just that. The old bait and switch. Titilate the audience then hit them with the reality if the situation and completely destroy their preconceptions. The main criticisms if the movie may be it's greatest praise.

Critic: There is nothing sexy or empowering about this!

Snyder: No sh*t Sherlock!

I think people wanted too much out of this film and got too little of what they expected. It's flawed as Hell, yes, but there's still enough interesting there worth discussing.

ccesarano wrote:

I think people wanted too much out of this film and got too little of what they expected. It's flawed as Hell, yes, but there's still enough interesting there worth discussing.

Time to split off a non-haterade thread? I'd love to talk about what I loved more without essentially being called a stupid pedophile living in my parents' basement.

IMAGE(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/rock_band.png)

For some reason this thread has reminded me of this.

Hah! Awesome!

The How did this get made? podcast has just 'reviewed' Sucker Punch. Reading between the lines, I don't think they were too impressed. NSFW. In the first half of the podcast the word rape probably outnumbers all the other words combined.

Man, every friend who's see it has liked it for the 'sexy-gun-toting'. I kind of feel like you they're doing it wrong.

It seems you can hate it for being that, or see it as something else, I didn't realize it's face value mattered.

Miashara wrote:

IMAGE(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/rock_band.png)

For some reason this thread has reminded me of this.

Totally.

I'm fine with people having different opinions than me. If they want to be wrong, there's no point in worrying about it. But I have to admit that it does sort of bug me, just a little bit, when people say that the movie was flawed because, essentially, it didn't play out like other movies do. That's probably silly, but it just reminds me of when Resident Evil 5 came out and people were complaining that it didn't play like Gears of War. It was like, if you want to play Gears of War, go play Gears of War. Leave my game alone. I happen to like the inability to move and shoot at the same time. It gives the game a different vibe, one that I really enjoy and that nobody seemed to mind when Resident Evil 4 came out. The problem with this analogy is that Resident Evil 5 kind of sucks, but that's mostly because Sheva is a useless retard. The shooty bang bang is perfectly fine.

Basically, my point is, if you want a movie that shows you what's actually happening or fleshes out the characters, that's fine and everything, but there are plenty of other movies out there for you. Like I've said, I like this movie precisely because of how vague everything is. It gives it a certain charm that apparently not many can appreciate, which I think is unfortunate. It's different, and I find that refreshing.

Still, if you're someone who only likes their movies with 3-dimensional characters and a story with context, it's not exactly hard to understand how you would call Sucker Punch flawed. I would argue that it's not because it wasn't meant to be what you wanted it to be and it succeeded at doing what it set out to do, but that's essentially the beginning of a pointless semantics argument and it assumes that authorial intent should be taken into account when critiquing an artistic endeavor, which I'm actually not sure it should. But I digress. And I suppose I'm repeating myself.

You want a flawed movie, however, I say go watch The Room or Plan 9 or anything Sandra Bullock has ever been in that wasn't about a runaway bus.

Or Arthur. I'm one of those strange people that likes Russell Brand, but my god was that movie a waste of time and money. I only saw it because the girlfriend wanted to see it, but even she hated it.

Y'know Emily Browning sung on the soundtrack? Wacky.

MechaSlinky wrote:

Basically, my point is, if you want a movie that shows you what's actually happening or fleshes out the characters, that's fine and everything, but there are plenty of other movies out there for you. Like I've said, I like this movie precisely because of how vague everything is. It gives it a certain charm that apparently not many can appreciate, which I think is unfortunate. It's different, and I find that refreshing.

Still, if you're someone who only likes their movies with 3-dimensional characters and a story with context, it's not exactly hard to understand how you would call Sucker Punch flawed. I would argue that it's not because it wasn't meant to be what you wanted it to be and it succeeded at doing what it set out to do, but that's essentially the beginning of a pointless semantics argument and it assumes that authorial intent should be taken into account when critiquing an artistic endeavor, which I'm actually not sure it should. But I digress. And I suppose I'm repeating myself.

You want a flawed movie, however, I say go watch The Room or Plan 9 or anything Sandra Bullock has ever been in that wasn't about a runaway bus.

A movie can be flawed but still worthwhile. It's possible to acknowledge that a movie has problems and good points. Movies exist on a continium, not a binary scale where the only options are the worst ever and the best ever.

For instance, I haven't seen Plan 9 or The Room, but I'm pretty sure Sucker Punch is better than both on a technical level. It does have some pretty pictures in it. But then again, the same could be said for Revolver, and that was drivel.

I'm one of those weirdos who likes movies with good acting, interesting stories, plot and characters, and competent action*. So yeah, I thought Sucker Punch was garbage. This is a movie that has five gorgeous girls in fetish outfits are fighting steamwork nazi zombies with mechs, katanas and flintlock pistols and manages to bore me senseless.

I found DSGamer's take on it interesting -- and more entertaining and better thought out than the movie and people should read it in lieu of watching this drek -- but it's a bit like analyzing the pattern a drooling imbecile made splashing his feces on a canvas. The reality is that Zack Snyder's a f*cking idiot and a thoroughly incompetent storyteller; Sucker Punch is filled with images stripped of their meaning because he lacks the ability to make them mean something.

*yeah, yeah so it's comprehensible on a visual level, so in that sense it's competently delivered. I'm talking about how the action scenes are incompetently *written*. There's no rules, stakes or context for the action. It's impossible to care about what happens in them because none of it matters. They're just long, boring pauses in the development of the paper thin story that made me wish I was doing something interesting like cleaning my toilet.

Alien Love Gardener wrote:

I found DSGamer's take on it interesting -- and more entertaining and better thought out than the movie and people should read it in lieu of watching this drek -- but it's a bit like analyzing the pattern a drooling imbecile made splashing his feces on a canvas. The reality is that Zack Snyder's a f*cking idiot and a thoroughly incompetent storyteller; Sucker Punch is filled with images stripped of their meaning because he lacks the ability to make them mean something.

Honestly, it's quite possible I'm right and that this is correct as well. It's possible, I believe, to co-opt all those tropes I mentioned and not realize what's you're doing. They're in the air we breathe. That's part of what I find fascinating. This movie could have arisen from a desire to make stuff the artist thought was cool, but because of how ingrained certain tropes are in our culture they may have been mined as if they were memories. I find that interesting.

Intentionalism?! Fie upon't, foh! What the director intended to produce doesn't mean squat in light of what was actually produced.

Alien Love Gardener wrote:

A movie can be flawed but still worthwhile. It's possible to acknowledge that a movie has problems and good points. Movies exist on a continium, not a binary scale where the only options are the worst ever and the best ever.

Yeah, that's not what I was saying. Admittedly, I may not have said what I was saying in the best way possible.

Basically, I was saying I like the movie for exactly the reasons why you don't like it. What you see as flaws, I see as wonderfully alternate methods of storytelling.

It was essentially a rant more than a rebuttal.

wordsmythe wrote:

Intentionalism?! Fie upon't, foh! What the director intended to produce doesn't mean squat in light of what was actually produced.

MechaSlinky wrote:

it assumes that authorial intent should be taken into account when critiquing an artistic endeavor, which I'm actually not sure it should.

Although, I really should've just said, "which it largely shouldn't." I mean, if someone intends their movie as a drama then judging it as a comedy is rather silly, but apart from basic stuff like that, yeah, I'm with you.

MechaSlinky wrote:

Basically, I was saying I like the movie for exactly the reasons why you don't like it. What you see as flaws, I see as wonderfully alternate methods of storytelling.

I'd genuinely like to know what you see those action segments as doing. I can't see the alternate methods of storytelling because I see no story being told. The action fantasy layer has no relation to reality or the brothel delusion, and what happens there tells us nothing new about anything. If you cut them out, you'd miss absolutely nothing.

In fact, I'd argue the action segments both hurts the rest of the movie by being in there, and are *hurt* by being set as fantasy sequences. If you'd removed them and presented them as separate entities, I'd probably enjoy them as silly little action viginettes on youtube or something. And if they weren't present as masses of dead weight in the movie, I'd probably like the rest more as well.

The only thing I disliked was the high-pitched voice of the pilot girl. Other than that I enjoyed the hell out of it. Two guys I went to see it with didn't like it, said it was stupid, to that I said that they were the stupids.

Zack Snider is one incredibly talented director, though I agree on narrative not being his forte. He has, still, a knack for "sequencing" and episodic content: opening sequence for SP, Watchmen's Dr. Manhattan back story, 300's spartan "life as a kid" scene. You may not like those movies, but Snider can pretty much pick up any subject at this time and I'll go see it for those 5-10 minutes of glorious movie making. I do, however, hope he'll eventually fulfill the underlying promise of delivering a masterpiece in years to come.

MechaSlinky wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:

Intentionalism?! Fie upon't, foh! What the director intended to produce doesn't mean squat in light of what was actually produced.

MechaSlinky wrote:

it assumes that authorial intent should be taken into account when critiquing an artistic endeavor, which I'm actually not sure it should.

Although, I really should've just said, "which it largely shouldn't." I mean, if someone intends their movie as a drama then judging it as a comedy is rather silly, but apart from basic stuff like that, yeah, I'm with you.

I've seen plenty of things that were intended to be serious but were unintentionally hilarious. I've seen plenty of things that were intended to be funny but were absolutely not.

Alien Love Gardener wrote:
MechaSlinky wrote:

Basically, I was saying I like the movie for exactly the reasons why you don't like it. What you see as flaws, I see as wonderfully alternate methods of storytelling.

I'd genuinely like to know what you see those action segments as doing. I can't see the alternate methods of storytelling because I see no story being told. The action fantasy layer has no relation to reality or the brothel delusion, and what happens there tells us nothing new about anything. If you cut them out, you'd miss absolutely nothing.

In fact, I'd argue the action segments both hurts the rest of the movie by being in there, and are *hurt* by being set as fantasy sequences. If you'd removed them and presented them as separate entities, I'd probably enjoy them as silly little action viginettes on youtube or something. And if they weren't present as masses of dead weight in the movie, I'd probably like the rest more as well.

Feeank wrote:

The only thing I disliked was the high-pitched voice of the pilot girl. Other than that I enjoyed the hell out of it. Two guys I went to see it with didn't like it, said it was stupid, to that I said that they were the stupids.

Zack Snider is one incredibly talented director, though I agree on narrative not being his forte. He has, still, a knack for "sequencing" and episodic content: opening sequence for SP, Watchmen's Dr. Manhattan back story, 300's spartan "life as a kid" scene. You may not like those movies, but Snider can pretty much pick up any subject at this time and I'll go see it for those 5-10 minutes of glorious movie making. I do, however, hope he'll eventually fulfill the underlying promise of delivering a masterpiece in years to come.

I think the action fantasy scenes definitely got in the way as well. The story was in the other world. There were just to many layers of obfuscation. It was fun to watch, but I wanted to see the what was going on in the Asylum world with Sweet pea and Baby Doll. That was where the real conflict was, even if it too was a fantasy world. Snyder was, to quote Shakespheare again, "hoisted on his own petard." And yes...I wrote that with one hand, while the other, with raised pinky, took a sip of fine English Earl Grey Tea.

Snyder has storytelling chops, he just fell in love with his own shtick and it bit him in the ass. It was like he was afraid to stay with the story. Maybe he thought the only way to make the movie work was through these über-geek metaphorical mash-ups.

heavyfeul wrote:

I think the action fantasy scenes definitely got in the way as well. The story was in the other world. There were just to many layers of obfuscation. It was fun to watch, but I wanted to see the what was going on in the Asylum world with Sweet pea and Baby Doll. That was where the real conflict was, even if it too was a fantasy world. Snyder was, to quote Shakespheare again, "hoisted on his own petard." And yes...I wrote that with one hand, while the other, with raised pinky, took a sip of fine English Earl Grey Tea.

Snyder has storytelling chops, he just fell in love with his own shtick and it bit him in the ass. It was like he was afraid to stay with the story. Maybe he thought the only way to make the movie work was through these über-geek metaphorical mash-ups.

I disagree and from other interviews it seems the action scenes were ideas he's had for awhile and wanted to get on film. I suspect the story came later. I dont think he was a victim of self love but tried to get everything in the movie that he could think of while he had the chance.

I just feel like he was wasting what precious time he had with those battle scenes. The clockwork zombie Nazi fight was one of the best fantasy action scenes I have ever seen on film, but it, and the other scenes like it, did not advance the story at all. They felt like overindulgent flights of fancy. When he cut back to the Asylum, though, the tension of the story immediately returned.

I think the action scenes brought a level of intensity to the movie that it would have otherwise lacked. I don't think they were ever intended to be part of the narrative, but neither do I think they broke up the narrative over much. I think using them as a fantasy arena for Baby's mind to go to while she is dancing her erotic dance (or whatever that equates to in the "real" world) is reason enough for those scenes to exist. I would much rather watch those scenes than watch some dirty, gritty oversexualized dance, and the reactions of the uncouth patrons of the club, or even worse, witness the physical trauma that was actually taking place in the real world.

To me they just looked like subconscious-gone-wild dreamish sequences--the kind of thing you expect to see in an abused person's mind in response to the abuse. It doesn't necessarily mean sexual abuse, either, though that was clearly happening at the asylum level. On some level the girls needed to escape just from their unpleasant living conditions and from the emotional and psychological wringer of Dr. Gorsky's therapy.

I actually think not showing her dance was a good choice -- nothing could ever live up to how spellbinding the movie presented it as anyway. I don't particularly mind going into an escapist fantasy either. What I want is for them to have some sort of relationship to what the girls are doing in the real/brothel world. Either that, or be an extension of Baby Doll's damaged psyche instead of a mash-up of Snyder's geek fantasies.

For me, them being so unrelated to the rest of the movie removed all emotional investment and stakes from the scenes, and drained any intensity out of it.

ranalin wrote:

I disagree and from other interviews it seems the action scenes were ideas he's had for awhile and wanted to get on film. I suspect the story came later.

It certainly plays that way.

Feeank wrote:

Zack Snider is one incredibly talented director, though I agree on narrative not being his forte. He has, still, a knack for "sequencing" and episodic content: opening sequence for SP, Watchmen's Dr. Manhattan back story, 300's spartan "life as a kid" scene. You may not like those movies, but Snider can pretty much pick up any subject at this time and I'll go see it for those 5-10 minutes of glorious movie making.

He's a capable visual stylist, I'll give him that, although he doesn't exactly do subtle. What he needs though is a script by someone who can write and a sadistic producer to keep him in line. The fact that he isn't without talent and that the opening sequence *was* striking makes me all that more annoyed with Sucker Punch. A whole lot of craftsmanship went into making it, and it was all wasted because of the abysmal script.

Alien Love Gardener wrote:

The fact that he isn't without talent and that the opening sequence *was* striking makes me all that more annoyed with Sucker Punch.

Man, I had the same problem with Watchmen. The opening credits were possibly the best I've seen, and then the rest of the film felt like kind of a slow mess.