Napoleon Dynamite
Jul. 28th, 2009 05:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
snousleI chose this movie for an odd reason: because I read somewhere that it has proven very difficult, using collaborative filtering algorithms, to predict whether a given viewer will like it or not based on their opinion of other films. In other words, viewer reaction is unusually unpredictable. Since I'm a Bayesian classification wonk, of course I had to see it.
I think that many readers here should see the film regardless of its merits. It's sort of enigmatic, but my take on it is that it is a fairly serious look at what it is like to be socially maladjusted in America. I think it is of particular interest to those who subscribe to the autism spectrum concept and its implications.
The film starts off seeming flippant and cruel, until a particular moment when the viewer - myself, at least - discovered how much of that cruelty was actually in my own mind, rather than in the film itself. Kind of disturbing. I guess it's the point where you realize the character is a real person, not a cartoon - despite the cartoonlike rendering of the film itself. This moment might not be the same for everyone.
And though some of the things in the film seem contrived and wildly implausible, they are also exactly like things I have seen happen in real life. So I can't call any of it implausible, actually, it only seems that way because it is so rarely represented. I particularly liked the crazy, colorful dom/sub relationship that seemed to make them both so happy. I was just reading in one of Fritscher's books about how gay men remake each other through domination... and found some of these scenes reminiscent of that. I cannot believe it is meant as a joke when it is acted with such emotional realism.
I thought it could have been much better and much stronger by being longer and more serious. It's teen-flick packaging is an interesting choice that makes me wonder if I'm reading too much into a shallow and superficial film, which is a strange sensation.
The Wikipedia article has some interesting comments as well.
I think that many readers here should see the film regardless of its merits. It's sort of enigmatic, but my take on it is that it is a fairly serious look at what it is like to be socially maladjusted in America. I think it is of particular interest to those who subscribe to the autism spectrum concept and its implications.
The film starts off seeming flippant and cruel, until a particular moment when the viewer - myself, at least - discovered how much of that cruelty was actually in my own mind, rather than in the film itself. Kind of disturbing. I guess it's the point where you realize the character is a real person, not a cartoon - despite the cartoonlike rendering of the film itself. This moment might not be the same for everyone.
And though some of the things in the film seem contrived and wildly implausible, they are also exactly like things I have seen happen in real life. So I can't call any of it implausible, actually, it only seems that way because it is so rarely represented. I particularly liked the crazy, colorful dom/sub relationship that seemed to make them both so happy. I was just reading in one of Fritscher's books about how gay men remake each other through domination... and found some of these scenes reminiscent of that. I cannot believe it is meant as a joke when it is acted with such emotional realism.
I thought it could have been much better and much stronger by being longer and more serious. It's teen-flick packaging is an interesting choice that makes me wonder if I'm reading too much into a shallow and superficial film, which is a strange sensation.
The Wikipedia article has some interesting comments as well.
