>I'M RICH
>I'M HANDSOME
>CAMERON DIAZ LOVES ME AND WANTS ME TO FRICK HER RAW EVERY DAY
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAA I'M LOSING MY MIND!!!
Rewatching Vanilla Sky right now. It's really hard to sympathize and identify with David, the main character played by Tom Cruise. Why were late 90's and early 2000's movies so frickin whiny? Is this why GenX are such weak people who can't appreciate anything?
>OH NO NO NO THIS PRETTY BLONDE BLUE EYED WOMAN IS OBSESSED WITH ME AAAAAAAAAAAGGHHHH!!!
OH GOD SHE SWALLOWED MY CUM SOMEONE SAVE ME FROM THIS HELL
>i swallowed your cum
>we fricked 4 times in a row
>that means something
>cruise as david: w-what does it mean?
>if only you men knew....
>the password is...uh, fellatio? no condom fellatio?
WEAR YOUR FRICKIN MASK!!!
wtf he is literally me
there were probably GenXers who downloaded this personality during the early 2000s without being the actual heir of a huge publisher. it probably still works today.
>i'm an irresponsible care-free douchebag
>i'll get into the car with my female stalker, who i just fricked four times a day ago, and who is implied to be some former actress
so many plot holes and just bad character building.
we're introduced to david having no problem with cameron diaz's character in his home, totally trusting her to stay and set the alarm when she leaves. they seem to be close and enjoy each other's company. then a day later, at his bday party, he acts like she's some crazy stalker, even though she's just there to celebrate with him. then he slips away and goes with penelope cruz. next morning, he chooses to get into the car with this crazy stalker who just the night before he was trying to avoid. doesn't really make much sense but hey, whatever.
whoops, i left out the crucial detail from the start of the movie: she cared enough about him to bring chicken soup as they both had a little cold. they don't argue or anything. nothing bad happens. then he does a complete 180 and doesn't invite her to the bday party, starts treating her like she's awful. was he playing some sort of game to get her to chase? who knows. i guess the movie did well when it was first released. but this change in character within the first 20 mins doesn't make sense upon a repeat viewing.
yeah, it was ok, not bad. which is why i'm confused about these movies showing people feeling like something felt off. maybe the corporate life sucked or being a worker in general.
>I HAVE JOB SECURITY IN A BORING OFFICE JOB WITH HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS
>I HAVE A COMFORTABLE APARTMENT WITH PLENTY OF FURNITURE
>ALL MY NEEDS ARE MET AND I CAN EVEN AFFORD TO GO OUT TO EAT EVERY NIGHT
>MY FRIDGE ONLY HAS CONDIMENTS
>OH GOD I'M LOSING MY MIND AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>I can't get laid so I guess I should go live in an abandoned house with another dude and spend my nights fighting and wrestling with sweaty men in the basement of various bars
>AHAHAHAHAHAHA
it was still good
cameron crowe is supposed to be some bigshot director, but vanilla sky is cut like it was done by some first year film student. it's so frickin choppy and overly long. i'm at the 1:45 mark and it feels like a three hour movie. i'm waiting for it to end. now imagine seeing this in theaters in 2001. good god. no wonder i'm so fricked up in the head.
i watched it with my ex in the theater and we both enjoined it - btw: i also like the original version.
what s so bad about the directing?
everything is choppy and there's a dozen cuts of nyc in the intro sequence. no smooth transitions. just jumping randomly from one scene to another. but yea glad you enjoyed it in theater. it's a different experience a 2nd or 3rd time around, especially alone on one's own tv or comp. wish they played up the sci-fi angle much more instead of leaving it to the very end.
hmm - i ll give it a watch - maybe yiu are right.
but it s still a good movie in my book.
i didn t care so much about technics at thta time
>just tell me you're a crazy murderer so I can go have dinner with my two daughters at Black Angus™
all these easy jobs out there. i seriously hope none of you took the "tradepill"
what makes it hard for me to sympathize is how he fricks the girl his friend is into while he's getting pussy on the regular. just an butthole character for most of the film's runtime.
oh a real anon, hello. yes, we're meant to see him as the villain and the hero basically. he is a rich, spoiled butthole who deserves to get REKT in that car accident, and that's when things go "sour" for him when he loses his good looks and his mind.
(yes, i finally do get it now on a 2nd or is this my third viewing. my main gripe is that it's a long movie with terrible editing, too many cuts, confusing)
the setup also reminds me of truman show
>has a hot blonde wife who is a nurse
>she wants him to impregnate her
>he's not in love with her and is obsessed with the redhead who left the show
>he's got a loyal best friend who is always there for him
>his entire life was a false, constructed reality
>by believing it, he allowed for it to continue
>it only stopped when he saw the dad character and the ceiling light fall out of the sky
>wake up, david
>open your eyes
>wake up, neo
what's with all these late 90s/early 2000 movies about being trapped in false realities, having to wake up from a dream-like state. were they trying to tell us something? now movies are mostly about fighting aliens or whatever. capeshit.
It was a time when the internet was still novel but starting to play a bigger role in our lives. As a result, I think the idea of a simulated universe was percolating through the collective unconscious/consciousness.
pretty interesting to see a large touchscreen in the office of the head woman at Life Extension (near end of vanilla sky). this was probably where Steve Jobs got the idea for iphones. she's also presumably a high ranking member of the org. lots of other high-tech stuff throughout the movie. an early livestreaming camera setup. a hologram.
also, minority report came out in 2002. lots of high-tech simulation ideas in that movie. but in Vsky they're referencing the internet in a casual way since it's been around since the 90s. aside from tech references, just the general idea that our perception of reality might not be accurate. it's explored in fight club too but that was probably due to some lack of sleep or mental illness spawning a separate identity. maybe life actually frickin sucked in the late 90s as the bubble was about to burst, and these movies tapped into that discontent.
I thought the late 90s/early 2000s were great - kind of magical, actually. Most people I know who were in their late teens/early 20s during that time agree.
I feel like this period was the digital-age version of the late 60s.
I remember there being lots of optimism and hope for the future pre 9/11, but maybe that's because I was young.
The year 2000, millennium was hyped big like "the future is now" type theme.
But it's like after 9/11 it was a gradual downhill slide. I'm not even saying that was the cause but more like a landmark.
By the time 2009 rolled around things were in the toilet. Circled the drain and then now it's in the septic tank.
The main thing I'm semi grateful for is widespread internet access, but that's both a blessing and a curse.
Sorry if this is off topic but I got in my feels.
The reason I think movies were edgier and had themes of false realities: box office hits were still a big thing since there was no streaming or YouTube, and so film makers could still make money and drop some truth bombs with artistic license, maybe throw some action in that b***h to keep people's attention.
A movie was just a bigger deal in those days. Before social media it was something to talk about when people still actually socialized. Nowadays if you don't look and act like a robot you get canceled and/or locked up.
yeah, you're right about the New Millennium. perhaps 1999-2001 was around the time people were feeling bubble anxiety. Vanilla Sky is quite shallow, in that it doesn't really delve into David's youth or upbringing, his relationship with his parents or friend(s). the movie feels repetitive after a while, like yeah we get it man, your face is fricked up, you're suddenly paranoid about corporate takeover and for some reason you suddenly hate cameron diaz's character. oh well, maybe they will remake it again and give it more depth.
Matrix and Truman Show are definitely smoother and better at tackling the false vs true reality layers.
actually, the shift from him being the attractive center of attention, who feels like he's being stalked by the needy cameron diaz, to then becoming the needy weirdo stalker (of penelope), was pretty artful. after his accident he becomes the stalker. instead of healing up he's just obsessed with this spanish woman and even tries to go clubbing, despite being barely able to stand and walk.
>ruins the movie by explaining the movie
>is tech support
>dressed like a pimp
>lets david live in his nightmare for who knows how many decades
>we the audience have to sit through this nightmare not knowing wtf is real
>cruise is disfigured and super-annoying for 3/4 of the movie
imagine you are fricking ana de armas the one moment and the next thing you see and hear is hunter schäfer acting and telling the cameron diaz parts