2 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
Let me start by stating my tastes..I'm 25, I love the art of cinema, my favourites are Fincher and Nolan and from the classic ones Kubrick and Scorcesse.
I've been on /tv/ many years but I think this is my first time creating a topic and that's because of the many negative things said about Birdman..Usually it's the critics who get it wrong but this time it's the opposite.
I have watched so many movies and every personal classic of mine (Fight Club, Eternal Sunshine Of A Spotless Mind, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, American Beauty, There Will Be Blood, every Kubrick film) took me more than one viewing to recognize their brilliance.
Birdman is the only film I have watched that when it was over I started clapping.
When I was watching it I had the feeling I was watching a classic.A modern and future classic that will be remembered.It reminded me of movies like All That Jazz and Being There and even Terry Gilliam's Brazil.I have since seen it two more times and each time I was in awe.
I was excited to visit the forums and see people share their experiences but I was disappointed.How can people think this film is boring??? And most of all pretentious? The word that comes up every time a director tries to create something unusual.If that's true then if greats like The Shawshank Redemption, Forrest Gump, The Silence of the Lambs, 2001 or Apocalypse Now came out now they would be called pretentious.
Mind you, I'm not an Inaritu fanboy, I had only watched Babel by him and thought it was very good but not an all time great..But I was so happy that the oscars finally awarded a truly bold-making and unpredictable film (I still can't get over the Social Network miss for The King's Speech).
So to sum up, my question is this: Why this movie, that many people like me consider a masterpiece, is so divisive? Is it because all the great ones over history divided audiences? Or is it because people were expecting something different from it?