He doesn't care about the audience here. This movie was for him. He's old and knows he's going to die. He is trying to say something deep about life, but he's not Socrates or Aristotle. He doesn't have a lot coherent to say.
I followed Megalopolis with My Old Ass, which ended up a good call, because My Old Ass was a great palate cleanser. It actually knew how to properly cast Aubrey Plaza.
@scottcopeland3730 I'm definitely going to see My Old Ass and The Wild Robot. However, Aubrey was a standout in this. She knew what kind of campy acid trip it was and made the most of it. Lol
@@CRM-114, it isn't about whether it went over your head. I've heard lots of people call this a hot mess and beautiful to watch. I was excited by the trailer and really wanted some apocalyptic mind bender and figured maybe it would help this director make it to my list of favorite directors which goes to 33 names, but he is not one of them. I like the first two Godfather movies, but since making the list of favorite movies both of them fell of my top 350 favorite movies. I think he had something good with "Apocalypse Now" so three good movies. Yet this really was awful to watch. Had this ended with the violent crowd stringing up those they did, hearing the celebrities speak and walk away, and cheering for our main character and then they all disperse back into their poor hovels of homes as the ending I would have said, "What an impression, to show how all these people we watched are all worthless to the common man." I still might have disliked the movie but I would have thought there is an artist doing his work and making his point and breaking all conventions to tell us the people watch all of this, but are unaffected by any of it. It wasn't that. It was stupid. 25 FAVORITE DIRECTORS OF MOVIES As a child I loved "Star Wars" and hated "E.T." so I guess I learned something making this list. I called a series of movies as one placement on the list of good movies for a director. 1st place Terry Gilliam has 8; 6 on my favorites list 1) The Man who Killed Don Quixote (2017) #36 2) 12 Monkeys (1995) #59 3) Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) #155 4) The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (1988) #180 5) Time Bandits (1981) #260 6) Tideland (2006) #262 7) The Brother's Grimm (2005) 😎 Brazil (1985) 2nd place Guy Ritchie has 6; 4 on my favorites list 1) Aladdin (2019) #40 2) The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015) #47 3) The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (2024) #158 4) Sherlock Holmnes: A Game of Shadows (2011) #213 - SERIES 5) The Covenant (2023) 6) King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3rd place Robert Zemeckis has 10; only 2 on my favorites list 1) Back to the Future (1985) #23 - SERIES 2) Forrest Gump (1994) #44 3) Cast Away (2000) 4) Pinocchio (2022) 5) The Polar Express (2004) 6) Allied (2016) 7) Contact (1997) 😎 Romancing the Stone (1984) 9) Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) 10) Welcome to Marwen (2018) 4th place John Hughes has 10; 5 on my favorites list 1) The Breakfast Club (1985) #49 2) National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (1989) #86 SERIES 3) Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986) #135 4) Weird Science (1985) #189 5) Planes, Trains, and Automobiles (1987) #284 6) Pretty in Pink (1986) 7) Some Kind of Wonderful (1987) 😎 Sixteen Candles (1984) 9) Home Alone (1990) 10) She’s Having a Baby (1988) 5th place Satoshi Kon directed 4 anime movies; all favorites 1) Paprika (2006) #33 2) Perfect Blue (1999) #63 3) Tokyo Godfathers (2004) #95 4) Millennium Actress (2003) #102 6th place Mel Gibson has 5 and all on my favorites list 1) The Passion of the Christ (2004) #29 2) Braveheart (1995) #161 3) Apocalypto (2006) #179 4) The Man Without a Face (1993) #207 5) Hacksaw Ridge (2016) #270 7th place James Cameron has 5 and all 5 on my favorites list 1) True Lies (1994) #99 2) Avatar (2009) #122 3) Aliens (1986) #128 - SERIES 4) The Terminator (1984) #210 - SERIES 5) Titanic (1997) #290 8th place Steven Spielberg has 17; 6 on my favorites list 1) Schindler's List (1993) #28 2) Amistad (1997) #77 3) Saving Private Ryan (1998) #273 4) Catch Me If You Can (2002) #281 5) Lincoln (2012) #346 6) Jurassic Park (1993) #363 - SERIES 7) The Fabelmans (2022) 😎 Munich (2005) 9) E.T. (1982) 10) Bridge of Spies (2015) 11) Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) - Indiana Jones SERIES 12) Jaws (1975) - SERIES 13) War Horse (2011) 14) A.I. (2001) 15) Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) 16) Hook (1991) 17) The BFG (2016) 9th place Alfred Hitchcock has 5; 3 on my favorites list 1) Notorious (1946) #27 2) To Catch a Thief (1955) #76 3) Psycho (1960) #215 4) Rear Window (1954) 5) North by Northwest (1959) 10th place Christopher Nolan has 9; 5 on my favorites list 1) Man of Steel (2013) #126 2) Inception (2010) #139 3) Dunkirk (2017) #168 4) Oppenheimer (2023) #275 5) Memento (2000) #348 6) The Dark Knight (2008) - SERIES 7) The Following (1998) 😎 The Prestige (2006) 9) Insomnia (2002) 11th place Bill Condon has 5; only 2 on my favorites list 1) Beauty and the Beast (2017) #12 2) The Greatest Showman (2017) #98 3) Mr. Holmes (2015) 4) The Good Liar (2019) 5) Kinsey (2004) 12th place Richard Donner has 7; 3 on my favorites list 1) Superman II (1980) #42 - SERIES 2) Lethal Weapon (1987) #133 - SERIES 3) The Toy (1982) #151 4) The Goonies (1985) 5) Scrooged (1988) 6) Radio Flyer (1992) 7) Timeline (2003) 😎 Ladyhawke (1985) 13th place Matthew Vaughn has 5; 4 on my favorites list 1) X-men: First Class (2011) #93 - SERIES 2) Kick-ass (2010) #162 - SERIES 3) Stardust (2007) #166 4) Kingsman: the Secret Service (2014) #236 - SERIES 5) Argylie (2024) 14th place Martin Scorsese has 9; 3 on my list of favorites 1) Silence (2016) #10 2) Goodfellas (1990) #320 3) Taxi Driver (1976) #345 4) The Irishman (2019) 5) Killers of the Flower Moon (2023) 6) The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) 7) Hugo (2011) 😎 The Aviator (2004) 9) Casino (1995) 15th place John Landis has 9; 3 on my favorites list 1) An American Werewolf in London (1981) #65 2) Blues Brothers (1980) #97 3) Coming to America (1988) #327 4) Trading Places (1983) 5) The Three Amigos (1986) 6) Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983) 7) Beverly Hills Cop III (1994) - SERIES 😎 Spies Like Us (1985) 9) Animal House (1978) 16th place Andrew Adamson has 2 and both on my favorites list 1) Narnia: the Lion, the witch, and the wardrobe (2005) #5 - SERIES 2) Shrek (2001) #142 - SERIES 17th place Arthur Hiller has 3 and all 3 on my favorites list 1) Man of La Mancha (1972) #2 2) Silver Streak (1976) #221 3) See No Evil, Hear No Evil (1989) #360 18th place Ridley Scott has 11; 4 on my favorites list 1) Alien (1979) #73 - SERIES 2) Legend (1985) #119 - director's cut only 3) Napoleon (2023) #266 4) Blade Runner (1982) #308 5) The Last Duel (2021) 6) House of Gucci (2021) 7) Robin Hood (2010) 😎 Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014) 9) The Martian (2015) 10) Hannibal (2001) - SERIES 11) Black Hawk Down (2001) 19th place Harold Ramis has 3; 2 on my favorites list 1) Caddyshack (1980) #82 - SERIES 2) National Lampoon's Vacation (1983) #96 - SERIES 3) Groundhod Day (1993) 20th place Simon Curtis has 6; 4 on my favorites list 1) Goodbye, Christopher Robin (2017) #13 2) Woman in Gold (2015) #296 3) Downton Abbey (2022) #353 4) The Art of Racing in the Rain (2019) #357 5) The Chaperone (2018) 6) My Week with Marilyn (2011) 21st place Gore Verbinski has 5; 3 on my favorites list 1) Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) #52 - SERIES 2) A Cure for Wellness (2017) #193 3) Mouse Hunt (1997) #322 4) The Mexican (2001) 5) The Lone Ranger (2013) 22nd place Guillermo Del Toro has 2 and both on my favorites list 1) Pan’s Labyrinth (2006) - #31 Spanish with English caption 2) The Shape of Water (2017) #211 23rd place Roland Emmerich has 7; 2 on my favorites list 1) Midway (2019) #32 2) Anonymous (2011) #258 3) Independence Day (1996) 4) The Patriot (2000) 5) Godzilla (1998) - SERIES 6) Stargate (1994) 7) 2012 (2009) 24th place Tom Tykwer has 4; 3 on my favorites list 1) Der Krieger und die Kaiserin (2000) #51 2) Cloud Atlas (2012) #288 3) Heaven (2002) #333 4) The International (2009) 25th place Ivan Reitman has 4; 2 on my favorites list 1) Ghostbusters (1984) #43 - SERIES 2) Twins (1988) #283 3) Kindergarten Cop (1990) 4) Dave (1993)
For better or worse, Adam Driver seems to be more interested in working with accomplished filmmakers more than playing compelling characters. In the last 15 years, he has been directed by Spike Lee, Jim Jarmusch, Ridley Scott, Noah Baumbach, Michael Mann, Martin Scorsese, Clint Eastwood, The Coen Brothers, Steven Soderbourgh, Steven Spielberg, and now Coppola. That’s a resume that any actor would love to have. Coppola has been criticized in the past for his puzzling casting choices. Remember Keanu Reeves in Dracula or Sofia in Godfather 3? Adam Driver here seems like a major mistake. From the trailer, he just doesn’t compel so much as repel.
I knew that a lot of people might disliked this movie but calling it the worst movie of the year? Even worse than Borderlands and Madame Web? That's certainly....... something 😅
Megalopolis has received great review by serious critics. 4 stars in Cahiers du cinema. Rave reviews in New York Times and by both (!) film critics in The New Yorker. Five stars by the respected French cinema journal Critikat. But yes, it has received bad reviews from people who prefer movies to just be entertainment and who don't want to challenge themselves.
@@stephenpmurphy591 The fact that you (as a supposed adult?) even think "embarrassing CGI" [sic] is a criteria to evaluate a movie tells me you don't like any sort of challenging form in art. You are aware that not all art needs to be naturalist? Movies are not fashion, where the latest fads need to be used.
He has the same problem with katy perry. Nobody on his team or his inner circle is advising him. They left him to do whatever he liked and this is the outcome. Shame this is his final movie Ending ur film making career with such a terrible movie like this is a shame.
Місяць тому+3
The fact that Katy already reached that point of her career at only 40 years old...
Because Grandpa Francis was paying them millions & hundreds of thousands out of his own pocket. Have you seen clips of grandpa sexuallly harassing extras during filming. In coming lawsuits.
@@stephenpmurphy591 that's been debunked ages ago as gossip from"anonymous sources". Just muckraking from the industry. The extra even came forward and said nothing happened.
I find it odd that it seems no film reviews seem to understand what "a fable" subtitle means. The acting is intentionally disingenuous. The story is intentionally idealistic and unreal. That is the thematic style. Similar to Atlas Shrugged, where characters will spend 5 pages saying an idealistic rant -that is intentional. No human talks like that - that is intentionally used as a thematic device. It's been done in literature and stage plays for decades. It isn't as common in films, but it isn't difficult to understand the concept. I had many issues with this movie, but the common complaints in this review and all the other reviews I've seen simply don't seem to intellectually understand the basic style. I have issues with the substance, but there is nothing wrong with the film using a fable style.
@@jacques2659 if he intended for this movie to be as pathetic as it is and spent his entire fortune on it, this was a pretty expensive experiment, yes, but so be it. One point though, I’ve seen movie “fables” before, and this is a really unconventional and highbrow approach to make a filmmaking statement, but I’ve never seen anyone, thematically, as you say, making a fable that, at the same time, stylistically is a Hollywood movie. If it was an indie movie, it would be understandable, but if you try to shoot a tentpole and a didactic poem at the same time, this is what you get.
So, what you're saying is all fables are good? FFC fails his own assignment. The tone of the film is wildly uneven. What's fable-like about a drearily extended montage of a character being drunk and stoned out of his mind? And that's just one example. FFC is all over the map and not in control of the material. It's unfocused, emotionally flat and laughably pretentious.
I am not defending this as a “good movie”! I really didn’t care for it, and I doubt I’ll ever watch it again. There are decisions made - like the extended drug sequence - that are uneven. And personally, I simply cannot look past the godawful 2000s Sci-Fi Channel CGI and aesthetic. The use of surrealism - like the hospital scene - is some of the worst surrealism since the 2000s “The Fountain“ era, which I loathe with passion. I am not calling this a good movie… What I AM saying is there is a general literary style being used that critics don’t seem to understand (probably because they don’t read literature). The main takeaway from reviews like this one are taking issue with the valid “fable” style that is used in traditional literature like Ayn Rand and Camus, and recently by Daniel Kehlmann. “The actors weren’t convincing” is a common complaint - but that is the stylistic point! “The story is uneven” - that is a key structure of fables. “The plot reveals were dumb and silly” - that is literally the defining characteristic of allegorical literature. All of the criticism that these UA-cam reviews are pointing to are arguing against the genre of writing this film uses. It’s like going to a Western and complaining “there’s too much desert and shootouts!” My point is - this criticism is uneducated. They simply are not educated in literary genre, and probably shouldn’t be reviewing films with a higher level of thought than Marvel films. Again - Metropolis isn’t a good movie. I am not saying that. But anyone engaging in criticism should at least be educated in the premise of what they’re reviewing, which these types of videos clearly are not.
No this is karma for him. I saw Godfather on opening night. Very good. However, he never gave Bob Evans the love he deserved for REALLY editing it and backing a longer cut. Evans also was instrumental in ensuring Godfather 2 was made. Then on the 50th anniversary at the Oscars - after Evans had passed away He finally thanked him. If it had not been Evans approving Francis as the director and fighting with Gulf and Western on Coppola’s vision, who knows if Francis would have even been widely known. Think what you want about Evans, but my Uncle told me that had not Evans re edited it after Francis cut some of the best scenes it would not have been the masterpiece it is considered today. Instead Francis stabbed Evans in the back and now this mess of a movie he is getting the payback for what he did to a lot of people in the past. He has the most overblown ego out there. As a fellow Sicilian as my dad’s parents came over and went through Ellis Island, I am quite aware how they can be. And Coppola is the epitome of that. Sad, but true. As Evans said there is your remembering how it went down, Ruddy’s memories and Coppola’s and somewhere in the three tellings is the truth and no one is lying. So yeah, you can’t idolize these directors - there are many people involved in making a great movie. And he should have retired gracefully because he only has really three good movies to his name and succumbed to all the hype and believed he was the best director and whined if someone questioned it. As a fellow Sicilian I have no empathy for him at all. Too bad there was no Evans on this film to tell him No, it’s a pretentious ego inflated passion project and an unmitigated mess. Multiple Razzies not Oscars coming his way. And Apocalypse Now is highly overrated. I take Full Metal Jacket, The Deer Hunter and Platoon over that meandering mess any day.
@@Ldv1969cts5Thanks for the interesting information and your take. After seeing Paramount’s “the Offer”, I got curious about the real Bob Evans and read quite a few articles written about him, and actually felt bad for the guy, even if he may not have been a saint either. So what you’ve said makes sense and I believe it. I’m an Asian American but have had quite a few Italian American friends growing up including a few exes, and I can kind of see what you’re referring to about the ego factor, that I’d associate with some kind of ethnic/cultural pride. I actually see the same in some people of my own ancestry, particularity men, and when you look back into history, it all makes more sense.
14:35 - sounds like what Jerry Lewis did with The Day the Clown Cried. He was so embarrassed he locked it away. Library of Congress received a copy after his death but it’s still under lock and key. It’s had a huge mystique about it though!
I will say, though, that despite being a swing and a miss, he tried something and it failed. We NEED different movies/diverse movies as opposed to just superhero movies. Granted, it puts people in the seats, but there needs to be more original, creative stories. Sadly, this was bad but I fear that this might put a nail in the coffin for a lot of low-budget films that don't involve masks/capes/family animation films that don't go by A24 or Pixar or Disney to have a decent box office.
This wasn’t a low budget movie and this has nothing to do with superhero movies. There are plenty of original movies out there, if people don’t go watch them that’s on the general public.
it failed... to you. But Megalopolis was entirely self funded and had no studio involvement outside of the limited theatrical distribution. Coppola even paid for the marketing. The fact that this singular creative vision of a film got made at all is a success in itself.
@@STNKbone made possible by him having an assload of money, dare to dream kids. I also don't think him paying for the marketing is a flex considering how embarrassingly bad it was.
@mambaforever9593 Maybe I didn't post it here. This is what I wrote. I saw the movie last night and thought the movie had a clear and coherent structure that many critics didn’t seem to understand. It’s a mixture of an Aesop fable with the magical realism of Latin American literature. I didn’t see anything that was unclear. In interviews, Adam Driver said the film leaves you open to interpret it but that’s not the nature of fables, which are moralistic by nature; the movie had a clear message. At the start of the movie, Catalina is probably in the middle of psychosis, and I think some of the things we see, like the moving statues in the drive, can be seen in that manner. I didn’t find the monologues preachy or out of place in the context they were given. It also helps to review the Catilinarian conspiracy right before the fall of the Roman Republic.
Funny that Tarantino says that, since I think his last good movie was Inglorious Basterds, which came out 15 years ago. (Sorry, not a fan of Django Unchained, The Hateful Eight, and Once upon a time in Hollywood, which is a pretentious snooze fest)
Coppola is too old to be directing this film or any film. When you’ve reached that age, most people lose the sharper senses and flexibility of mind that they once had when they were younger, with a very few exceptions. Seems it’s only those who have taken a superb care of their health, led a rather well-intentioned life with many good deeds done for others (generating good karma), and are lucky, that seem to be able to produce good-quality creative work into their older age. Robert Redford is one such director/producer that comes to mind. He’s actually older than Coppola but still producing good films, he is also still extremely well-spoken and inspiring in interviews. And he was smart and wise enough to retire from directing years ago. Thanks for the review. I sometimes waste my time watching poor-rated films anyway out of mere curiosity of how bad it is, but I think seeing this video I’ll skip this one, and also the sequel to Joker, too, after seeing your review on it.
Okay so out of morbid curiosity I went and saw Francis Ford Coppola's Megalopolis. It's pretty much a mess as if Coppola is now like a Tommy Wiseau (The Room) bad director. LOL I give him some credit for being 85 years old and following his own vision; I think a glimmer of a good movie is in there if maybe someone had challenged Coppola on some of his decisions and edited it down. Aubrey Plaza is one of the highlights of the film and she looks fantastic as a blonde in this I must say. Aubrey plays a gold digger who marries a rich guy for his money and power, her character is smart and ambitious and she actually has a career as a TV journalist. Shi LaBeouf dresses in drag in the film. Adam Driver is good in this also but he needs to pick better roles in the future. A lot of good actors are in this actually; the direction and story falls flat. It could have been great if Coppola had made this 40 years ago or so. I'd probably give it like 2 1/2 stars out of five. Oh yeah there is one disturbing scene where Shia LeBeouf performs oral sex on Aubrey Plaza; she isn't attracted to him she is just manipulating him for money and power. That guy always gives a creepy performance. If anyone is curious I would wait for streaming on this one. It's pretty slow and not a lot of action. It's not the worst movie I have ever seen but I believe most people would not like it. You can bet on that.
Somehow it reminded me of Cloud Atlas with all those strange casting choices of top Hollywood stars appearing in what can be described as an essentially indie sci-fi movie, but on steroids. But, for Cloud Atlas, it worked, because the story was well adapted from a well written book by a professional writer.
yeah….the more time passes the worse that movie ages. Gaga’s hair was so distractingly bad, none of the cast had an accent that made sense, Salma Hayek, as much as I love her, was miscast and made no sense for that role, it was just kind of a pointless movie that I really didn’t care for
Marriage Story bought Adam Driver a lot of good will for me, so I won't hold this terrible movie against him. I think these legendary directors get to a point where they no longer keep the audience in mind. It's all about their vision and because of their position no one will tell them no
I think the problem with Adam Driver is he wants an Oscar and thinks that working with a bunch of older, white male directors, no matter what the project is the trick that will work. "Ferrari" is fine, though, but he's badly cast.
@@lymphomasurvive Agreed. I don't understand why people don't get this film is a political essay that reflects our time. I admit I didn't pick up on the meaning of all the imagery but I found it to be the most engaging cinematic experience, in terms of Hollywood, I have had in many years. I am going to see it again.
@ricardocantoral7672 I thought the movie was a long exploration of love on every level and from every side, and it is played on top of a retelling and twisting of an actual historical event. It showed the ugliness and beauty of love. There was grief, jealousy, sex as a weapon on the negative side. Catalina was in the middle of psychosis in the first half of the movie, but he was also an indifferent and uncaring; the visuals in the first half can be seen through the lens of his psychosis. We don’t see how Platinum falls in love with Catalina but we know how that drives her anger and jealousy; which is how Pulcher responds to rejection. It was love that redeemed him and the second half of the movie was how that happened. Beyond the personal love, the movie explores love through the lens of family and civics to the love of humanity and all beings. As love refines Catalina, he starts to care more about other people. The movie as a whole can be seen through the lens of a fable with magical realism. As a fable, it has a clear moral message. The structure was coherent and clear. For the historical events, the scandal with the Vestal virgin happened with the real Catalina being accused of trying to sleep with one, which was a potential death sentence. The Coliseum scene with the virgin also speaks to love misused, her virginity was being put up for sale. I also think the historical Catalina is split into two characters - the cousins portrayed by Driver, who is the superego, and Labeouf, who is the id. But Driver starts off with his id and superego fighting from the grief of the loss of his wife. Coppola subverted both fables and the ending of the real conspiracy. Rome became a dictatorship. And part of the point of the movie is we can't make it on our own. Love is what brought him out of the madness.
Having seen Coppola's previous three films a month ago, I can definitively say that Twixt was worse. It really does come across as inept as people accuse Megalopolis of being (which I thought was odd but not so amateurish). Tetro was a better-made film than Twixt, but I regarded as a worse watch because it was so dull, and I still think of it as duller than Megalopolis. Youth Without Youth could rank higher because he was adapting someone else's magical realist story rather than just writing his own original script (the worst aspect of Megalopolis). I expect he's much happier to have this as his final film than Twixt.
I like people who claim they are Coppola fans but only talk about movies he made 50 years ago. This reviewer proclaims "this doesn't feel like the work of Francis Ford Coppola". Maybe if you actually saw some of his films you'd discover that this is the style that he has developed the last 20 years. Watch Tetro, Twixt and his masterful Youth Without Youth. If you don't like that style that's fine, but don't chain him to a style he had 50 years ago and that he has since abandoned.
My review: (B) While its narrative is nowhere near perfect and can often get confusing, Megalopolis at least has great visuals, excellent costumes and an amazing cast.
Read Sam Wasson's book Path To Paradise for perspective on this. It had been germinating in Coppola for 40 years. He spent 110 million dollars of his own money to get his heart and soul on the screen. I admire his courage. He sees a parallel to the fall of the Roman Empire and America today. I want to see Megadoc, a documentary by Mike Figgis about the making of Megalopolis.
To each their own and you can not like this movie, but this was pretty lazy criticism. This is far from the worst movie of the year and saying this seems like the work of an amateur is laughable. Shit like this is why internet film criticism is losing most of, if not all credibility.
Overall, I think Brian is not a good critic at all. Actually, he's not a critic, full stop. I enjoy listening to him talking about Oscars and stuff, but this is it. All of his criticisms are pretty lazy, as when he said that Guadagnino's Queer is a letdown because he was expecting a kind of Call me by your name or A single man movie and Queer was anything but. The problem is not with Brian's lazy criticisms because, as I said, he is not a critic (and it shows). (It's also very likely that he doesn't care what his followers think, given the very low engagement he shows in terms of replies in the comment section.) The problem is with all the (allegedly) 'professional reviewers' who even fail to grasp the basic plot of Megalopolis -- which is pretty straightforward and classicaly structured. Honestly, we are at a point where viewers, even 'professional' viewers, do not even understand what they are watching!
This guy keeps making these laughable absolute statements. "We don't care, there are non-characters, it doesn't reach the audience," What is this guy? The unquestionable Czar of film?
@@ricardocantoral7672 yeah, well, I noticed that UA-camrs tend to develop a very big ego. Like, they become 'experts' or something, whereas everybody else, from their perspective, is just an illiterate idiot. Being able to shoot a video with their phone in their room does not make them professional critics though.
This movie was brilliant. Criticising anything that’s ambitious in trying something different or weird in an over the top manner isn’t the way to go either and is a big reason why studios take little to no risks and pump out millions of sequels to popular franchises every year instead of investing in good scripts and ideas. This film has plenty to criticise but calling it the worst of the year when there’s been many terrible films this year is very disingenuous. I loved it and am going to see it again
Couldn't agree more with this revie. I saw it a couple of days ago. I tried to stay away from reviews that were negative but I did go into this film with low expectations. I saw it because it was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. He's made some great films so I tried to go in with an open mind. Unfortunately, Megalopolis is by far his worst film. It was embarrassingly bad. I don't understand how he spent 40 years trying to make this and this is what he put out? Almost every performance is bad. It's not even " it's so bad it's good " territory. I admire a filmmaker that takes chances but Coppola truly wasted his time and money on this. It seems it's all ego for him. The 140 minutes of this film felt like 4!!! The last Coppola film that I saw that was interesting was Tetro. Coppola has always fancied himself as an independent auteur but sometimes his ambition hurts his films. This man has made some great films and I hope this isn't his last one but this is by far the worst film I've seen this year!!!
After seeing the movie they gave us a free sample tasting of Coppola's chardonnay outside which is exactly what I needed after I saw the movie lol Ironically the best parts of the movie were the clips montage where he goes full Terrence Mallick I still would rank Borderlands, Am I Racist and The Crow worse than this though
Francis Ford Coppola is a very morally questionable person. Everyone should research the Nathan Forrest Winters/Victor Salva situation from the late 80s.
Mavensbaseball- He infamously defended convicted pedo Victor Salva and made sure Nathan, his victim never “worked in this business again” for speaking out. Sick fuck even tried to say Salva, a 30 year man, was “Just a child himself.”
@@mavensbaseball Coppola's production company was instrumental in supporting convicted pedophile rapist Victor Salva (who raped a twelve year old actor Nathan Forrest Winters) to return to directing the Jeepers Creepers franchaise.
I saw that movie he made in the early 1990’s on HBO called Clownhouse and was wondering like WTH! Why is he showing all this? Then I heard accusations about the director years later when he made Powder and not surprised. So how does Francis Coppola compare? Only controversy I ever heard about him was when he was filming Gardens of Stone and a cast member of it was fired because he was in a boating accident with his son that killed him.
Nah, it was great! You gotta embrace the weirdness of it all. It had super unique tone and at the times I almost felt like I was watching totally new genre of cinema, though that makes it sound smarter than it is. But that’s the thing: It is kinda like at the same time really stupid and crazy, but also smart. And I think that’s intentional. It's like megalomaniac art film. And It’s really funny too! All in all very interesting film and I truly think we need more films like these in the theaters. Films that polarize viewers by taking risks and doing what the heck they want.
That's why he's the king of nepotism. Surround yourself with family and friends and any outsider who disagrees with you can always be replaced with a cousin or something.
Why not? It’s his money. Hollywood has its own New Rome Nepotisms. Variety et al suck up to Hollywood (like Wow sucks up to Crassus) and Coppola (Caesar) refuse to play the old game as Hollywood is dying before our eyes.
Costner never had it. Ridley’s Napoleon was better than any other. And FFC has just made a masterpiece that people can’t see, yet. Just like the Mayor, you need trust and new eyes to see.
@@michaelroseagain Ridley is the most hit or miss director in the business lol. For every American Gangster Or The Martian we get a Robin Hood or Exodus
It was the worst movie going experience I have ever had. I was miserable. About 40 minutes in you realize it isn't going to get any better and your left for nearly another 2 hours with a false sense of hope that something will happen to turn things around. It never does. By the end you will be just begging for it to end so you can go about your business. It was artsy fartsy nonsense. I honestly hated every minute of it. I've never felt so disconnected from something I was wanting and trying so hard to get into.
@quiet_erp Adam Driver and Shia LaBeouf's performances. I love it when directors allow actors to follow their instincts and just go for it. The tone of the movie was right up my alley. Coppola and most of the actors come across as being earnest to me in their intentions. My least favorite part was the actress who played opposite Adam Driver. She was monotone and didn't have the confidence of Aubrey Plaza or LaBeouf.
Just saw it last night. Tbh it's not as bad as I'd expected, but it's a failure for sure. Coppola had the idea of making it in 70s. Just imagine if this had been completed back then, it might not have been a success but it could've potentially reached a cult status. I think the reason why it fails epically is because Coppola's cinematic styles and aesthetics still stuck in the past. Moments in this film made me feel like I've seen similar stuffs from other indie filmmakers decades ago, and yet Megalopolis is infused with those 'comparatively more modern' and gimmicky special effects and narrative style, which make the whole thing worse. It feels like an elder man trying to embrace new concepts and stuff but ends up putting himself in a rather awkward position: still belonging to the past, but looking at the present and the future mostly through his old lens. However, I do think the script isn't that bad and could be more suitable for different forms of art , such as stage play or maybe an anime? I'm not joking about the latter. In anime, imagination runs wilder than ever. Picturing this if those Ghibli's masterpieces are made into live-actions, I guess 99% of them would end up becoming a huge disaster.
It's so disappointing to hear she's so bad on this. It's like Coppola is trying to help his old cancelled friends (he bagged about this in the press) while hurting the careers of some younger stars.
Yes, definitely in the running for multiple Razzies. It’s like Coppola’s 45 year hang over from making “Apocalypse Now”. The good news here is Kylo Ren becomes a father, and I’m happy for him.
Pretty strong disagreement on this one. My video review is going to be VERY different, and I think that this will become a classic as people re-evaluate it down the road (the same way "One from the Heart" was polarizing before it was embraced)! There is so much great stuff in this movie that IS a little messy (I won't argue there), but my God we rarely see such ambition on the screen these days, and considering the subtext of the story and what we are seeing in the political landscape today...I meant, sorry you didn't enjoy it, but I believe this is a masterpiece.
@@stxrstrxckmxteo515 well, nope, in my opinion Babylon is a great movie (and I will be waiting 10 or 20 years until it will be re-evaluated, so that I will be able to say that I loved it since day 1). Megalopolis is not as good as Babylos. Still, it's not an abomination and it's not a horrible mess like many people are saying.
The one thing I would disagree with is that I do find this movie crosses the threshold into unintentional comedy to where I really enjoyed it and would watch it again. But not because anything in it worked as intended.
He’s got his vineyards. Coppola wines are usually good for the price. So there’s that. I won’t be surprised if they increase their wine distribution to help cover the expenses of this film’s distribution.
@@robgabriel8900 He created his wine business from nothing and he still owns it. If he had spent that money on cocaine and hookers, he’d be getting less flak from spending it on a movie that won’t make anywhere near its money back in his lifetime, if ever.
I like that you said what I was thinking. Bardo was such a piece of shit from Inarritu I am still pissed at him. All those movies were industrial sized dunpsters compared to their typical work
Why are some reviewers trying to pretend that this film is not a pretentious mess? It must be that thing that seems particular to some film enthusiasts - The Great Man Auteur Must Never Be Criticized - dictum. It seems to apply in varying degrees to Wes Anderson and Tarantino also.
Either they genuinely think it's a brilliant piece of art, or they don't want to admit that they've wasted their time watching a Pretentious piece of drivel.
As Adam Driver’s biggest fan, his film choices have been driving me nuts. He’s such a phenomenal actor who has so much power, passion, and emotion in his performances but he keeps getting landed in all these director passion projects. He hasn’t been in a truly ENJOYABLE film in so long, even if they’re good they’re so dark or overly dramatic that I wouldn’t call them enjoyable. I would love to just be able to chilax and watch him in a simple romantic comedy just for a breath of fresh air.
@kristineh1601 Heat is Up and down enjoyment wise. Some parts are very mechanical or technical. While the two sides are doing their thing. Public Enemies is very enjoyable but has a hugely problematic soundtrack at most times.
This movie would've been better off as a musica dramal a la Romeo and Juliet with Leo and Claire Danes. I saw it on Thursday. The ONLY way to rebrand this for marketing purposes is to advertise it like a "sh*tshow so crazy you have to see" and maybe make it a drinking game for every unnecessary Shakespeare quote or monologue from Adam Driver. He was insufferable.
I thought the movie was a long exploration of love on every level and from every side, and it is played on top of a retelling and twisting of an actual historical event. It showed the ugliness and beauty of love. There was grief, jealousy, sex as a weapon on the negative side. Catalina was in the middle of psychosis in the first half of the movie, but he was also an indifferent and uncaring; the visuals in the first half can be seen through the lens of his psychosis. We don’t see how Platinum falls in love with Catalina but we know how that drives her anger and jealousy; which is how Pulcher responds to rejection. It was love that redeemed him and the second half of the movie was how that happened. Beyond the personal love, the movie explores love through the lens of family and civics to the love of humanity and all beings. As love refines Catalina, he starts to care more about other people. The movie as a whole can be seen through the lens of a fable with magical realism. As a fable, it has a clear moral message. The structure was coherent and clear. For the historical events, the scandal with the Vestal virgin happened with the real Catalina being accused of trying to sleep with one, which was a potential death sentence. The Coliseum scene with the virgin also speaks to love misused, her virginity was being put up for sale. I also think the historical Catalina is split into two characters - the cousins portrayed by Driver, who is the superego, and Labeouf, who is the id. But Driver starts off with his id and superego fighting from the grief of the loss of his wife. Coppola subverted both fables and the ending of the real conspiracy. Rome became a dictatorship. And part of the point of the movie is we can't make it on our own. Love is what brought him out of the madness.
@vins1979 I've only seen three reviewers get it and only one, Terry Talks Movies, mention the magic realism. I went into the movie with no expectations because everyone out of Cannes said it was saying it was a mess. How is it that so few get it? I can endorse not liking it, I'd totally understand that, but not at least understand the story. I did see one mixed reviewer talk about love.
You're absolutely right, on all counts. What's funny, though, is that your little comment stated more conscious, detailed observations about the movie and its inspirations than this entire 15+ minute bitchfest full of vague condemnations and hollow intellectual posturing (without any intellectual observations, natch). He literally couldn't think of any specific details to address, so he just pivoted to vague feelings about the celebrities involved. Dude needs to turn off Andy Cohen and crack open a few books
@@BobSmith-g4b Most reviewers were like that. I know the educational system has been bad but I'm more worried than ever; the system has been degrading for years but this is horrible. It has such a simple narrative structure with a relatively simple message that it should be easy to see. The rest is a matter of taste and I do respect that part of not liking it. Most attacks, though, have no real merit.
What I learned is that no matter who you are in Hollywood, someone will always try to change the curse of production. Like the "big spider" story Kevin Smith told once, about insane producers. Ridley Scott's Prometheus also had awful dialogues but since it was from Alien's universe lots of people loved it. I guess opinion is an extreme relativistic thing.
Terrible film, a nonsense that is not understood. The actresses are of very low quality and it shows in their acting and since the actor does not understand his role it is not known if the acting is good or bad. Now I understand why the movie studios didn't want to produce it. There is no script and it is the sum of incomprehensible philosophical scenes. Very BAD and a failure at the box office and in critics, even though there are some who rescue something from this disaster, probably some snobbish critic and friend of Coppola?
I love The Rainmaker. Underrated Gem. Is it as good as The Godfather or Apocalypse Now? No, it's not. But I think it's a really solid movie in his catalog.
Coppola had one great decade (1969 to 1979) in a six decade career.He's directed stinkers before, FINIAN'S RAINBOW and JACK. For the last 45 years he's been a mediocre director.
Hey Brian, I was entertained by your review, but I watched BKR: Be Kind Rewind's review video and was educated! She spent 40 minutes telling Coppola's saga of bringing the film to the screen and the fits and starts along the way. Her review was sympathetic, and she said she didn't want to go into seeing the film with knives out! She did, however, treat Mr. Coppola with kid gloves. She entertained and educated me! If you have any time, take a look at Be Kind Rewind.
it's not worth seeing? for real? people should really develop their own opinions about this movie by watching it, not by watching you. this is what happened to Babylon.
Idk the crowd consenus seems pretty obvious. Maybe one percent of the audiencr claim to understand it. Thats a failure. Why not tell some real Roman history?
@@lawrencerinehart5747and evo and hubris are what hollywood is made of. He can have his art and let pwople kewp their 2.5 hours. That would bw fine ya know if he wqsnt trying to sell it to the masses.
@@jhoughjr1 the fact that so many people fail to understand a movie that is pretty straightforward in its plot and in its message means that the crowd is really getting incapable of understanding, honestly!
admismid I agree with you: for me, Babylon is a GREAT movie which will be reevaluated in 10 or 20 years. Megalopolis is not the best movie in the history of cinema, but it's not the worst movie ever. And what's up with all the people who do not 'understand' it? What's so difficult to understand??
I’m going to go see it because of two things: One, I read the NYTimes review and it was stellar and a critics pick and Two, I want to see it. I’ll come back to your review after I see it… the wild difference between your labeling it an “Abomination” and the Times saying it’s masterful is far too wide of a contradiction for me to not see it first and then hear your thoughts.
I've never liked him and I think he's super overrated. Like, I don't get the hype. He also doesn't have any charm or charisma on screen. Really baffled by who Hollywood chooses for their new "stars" today.
Is it a possibility it wasn’t marketed properly? I heard one reviewer say it’s not what people think it is and it’s more of an allegory like Aranofsky’s Mother. it says right in the marketing “A Fable”. It seems most people hate it but some people did enjoy it knowing what it’s trying to be.
lol sure an idiosyncratic film financed and creatively controlled by a single guy is what an AI film would look like, not the superhero slop the studios keep pumping out.
Ugh I was hoping this was a "so bad that it's almost good" movie. :/ Thank you for actually being honest! So many reviewers are hesitant to go in on bad performances but you don't shy away.
9:29 - I’ve personally never enjoyed Adam in any of his roles, though to be fair I haven’t seen everything he’s done. In my opinion, he’s always sleepy or detached and very robotic and stiff. He’s not enjoyable to watch.
I think that's such an odd take. You sound like you are talking about that walking, talking valium called Jessie Eisenberg. Driver is hot blooded, loaded with passion. I have never seen a performance from him that remotely resembles being robotic and stiff.
Cinema used to mean something and not box office bankability. We used to make space for art films in the conversation. Now that conversation has shrunk to the size of a cell phone. We live in a highly polarized society where every piece of entertainment, stylistically resembles the next, all equally forgettable. Then, once in a blue moon a film comes along that does not fit into conventions or popular tastes. Give it a year or two, or ten and let it ruminate. Perhaps Megalopolis is so hated because it hits so close to the mark of where society is truly at, and what is at stake.
I agree with you 100%. The hand that takes the Moon and the woman that dissolves into many different bodies are images that will remain with me forever.
Leaving this comment before I watch your review. It's a mess but the ridiculousness of most of the dialogue and some scenes made me smile and laugh. So I kinda enjoyed it, i think? I dont even know what the ending meant and it got boring in the middle until the final act but I really liked whatever Aubrey Plaza and Shia Labeouf were doing 😅
I went to watch Megalopolis again and noticed a few things were missing from the print I saw on opening day. The first time I saw it, there was this really intentional delay in a scene where Cesar was talking-a super long pause. I’d heard it was meant to give a member of the audience or staff a chance to read a line from the script or something like that. Also, the slogans shouted by the protestors in the film seemed to be cut in the second viewing. The film felt like a mix of things: it had this play-like quality at times, but it also had elements of film noir, Fellini’s surrealism, and that campy Gotham City vibe. It felt nostalgic in a way, like the director was pulling from the styles and themes he connected with in his youth. By mixing in those familiar elements, I think he’s getting the audience to experience the film on multiple levels-part homage, part commentary on the issues we’re dealing with today. I really enjoyed it more the second time around, once I stopped comparing it to Coppola’s earlier films. This one’s different. It’s got a lot going on, and I think people will be talking about it for a long time. Honestly, I think given time it nay earn a place amongst the greats.
So, I find myself morbidly curious. Is this movie fun if you've been drinking? I saw the Adam Driver "club" clip and the visuals make me think that this might be a fun buzzed watch.
Your reaction to the movie is the consensus but like you, I have so much respect and admiration for Coppola, I’ll have to check it out. But I’ll tread carefully.
@TheNewyorkmets01 It's a good movie. Don't know if it's great but I'll watch it again when it comes to the small screen. But I understand it and everything connected.
He doesn't care about the audience here.
This movie was for him. He's old and knows he's going to die. He is trying to say something deep about life, but he's not Socrates or Aristotle. He doesn't have a lot coherent to say.
He s fucking diogenes
A tribute to Dame Maggie Smith please 🙏
Ill wait 10 years until comment section hipsters begin to speak of this movie as a misunderstood masterpiece.
And I still won't watch it 😂😂!🫶🏾
😂
10 years? Bro it’s happening NOW.
It is misunderstood on every level.
@@lymphomasurviveNo, it's not as it's a terrible a movie.
It's pretentious silliness wrapped in bad cgi and laugh out loud bad dialogue..
Just go see The Wild Robot. It’s a masterpiece and I mean it. It’s so much better than this
ua-cam.com/video/boZ-bEKDZY4/v-deo.htmlsi=XGkq5JJ6yuABQQNz
he has, he mentioned it in his rating of all the movies from TIFF and he was in awe.
I followed Megalopolis with My Old Ass, which ended up a good call, because My Old Ass was a great palate cleanser. It actually knew how to properly cast Aubrey Plaza.
I’m seeing my old ass tonight and the wild robot tomorrow
@scottcopeland3730 I'm definitely going to see My Old Ass and The Wild Robot. However, Aubrey was a standout in this. She knew what kind of campy acid trip it was and made the most of it. Lol
Unfortunately, there comes a time when you take the car keys from grandpa...this is one of those times, but a little too late.
Best comment
That comment is just disrespectful. The movie does contain some great ideas which I‘m sure went right over your head.
What does that even mean?
Not everyone can be like Martin Scorsese in their 80s.
@@CRM-114, it isn't about whether it went over your head. I've heard lots of people call this a hot mess and beautiful to watch. I was excited by the trailer and really wanted some apocalyptic mind bender and figured maybe it would help this director make it to my list of favorite directors which goes to 33 names, but he is not one of them. I like the first two Godfather movies, but since making the list of favorite movies both of them fell of my top 350 favorite movies. I think he had something good with "Apocalypse Now" so three good movies. Yet this really was awful to watch. Had this ended with the violent crowd stringing up those they did, hearing the celebrities speak and walk away, and cheering for our main character and then they all disperse back into their poor hovels of homes as the ending I would have said, "What an impression, to show how all these people we watched are all worthless to the common man." I still might have disliked the movie but I would have thought there is an artist doing his work and making his point and breaking all conventions to tell us the people watch all of this, but are unaffected by any of it. It wasn't that. It was stupid.
25 FAVORITE DIRECTORS OF MOVIES
As a child I loved "Star Wars" and hated "E.T." so I guess I learned something making this list. I called a series of movies as one placement on the list of good movies for a director.
1st place Terry Gilliam
has 8; 6 on my favorites list
1) The Man who Killed Don Quixote (2017) #36
2) 12 Monkeys (1995) #59
3) Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) #155
4) The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (1988) #180
5) Time Bandits (1981) #260
6) Tideland (2006) #262
7) The Brother's Grimm (2005)
😎 Brazil (1985)
2nd place Guy Ritchie
has 6; 4 on my favorites list
1) Aladdin (2019) #40
2) The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015) #47
3) The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (2024) #158
4) Sherlock Holmnes: A Game of Shadows (2011) #213 - SERIES
5) The Covenant (2023)
6) King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)
3rd place Robert Zemeckis
has 10; only 2 on my favorites list
1) Back to the Future (1985) #23 - SERIES
2) Forrest Gump (1994) #44
3) Cast Away (2000)
4) Pinocchio (2022)
5) The Polar Express (2004)
6) Allied (2016)
7) Contact (1997)
😎 Romancing the Stone (1984)
9) Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)
10) Welcome to Marwen (2018)
4th place John Hughes
has 10; 5 on my favorites list
1) The Breakfast Club (1985) #49
2) National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (1989) #86 SERIES
3) Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986) #135
4) Weird Science (1985) #189
5) Planes, Trains, and Automobiles (1987) #284
6) Pretty in Pink (1986)
7) Some Kind of Wonderful (1987)
😎 Sixteen Candles (1984)
9) Home Alone (1990)
10) She’s Having a Baby (1988)
5th place Satoshi Kon
directed 4 anime movies; all favorites
1) Paprika (2006) #33
2) Perfect Blue (1999) #63
3) Tokyo Godfathers (2004) #95
4) Millennium Actress (2003) #102
6th place Mel Gibson
has 5 and all on my favorites list
1) The Passion of the Christ (2004) #29
2) Braveheart (1995) #161
3) Apocalypto (2006) #179
4) The Man Without a Face (1993) #207
5) Hacksaw Ridge (2016) #270
7th place James Cameron
has 5 and all 5 on my favorites list
1) True Lies (1994) #99
2) Avatar (2009) #122
3) Aliens (1986) #128 - SERIES
4) The Terminator (1984) #210 - SERIES
5) Titanic (1997) #290
8th place Steven Spielberg
has 17; 6 on my favorites list
1) Schindler's List (1993) #28
2) Amistad (1997) #77
3) Saving Private Ryan (1998) #273
4) Catch Me If You Can (2002) #281
5) Lincoln (2012) #346
6) Jurassic Park (1993) #363 - SERIES
7) The Fabelmans (2022)
😎 Munich (2005)
9) E.T. (1982)
10) Bridge of Spies (2015)
11) Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) - Indiana Jones SERIES
12) Jaws (1975) - SERIES
13) War Horse (2011)
14) A.I. (2001)
15) Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
16) Hook (1991)
17) The BFG (2016)
9th place Alfred Hitchcock
has 5; 3 on my favorites list
1) Notorious (1946) #27
2) To Catch a Thief (1955) #76
3) Psycho (1960) #215
4) Rear Window (1954)
5) North by Northwest (1959)
10th place Christopher Nolan
has 9; 5 on my favorites list
1) Man of Steel (2013) #126
2) Inception (2010) #139
3) Dunkirk (2017) #168
4) Oppenheimer (2023) #275
5) Memento (2000) #348
6) The Dark Knight (2008) - SERIES
7) The Following (1998)
😎 The Prestige (2006)
9) Insomnia (2002)
11th place Bill Condon
has 5; only 2 on my favorites list
1) Beauty and the Beast (2017) #12
2) The Greatest Showman (2017) #98
3) Mr. Holmes (2015)
4) The Good Liar (2019)
5) Kinsey (2004)
12th place Richard Donner
has 7; 3 on my favorites list
1) Superman II (1980) #42 - SERIES
2) Lethal Weapon (1987) #133 - SERIES
3) The Toy (1982) #151
4) The Goonies (1985)
5) Scrooged (1988)
6) Radio Flyer (1992)
7) Timeline (2003)
😎 Ladyhawke (1985)
13th place Matthew Vaughn
has 5; 4 on my favorites list
1) X-men: First Class (2011) #93 - SERIES
2) Kick-ass (2010) #162 - SERIES
3) Stardust (2007) #166
4) Kingsman: the Secret Service (2014) #236 - SERIES
5) Argylie (2024)
14th place Martin Scorsese
has 9; 3 on my list of favorites
1) Silence (2016) #10
2) Goodfellas (1990) #320
3) Taxi Driver (1976) #345
4) The Irishman (2019)
5) Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)
6) The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
7) Hugo (2011)
😎 The Aviator (2004)
9) Casino (1995)
15th place John Landis
has 9; 3 on my favorites list
1) An American Werewolf in London (1981) #65
2) Blues Brothers (1980) #97
3) Coming to America (1988) #327
4) Trading Places (1983)
5) The Three Amigos (1986)
6) Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983)
7) Beverly Hills Cop III (1994) - SERIES
😎 Spies Like Us (1985)
9) Animal House (1978)
16th place Andrew Adamson
has 2 and both on my favorites list
1) Narnia: the Lion, the witch, and the wardrobe (2005) #5 - SERIES
2) Shrek (2001) #142 - SERIES
17th place Arthur Hiller
has 3 and all 3 on my favorites list
1) Man of La Mancha (1972) #2
2) Silver Streak (1976) #221
3) See No Evil, Hear No Evil (1989) #360
18th place Ridley Scott
has 11; 4 on my favorites list
1) Alien (1979) #73 - SERIES
2) Legend (1985) #119 - director's cut only
3) Napoleon (2023) #266
4) Blade Runner (1982) #308
5) The Last Duel (2021)
6) House of Gucci (2021)
7) Robin Hood (2010)
😎 Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)
9) The Martian (2015)
10) Hannibal (2001) - SERIES
11) Black Hawk Down (2001)
19th place Harold Ramis
has 3; 2 on my favorites list
1) Caddyshack (1980) #82 - SERIES
2) National Lampoon's Vacation (1983) #96 - SERIES
3) Groundhod Day (1993)
20th place Simon Curtis
has 6; 4 on my favorites list
1) Goodbye, Christopher Robin (2017) #13
2) Woman in Gold (2015) #296
3) Downton Abbey (2022) #353
4) The Art of Racing in the Rain (2019) #357
5) The Chaperone (2018)
6) My Week with Marilyn (2011)
21st place Gore Verbinski
has 5; 3 on my favorites list
1) Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) #52 - SERIES
2) A Cure for Wellness (2017) #193
3) Mouse Hunt (1997) #322
4) The Mexican (2001)
5) The Lone Ranger (2013)
22nd place Guillermo Del Toro
has 2 and both on my favorites list
1) Pan’s Labyrinth (2006) - #31 Spanish with English caption
2) The Shape of Water (2017) #211
23rd place Roland Emmerich
has 7; 2 on my favorites list
1) Midway (2019) #32
2) Anonymous (2011) #258
3) Independence Day (1996)
4) The Patriot (2000)
5) Godzilla (1998) - SERIES
6) Stargate (1994)
7) 2012 (2009)
24th place Tom Tykwer
has 4; 3 on my favorites list
1) Der Krieger und die Kaiserin (2000) #51
2) Cloud Atlas (2012) #288
3) Heaven (2002) #333
4) The International (2009)
25th place Ivan Reitman
has 4; 2 on my favorites list
1) Ghostbusters (1984) #43 - SERIES
2) Twins (1988) #283
3) Kindergarten Cop (1990)
4) Dave (1993)
For better or worse, Adam Driver seems to be more interested in working with accomplished filmmakers more than playing compelling characters. In the last 15 years, he has been directed by Spike Lee, Jim Jarmusch, Ridley Scott, Noah Baumbach, Michael Mann, Martin Scorsese, Clint Eastwood, The Coen Brothers, Steven Soderbourgh, Steven Spielberg, and now Coppola. That’s a resume that any actor would love to have.
Coppola has been criticized in the past for his puzzling casting choices. Remember Keanu Reeves in Dracula or Sofia in Godfather 3? Adam Driver here seems like a major mistake. From the trailer, he just doesn’t compel so much as repel.
Don’t forget J.J. Abrams and Rian Johnson.
Yes and he thinks it's his road to an Oscar.
He has been great in almost all of those films and I would say most of those performances were compelling characters.
To be fair, Winona Ryder was set to play that character, but had to drop out very close to production, so Coppola chose to cast his daughter instead.
@@chrislondo2683 Those aren't great filmakers. Or even acomplished.....
I knew that a lot of people might disliked this movie but calling it the worst movie of the year? Even worse than Borderlands and Madame Web? That's certainly....... something 😅
I'll take ego driven auteur disaster over soulless IP safe cashgrab any day of the week
Tbf at least there are some great visuals in Megalopolis
Honestly, Borderlands and Madame Web have a better script than this.
@@Jingles6466I so agree
@@Jingles6466 Comparing Francis Ford Coppola to that is such a huge stretch 😅
The critics will say, “Megaflopalis.”
If they haven't already.
Megalopolis has received great review by serious critics. 4 stars in Cahiers du cinema. Rave reviews in New York Times and by both (!) film critics in The New Yorker. Five stars by the respected French cinema journal Critikat. But yes, it has received bad reviews from people who prefer movies to just be entertainment and who don't want to challenge themselves.
@@onshnriskChallenge how?
Silly embarrassing writing, silly embarrassing acting, silly embarrassing CGI?
That type of challenge?
@@onshnrisk the movie is ass, you are not a philosopher or a deep thinker bro
@@stephenpmurphy591 The fact that you (as a supposed adult?) even think "embarrassing CGI" [sic] is a criteria to evaluate a movie tells me you don't like any sort of challenging form in art. You are aware that not all art needs to be naturalist? Movies are not fashion, where the latest fads need to be used.
He has the same problem with katy perry.
Nobody on his team or his inner circle is advising him. They left him to do whatever he liked and this is the outcome.
Shame this is his final movie
Ending ur film making career with such a terrible movie like this is a shame.
The fact that Katy already reached that point of her career at only 40 years old...
Comparing Francis Ford Coppola to Katy Perry 😂😂😂 Hilarious but I get it.
@@thebigbadart Katy deserves so much better
Because Grandpa Francis was paying them millions & hundreds of thousands out of his own pocket.
Have you seen clips of grandpa sexuallly harassing extras during filming.
In coming lawsuits.
@@stephenpmurphy591 that's been debunked ages ago as gossip from"anonymous sources". Just muckraking from the industry. The extra even came forward and said nothing happened.
I find it odd that it seems no film reviews seem to understand what "a fable" subtitle means. The acting is intentionally disingenuous. The story is intentionally idealistic and unreal. That is the thematic style. Similar to Atlas Shrugged, where characters will spend 5 pages saying an idealistic rant -that is intentional. No human talks like that - that is intentionally used as a thematic device. It's been done in literature and stage plays for decades. It isn't as common in films, but it isn't difficult to understand the concept. I had many issues with this movie, but the common complaints in this review and all the other reviews I've seen simply don't seem to intellectually understand the basic style. I have issues with the substance, but there is nothing wrong with the film using a fable style.
💯 x 💯 x 💯
@@jacques2659 if he intended for this movie to be as pathetic as it is and spent his entire fortune on it, this was a pretty expensive experiment, yes, but so be it. One point though, I’ve seen movie “fables” before, and this is a really unconventional and highbrow approach to make a filmmaking statement, but I’ve never seen anyone, thematically, as you say, making a fable that, at the same time, stylistically is a Hollywood movie. If it was an indie movie, it would be understandable, but if you try to shoot a tentpole and a didactic poem at the same time, this is what you get.
@@drctrs Only Hollywood in terms of budget.
So, what you're saying is all fables are good? FFC fails his own assignment. The tone of the film is wildly uneven. What's fable-like about a drearily extended montage of a character being drunk and stoned out of his mind? And that's just one example. FFC is all over the map and not in control of the material. It's unfocused, emotionally flat and laughably pretentious.
I am not defending this as a “good movie”! I really didn’t care for it, and I doubt I’ll ever watch it again. There are decisions made - like the extended drug sequence - that are uneven. And personally, I simply cannot look past the godawful 2000s Sci-Fi Channel CGI and aesthetic. The use of surrealism - like the hospital scene - is some of the worst surrealism since the 2000s “The Fountain“ era, which I loathe with passion. I am not calling this a good movie…
What I AM saying is there is a general literary style being used that critics don’t seem to understand (probably because they don’t read literature). The main takeaway from reviews like this one are taking issue with the valid “fable” style that is used in traditional literature like Ayn Rand and Camus, and recently by Daniel Kehlmann. “The actors weren’t convincing” is a common complaint - but that is the stylistic point! “The story is uneven” - that is a key structure of fables. “The plot reveals were dumb and silly” - that is literally the defining characteristic of allegorical literature. All of the criticism that these UA-cam reviews are pointing to are arguing against the genre of writing this film uses. It’s like going to a Western and complaining “there’s too much desert and shootouts!” My point is - this criticism is uneducated. They simply are not educated in literary genre, and probably shouldn’t be reviewing films with a higher level of thought than Marvel films.
Again - Metropolis isn’t a good movie. I am not saying that. But anyone engaging in criticism should at least be educated in the premise of what they’re reviewing, which these types of videos clearly are not.
When 1 of the 3 positives is "the opening logo" you know you're in trouble.
I also looked at my watch and was shocked it was only an hour in. What a struggle to make it through this pretentious mess.
Well, he's 85 (84 while filming this), so he's definitely not the same man that made The Godfather.
No this is karma for him. I saw Godfather on opening night. Very good. However, he never gave Bob Evans the love he deserved for REALLY editing it and backing a longer cut. Evans also was instrumental in ensuring Godfather 2 was made. Then on the 50th anniversary at the Oscars - after Evans had passed away He finally thanked him. If it had not been Evans approving Francis as the director and fighting with Gulf and Western on Coppola’s vision, who knows if Francis would have even been widely known. Think what you want about Evans, but my Uncle told me that had not Evans re edited it after Francis cut some of the best scenes it would not have been the masterpiece it is considered today. Instead Francis stabbed Evans in the back and now this mess of a movie he is getting the payback for what he did to a lot of people in the past. He has the most overblown ego out there. As a fellow Sicilian as my dad’s parents came over and went through Ellis Island, I am quite aware how they can be. And Coppola is the epitome of that. Sad, but true. As Evans said there is your remembering how it went down, Ruddy’s memories and Coppola’s and somewhere in the three tellings is the truth and no one is lying. So yeah, you can’t idolize these directors - there are many people involved in making a great movie. And he should have retired gracefully because he only has really three good movies to his name and succumbed to all the hype and believed he was the best director and whined if someone questioned it. As a fellow Sicilian I have no empathy for him at all. Too bad there was no Evans on this film to tell him No, it’s a pretentious ego inflated passion project and an unmitigated mess. Multiple Razzies not Oscars coming his way. And Apocalypse Now is highly overrated. I take Full Metal Jacket, The Deer Hunter and Platoon over that meandering mess any day.
Well that wqs like 50 years ago.
Regardlesa of talent noone hits home runs forever
@@Ldv1969cts5Thanks for the interesting information and your take. After seeing Paramount’s “the Offer”, I got curious about the real Bob Evans and read quite a few articles written about him, and actually felt bad for the guy, even if he may not have been a saint either. So what you’ve said makes sense and I believe it. I’m an Asian American but have had quite a few Italian American friends growing up including a few exes, and I can kind of see what you’re referring to about the ego factor, that I’d associate with some kind of ethnic/cultural pride. I actually see the same in some people of my own ancestry, particularity men, and when you look back into history, it all makes more sense.
This the first one that I've seen that didn't like it on the scale this guy did it so I'll go by the majority and go to form my own opinion.
Scorsese is 81 and he still manages to direct very good movies, so I don't know if it is matter only of age
14:35 - sounds like what Jerry Lewis did with The Day the Clown Cried. He was so embarrassed he locked it away. Library of Congress received a copy after his death but it’s still under lock and key. It’s had a huge mystique about it though!
That's if you think this reactor is correct, or even the possibility he isn't on a payroll to say "crap!"
I will say, though, that despite being a swing and a miss, he tried something and it failed. We NEED different movies/diverse movies as opposed to just superhero movies. Granted, it puts people in the seats, but there needs to be more original, creative stories. Sadly, this was bad but I fear that this might put a nail in the coffin for a lot of low-budget films that don't involve masks/capes/family animation films that don't go by A24 or Pixar or Disney to have a decent box office.
This wasn’t a low budget movie and this has nothing to do with superhero movies. There are plenty of original movies out there, if people don’t go watch them that’s on the general public.
it failed... to you. But Megalopolis was entirely self funded and had no studio involvement outside of the limited theatrical distribution. Coppola even paid for the marketing. The fact that this singular creative vision of a film got made at all is a success in itself.
@@STNKbone made possible by him having an assload of money, dare to dream kids. I also don't think him paying for the marketing is a flex considering how embarrassingly bad it was.
Swung and miss if you believe this guy. To me he went way overboard so I don't.
So that's what Tarantino meant when he said he wanted to make 10 movies and not one to many, so that his career will not end with a massive dud:)
It wasn't a dud, the critics just didn't get it.
@@lymphomasurvive i don't see you explaining it, only crying about others not getting it under every comment. What is good about it?
@mambaforever9593 Maybe I didn't post it here. This is what I wrote. I saw the movie last night and thought the movie had a clear and coherent structure that many critics didn’t seem to understand. It’s a mixture of an Aesop fable with the magical realism of Latin American literature. I didn’t see anything that was unclear. In interviews, Adam Driver said the film leaves you open to interpret it but that’s not the nature of fables, which are moralistic by nature; the movie had a clear message. At the start of the movie, Catalina is probably in the middle of psychosis, and I think some of the things we see, like the moving statues in the drive, can be seen in that manner. I didn’t find the monologues preachy or out of place in the context they were given. It also helps to review the Catilinarian conspiracy right before the fall of the Roman Republic.
@@lymphomasurviveI agree with you.
Funny that Tarantino says that, since I think his last good movie was Inglorious Basterds, which came out 15 years ago. (Sorry, not a fan of Django Unchained, The Hateful Eight, and Once upon a time in Hollywood, which is a pretentious snooze fest)
Coppola is too old to be directing this film or any film. When you’ve reached that age, most people lose the sharper senses and flexibility of mind that they once had when they were younger, with a very few exceptions. Seems it’s only those who have taken a superb care of their health, led a rather well-intentioned life with many good deeds done for others (generating good karma), and are lucky, that seem to be able to produce good-quality creative work into their older age. Robert Redford is one such director/producer that comes to mind. He’s actually older than Coppola but still producing good films, he is also still extremely well-spoken and inspiring in interviews. And he was smart and wise enough to retire from directing years ago.
Thanks for the review. I sometimes waste my time watching poor-rated films anyway out of mere curiosity of how bad it is, but I think seeing this video I’ll skip this one, and also the sequel to Joker, too, after seeing your review on it.
Okay so out of morbid curiosity I went and saw Francis Ford Coppola's Megalopolis. It's pretty much a mess as if Coppola is now like a Tommy Wiseau (The Room) bad director. LOL I give him some credit for being 85 years old and following his own vision; I think a glimmer of a good movie is in there if maybe someone had challenged Coppola on some of his decisions and edited it down. Aubrey Plaza is one of the highlights of the film and she looks fantastic as a blonde in this I must say. Aubrey plays a gold digger who marries a rich guy for his money and power, her character is smart and ambitious and she actually has a career as a TV journalist. Shi LaBeouf dresses in drag in the film. Adam Driver is good in this also but he needs to pick better roles in the future. A lot of good actors are in this actually; the direction and story falls flat. It could have been great if Coppola had made this 40 years ago or so. I'd probably give it like 2 1/2 stars out of five. Oh yeah there is one disturbing scene where Shia LeBeouf performs oral sex on Aubrey Plaza; she isn't attracted to him she is just manipulating him for money and power. That guy always gives a creepy performance. If anyone is curious I would wait for streaming on this one. It's pretty slow and not a lot of action. It's not the worst movie I have ever seen but I believe most people would not like it. You can bet on that.
No, but how do you really feel about this film? I haven't laughed this hard during a review in a loooong time. Thanks for saving me time and money.
Read my comment in the main section. Don't let him do your thinking for you.
I didnt even finish the movie. The theater felt like a prison watching it.
It was shockingly BADD~
Roger Ebert said, “No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough.”
No "one reactor" is too right. Other reactors praised it.
@@Calers-gu1ib Go watch it and let us know what you think.
@@Calers-gu1ib Yea, a very small minority. But so what? That happens with every movie.
Somehow it reminded me of Cloud Atlas with all those strange casting choices of top Hollywood stars appearing in what can be described as an essentially indie sci-fi movie, but on steroids. But, for Cloud Atlas, it worked, because the story was well adapted from a well written book by a professional writer.
"I loved the opening logo" omg THE SHADE
I thought that Adam Driver was awful in the horrible HOUSE OF GUCCI. He slept walked through that entire movie.
He was awful, the rest of the cast and the movie
yeah….the more time passes the worse that movie ages. Gaga’s hair was so distractingly bad, none of the cast had an accent that made sense, Salma Hayek, as much as I love her, was miscast and made no sense for that role, it was just kind of a pointless movie that I really didn’t care for
So you believe this guy. I saw other reactors say Adam is really good in this.
I'm gonna be so mad if Francis Ford Coppola ends his career with this movie.
I don't think there will be a chance at redemption for Coppola. This film is sooooo bad. I almost left the theatre, but remained respectful.
He‘a already working on the next one
Even better if he ends up nabbing Worst Director at the Razzies. He humiliated himself with this disaster of a movie.
Better than if he ended it with Twixt.
Maybe he'll sell another winery and make a good film this time
I have not seen it yet, but it cannot be worse than Madame Web, or Sasquatch Sunset.
It is pretty bad. Watched it on opening day. The only good thing about this film is seeing Adam Driver shirtless.
Its not. Borderlands, Madame Web and Sasquatch Sunset are all worse
It felt unwatchable in the two attempts I made to finish it. I could not keep my eyes open.
Marriage Story bought Adam Driver a lot of good will for me, so I won't hold this terrible movie against him. I think these legendary directors get to a point where they no longer keep the audience in mind. It's all about their vision and because of their position no one will tell them no
I think the problem with Adam Driver is he wants an Oscar and thinks that working with a bunch of older, white male directors, no matter what the project is the trick that will work.
"Ferrari" is fine, though, but he's badly cast.
It's a good movie that flows well and is easily understood.
@@lymphomasurvive Agreed. I don't understand why people don't get this film is a political essay that reflects our time. I admit I didn't pick up on the meaning of all the imagery but I found it to be the most engaging cinematic experience, in terms of Hollywood, I have had in many years. I am going to see it again.
@ricardocantoral7672 I thought the movie was a long exploration of love on every level and from every side, and it is played on top of a retelling and twisting of an actual historical event. It showed the ugliness and beauty of love. There was grief, jealousy, sex as a weapon on the negative side. Catalina was in the middle of psychosis in the first half of the movie, but he was also an indifferent and uncaring; the visuals in the first half can be seen through the lens of his psychosis. We don’t see how Platinum falls in love with Catalina but we know how that drives her anger and jealousy; which is how Pulcher responds to rejection. It was love that redeemed him and the second half of the movie was how that happened. Beyond the personal love, the movie explores love through the lens of family and civics to the love of humanity and all beings. As love refines Catalina, he starts to care more about other people. The movie as a whole can be seen through the lens of a fable with magical realism. As a fable, it has a clear moral message. The structure was coherent and clear. For the historical events, the scandal with the Vestal virgin happened with the real Catalina being accused of trying to sleep with one, which was a potential death sentence. The Coliseum scene with the virgin also speaks to love misused, her virginity was being put up for sale. I also think the historical Catalina is split into two characters - the cousins portrayed by Driver, who is the superego, and Labeouf, who is the id. But Driver starts off with his id and superego fighting from the grief of the loss of his wife. Coppola subverted both fables and the ending of the real conspiracy. Rome became a dictatorship. And part of the point of the movie is we can't make it on our own. Love is what brought him out of the madness.
Doesn't deserve any awards but God damn this was the most fun I've had in a theatre in awhile
It was so awful. I had to leave the theatre. No coherent story, dialogue or unified theme. Felt narratively epileptic 😆
Worst movie of 2024? Clearly you haven't seen madame web
Having seen Coppola's previous three films a month ago, I can definitively say that Twixt was worse. It really does come across as inept as people accuse Megalopolis of being (which I thought was odd but not so amateurish). Tetro was a better-made film than Twixt, but I regarded as a worse watch because it was so dull, and I still think of it as duller than Megalopolis. Youth Without Youth could rank higher because he was adapting someone else's magical realist story rather than just writing his own original script (the worst aspect of Megalopolis). I expect he's much happier to have this as his final film than Twixt.
I like people who claim they are Coppola fans but only talk about movies he made 50 years ago. This reviewer proclaims "this doesn't feel like the work of Francis Ford Coppola". Maybe if you actually saw some of his films you'd discover that this is the style that he has developed the last 20 years. Watch Tetro, Twixt and his masterful Youth Without Youth. If you don't like that style that's fine, but don't chain him to a style he had 50 years ago and that he has since abandoned.
My review: (B) While its narrative is nowhere near perfect and can often get confusing, Megalopolis at least has great visuals, excellent costumes and an amazing cast.
Read Sam Wasson's book Path To Paradise for perspective on this. It had been germinating in Coppola for 40 years. He spent 110 million dollars of his own money to get his heart and soul on the screen. I admire his courage. He sees a parallel to the fall of the Roman Empire and America today. I want to see Megadoc, a documentary by Mike Figgis about the making of Megalopolis.
I really liked the movie! It's much better than critics want you to think.
To each their own and you can not like this movie, but this was pretty lazy criticism. This is far from the worst movie of the year and saying this seems like the work of an amateur is laughable. Shit like this is why internet film criticism is losing most of, if not all credibility.
Overall, I think Brian is not a good critic at all. Actually, he's not a critic, full stop. I enjoy listening to him talking about Oscars and stuff, but this is it. All of his criticisms are pretty lazy, as when he said that Guadagnino's Queer is a letdown because he was expecting a kind of Call me by your name or A single man movie and Queer was anything but. The problem is not with Brian's lazy criticisms because, as I said, he is not a critic (and it shows). (It's also very likely that he doesn't care what his followers think, given the very low engagement he shows in terms of replies in the comment section.) The problem is with all the (allegedly) 'professional reviewers' who even fail to grasp the basic plot of Megalopolis -- which is pretty straightforward and classicaly structured. Honestly, we are at a point where viewers, even 'professional' viewers, do not even understand what they are watching!
@@vins1979well said
This guy keeps making these laughable absolute statements. "We don't care, there are non-characters, it doesn't reach the audience," What is this guy? The unquestionable Czar of film?
@@ricardocantoral7672 yeah, well, I noticed that UA-camrs tend to develop a very big ego. Like, they become 'experts' or something, whereas everybody else, from their perspective, is just an illiterate idiot. Being able to shoot a video with their phone in their room does not make them professional critics though.
This guy is saying the movie is bad and saying why. You're just saying it's not that bad. How about explaining why?
This movie was brilliant. Criticising anything that’s ambitious in trying something different or weird in an over the top manner isn’t the way to go either and is a big reason why studios take little to no risks and pump out millions of sequels to popular franchises every year instead of investing in good scripts and ideas. This film has plenty to criticise but calling it the worst of the year when there’s been many terrible films this year is very disingenuous. I loved it and am going to see it again
I feel certain there will be a movie made about this movie in the next few years.
It felt almost like he was "Punking" the audience is was so terrible,.lol~
Couldn't agree more with this revie. I saw it a couple of days ago. I tried to stay away from reviews that were negative but I did go into this film with low expectations. I saw it because it was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. He's made some great films so I tried to go in with an open mind. Unfortunately, Megalopolis is by far his worst film. It was embarrassingly bad. I don't understand how he spent 40 years trying to make this and this is what he put out? Almost every performance is bad. It's not even " it's so bad it's good " territory. I admire a filmmaker that takes chances but Coppola truly wasted his time and money on this. It seems it's all ego for him. The 140 minutes of this film felt like 4!!! The last Coppola film that I saw that was interesting was Tetro. Coppola has always fancied himself as an independent auteur but sometimes his ambition hurts his films. This man has made some great films and I hope this isn't his last one but this is by far the worst film I've seen this year!!!
After seeing the movie they gave us a free sample tasting of Coppola's chardonnay outside which is exactly what I needed after I saw the movie lol
Ironically the best parts of the movie were the clips montage where he goes full Terrence Mallick
I still would rank Borderlands, Am I Racist and The Crow worse than this though
So this is what Reverend Mother Mohiam when she said, "abomination!!!". This film is indeed abhorrent
Francis Ford Coppola is a very morally questionable person. Everyone should research the Nathan Forrest Winters/Victor Salva situation from the late 80s.
This is interesting, why do you say this?
@@mavensbaseballBecause he's a pedo apologista.
Mavensbaseball- He infamously defended convicted pedo Victor Salva and made sure Nathan, his victim never “worked in this business again” for speaking out.
Sick fuck even tried to say Salva, a 30 year man, was “Just a child himself.”
@@mavensbaseball Coppola's production company was instrumental in supporting convicted pedophile rapist Victor Salva (who raped a twelve year old actor Nathan Forrest Winters) to return to directing the Jeepers Creepers franchaise.
I saw that movie he made in the early 1990’s on HBO called Clownhouse and was wondering like WTH! Why is he showing all this? Then I heard accusations about the director years later when he made Powder and not surprised.
So how does Francis Coppola compare? Only controversy I ever heard about him was when he was filming Gardens of Stone and a cast member of it was fired because he was in a boating accident with his son that killed him.
The way Megalopolis will open in the domestic box office behind a movie from another country will put Coppola's ego in its right place 🤭
Probably behind a lot of movies!
He’s suffering from Katy Perry Syndrome. Refuses to adapt for the next generation and the trends that are lining up with said generation.
THIS….is the kind of criticism I LOVE!!! True, heartfelt and soul crushing!!!👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾💐💐💐💐❤️❤️❤️
Nah, it was great! You gotta embrace the weirdness of it all. It had super unique tone and at the times I almost felt like I was watching totally new genre of cinema, though that makes it sound smarter than it is. But that’s the thing: It is kinda like at the same time really stupid and crazy, but also smart. And I think that’s intentional. It's like megalomaniac art film. And It’s really funny too! All in all very interesting film and I truly think we need more films like these in the theaters. Films that polarize viewers by taking risks and doing what the heck they want.
WORST MOVIE EVER!!! First time I ever walked out of a movie before it ended !!! Truly BAD!!! NOTHING WAS GOOD ABOUT THIS FILM..........
I love Adam Driver, but the artsy/boring movies he chooses do nothing for him.
What are your thoughts of that marriage movie with Scar Jo?
That's why he's the king of nepotism. Surround yourself with family and friends and any outsider who disagrees with you can always be replaced with a cousin or something.
Why not? It’s his money. Hollywood has its own New Rome Nepotisms. Variety et al suck up to Hollywood (like Wow sucks up to Crassus) and Coppola (Caesar) refuse to play the old game as Hollywood is dying before our eyes.
I just read somewhere that "Megalopolis makes Southland Tales look like an episode of Friends" LOL
Who's gonna tell Coppola, Costner and Ridley that they're past it.
Costner never had it. Ridley’s Napoleon was better than any other. And FFC has just made a masterpiece that people can’t see, yet. Just like the Mayor, you need trust and new eyes to see.
@@michaelroseagain Ridley is the most hit or miss director in the business lol. For every American Gangster Or The Martian we get a Robin Hood or Exodus
It sounds like a movie nobody is going to want to see twice.
Maybe for Laughs~
It was the worst movie going experience I have ever had. I was miserable. About 40 minutes in you realize it isn't going to get any better and your left for nearly another 2 hours with a false sense of hope that something will happen to turn things around. It never does. By the end you will be just begging for it to end so you can go about your business. It was artsy fartsy nonsense. I honestly hated every minute of it. I've never felt so disconnected from something I was wanting and trying so hard to get into.
Damn I absolutely loved it. It commanded my complete attention the entire run time
Same here.
@@redfacegaming7727 just out of curiosity what was your favorite "part"?
@quiet_erp Adam Driver and Shia LaBeouf's performances. I love it when directors allow actors to follow their instincts and just go for it. The tone of the movie was right up my alley. Coppola and most of the actors come across as being earnest to me in their intentions. My least favorite part was the actress who played opposite Adam Driver. She was monotone and didn't have the confidence of Aubrey Plaza or LaBeouf.
@@redfacegaming7727 right on. We'll I'm glad you enjoyed it. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
6:23 “obviously we know”. And FFC knows we know. So, you’ve heard of Bertold Brecht’s fourth wall? This. Is. That.
"Berthold Brecht- was he on Andy Cohen last night?"
LOL. I can almost guarantee he has no idea who Brecht was
Just saw it last night. Tbh it's not as bad as I'd expected, but it's a failure for sure.
Coppola had the idea of making it in 70s. Just imagine if this had been completed back then, it might not have been a success but it could've potentially reached a cult status.
I think the reason why it fails epically is because Coppola's cinematic styles and aesthetics still stuck in the past. Moments in this film made me feel like I've seen similar stuffs from other indie filmmakers decades ago, and yet Megalopolis is infused with those 'comparatively more modern' and gimmicky special effects and narrative style, which make the whole thing worse. It feels like an elder man trying to embrace new concepts and stuff but ends up putting himself in a rather awkward position: still belonging to the past, but looking at the present and the future mostly through his old lens.
However, I do think the script isn't that bad and could be more suitable for different forms of art , such as stage play or maybe an anime? I'm not joking about the latter. In anime, imagination runs wilder than ever. Picturing this if those Ghibli's masterpieces are made into live-actions, I guess 99% of them would end up becoming a huge disaster.
Dry Brian: “Aubrey Plaza plays a character named WOW PLATINUM. That is her name in this movie, WOW PLATINUM.” 😂
Described by another critic as "the kind of name a writer in his 80s would give a wild character".
It's a stage name and even the movie makes fun of how ridiculous it is.
It's so disappointing to hear she's so bad on this. It's like Coppola is trying to help his old cancelled friends (he bagged about this in the press) while hurting the careers of some younger stars.
I don't understand what's the problem with a character whose stage name is Wow Platinum. I really don't understand.
Everyone who says this can’t see that Aubrey Plaza is also a really stoopid name.
Never imagined me saying this but maybe Coppola should have taken some notes from Brady Corbet
It was worth seeing.
Yes, definitely in the running for multiple Razzies. It’s like Coppola’s 45 year hang over from making “Apocalypse Now”.
The good news here is Kylo Ren becomes a father, and I’m happy for him.
i know it's going to be bad when the first poster was released... what a horrible poster that was.
Pretty strong disagreement on this one. My video review is going to be VERY different, and I think that this will become a classic as people re-evaluate it down the road (the same way "One from the Heart" was polarizing before it was embraced)! There is so much great stuff in this movie that IS a little messy (I won't argue there), but my God we rarely see such ambition on the screen these days, and considering the subtext of the story and what we are seeing in the political landscape today...I meant, sorry you didn't enjoy it, but I believe this is a masterpiece.
Ehi, when is your video review coming out? I would like to watch it.
@@vins1979 Probably Friday.
I loved Babylon and if this movie is anything like that I might actually watch it
@@stxrstrxckmxteo515 well, nope, in my opinion Babylon is a great movie (and I will be waiting 10 or 20 years until it will be re-evaluated, so that I will be able to say that I loved it since day 1). Megalopolis is not as good as Babylos. Still, it's not an abomination and it's not a horrible mess like many people are saying.
Just like how we all reevaluated Jack, The Rainmaker and Twixt
The one thing I would disagree with is that I do find this movie crosses the threshold into unintentional comedy to where I really enjoyed it and would watch it again. But not because anything in it worked as intended.
This review is the epitome of the phrase "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed".
He’s got his vineyards. Coppola wines are usually good for the price. So there’s that. I won’t be surprised if they increase their wine distribution to help cover the expenses of this film’s distribution.
reportedly, Coppola sold a portion of his winery in California to spend $120 million of his own money to fund it.
@@robgabriel8900 Oh dear, he needs that revenue!
@@wsidechrisThe movie was good.
@@lymphomasurvive but was it worth spending 120mil of ones own money to make it...
@@robgabriel8900 He created his wine business from nothing and he still owns it. If he had spent that money on cocaine and hookers, he’d be getting less flak from spending it on a movie that won’t make anywhere near its money back in his lifetime, if ever.
Disastrous films by well-respected directors seems to be a trend right now: Bardo, Babylon, Napoleon, and now Megalopolis.
Those films are masterpiece when compared to this trainwreck. This is whole other level of disastrous 😖
@@ZlatanHu. I feel like this is a whole new level, though.
I like that you said what I was thinking. Bardo was such a piece of shit from Inarritu I am still pissed at him. All those movies were industrial sized dunpsters compared to their typical work
Bardo is excellent, Babylon is a masterpiece and Megalopolis is also a major work.
@@medou2161 lololol are u nut????
Why are some reviewers trying to pretend that this film is not a pretentious mess? It must be that thing that seems particular to some film enthusiasts - The Great Man Auteur Must Never Be Criticized - dictum. It seems to apply in varying degrees to Wes Anderson and Tarantino also.
Either they genuinely think it's a brilliant piece of art, or they don't want to admit that they've wasted their time watching a Pretentious piece of drivel.
As Adam Driver’s biggest fan, his film choices have been driving me nuts. He’s such a phenomenal actor who has so much power, passion, and emotion in his performances but he keeps getting landed in all these director passion projects. He hasn’t been in a truly ENJOYABLE film in so long, even if they’re good they’re so dark or overly dramatic that I wouldn’t call them enjoyable. I would love to just be able to chilax and watch him in a simple romantic comedy just for a breath of fresh air.
I think Ferrari is very decent
@@chamindujanith6337I thought it was decent albeit a little lacking. I just want him to be in something GREAT again.
Michael Mann films are not very enjoyable outside a few like Thief, The Last of the Mohicans, Collateral.
@@chamindujanith6337I’d throw Heat in there as well.
@kristineh1601 Heat is Up and down enjoyment wise. Some parts are very mechanical or technical. While the two sides are doing their thing.
Public Enemies is very enjoyable but has a hugely problematic soundtrack at most times.
The face says it all...CAN'T WAIT TO WATCH IT!
Ridley Scott is 86 and has never won an Oscar. I really hope Gladiator 2 is good and it’s not another old man trying to make an ambitious movie.
This movie would've been better off as a musica dramal a la Romeo and Juliet with Leo and Claire Danes. I saw it on Thursday. The ONLY way to rebrand this for marketing purposes is to advertise it like a "sh*tshow so crazy you have to see" and maybe make it a drinking game for every unnecessary Shakespeare quote or monologue from Adam Driver. He was insufferable.
So did he like the movie? Looking at the bright side, people working on the film got paychecks.
I thought the movie was a long exploration of love on every level and from every side, and it is played on top of a retelling and twisting of an actual historical event. It showed the ugliness and beauty of love. There was grief, jealousy, sex as a weapon on the negative side. Catalina was in the middle of psychosis in the first half of the movie, but he was also an indifferent and uncaring; the visuals in the first half can be seen through the lens of his psychosis. We don’t see how Platinum falls in love with Catalina but we know how that drives her anger and jealousy; which is how Pulcher responds to rejection. It was love that redeemed him and the second half of the movie was how that happened. Beyond the personal love, the movie explores love through the lens of family and civics to the love of humanity and all beings. As love refines Catalina, he starts to care more about other people. The movie as a whole can be seen through the lens of a fable with magical realism. As a fable, it has a clear moral message. The structure was coherent and clear. For the historical events, the scandal with the Vestal virgin happened with the real Catalina being accused of trying to sleep with one, which was a potential death sentence. The Coliseum scene with the virgin also speaks to love misused, her virginity was being put up for sale. I also think the historical Catalina is split into two characters - the cousins portrayed by Driver, who is the superego, and Labeouf, who is the id. But Driver starts off with his id and superego fighting from the grief of the loss of his wife. Coppola subverted both fables and the ending of the real conspiracy. Rome became a dictatorship. And part of the point of the movie is we can't make it on our own. Love is what brought him out of the madness.
Finally someone who gets the movie --- which is not even so difficult to get to begin with, but people nowadays are becoming brainless...
@vins1979 I've only seen three reviewers get it and only one, Terry Talks Movies, mention the magic realism. I went into the movie with no expectations because everyone out of Cannes said it was saying it was a mess. How is it that so few get it? I can endorse not liking it, I'd totally understand that, but not at least understand the story. I did see one mixed reviewer talk about love.
You're absolutely right, on all counts. What's funny, though, is that your little comment stated more conscious, detailed observations about the movie and its inspirations than this entire 15+ minute bitchfest full of vague condemnations and hollow intellectual posturing (without any intellectual observations, natch). He literally couldn't think of any specific details to address, so he just pivoted to vague feelings about the celebrities involved. Dude needs to turn off Andy Cohen and crack open a few books
@@BobSmith-g4b Most reviewers were like that. I know the educational system has been bad but I'm more worried than ever; the system has been degrading for years but this is horrible. It has such a simple narrative structure with a relatively simple message that it should be easy to see. The rest is a matter of taste and I do respect that part of not liking it. Most attacks, though, have no real merit.
My entire conscious life, people have been making excuses for Coppola. And I'm pushing 50.
"This is it. This is the one I'll be remembered for." --Ed Wood Jr.
He said this isn’t his last film. He has two more lined up, I believe.
Hopefully not a sequel to this!!!🤣🤣🤣
Maybe not after this unless everyone else involved watches him like a hawk.
Who is going to fund them after this disaster?
@@vinnym5607 You might be right. But he also still has money from selling his winery, so he could just self-fund again.
What I learned is that no matter who you are in Hollywood, someone will always try to change the curse of production. Like the "big spider" story Kevin Smith told once, about insane producers. Ridley Scott's Prometheus also had awful dialogues but since it was from Alien's universe lots of people loved it. I guess opinion is an extreme relativistic thing.
Prometheus had a horrible script but its production values were top notch. This movie looks like Neil Breen was given a few mil
Terrible film, a nonsense that is not understood. The actresses are of very low quality and it shows in their acting and since the actor does not understand his role it is not known if the acting is good or bad. Now I understand why the movie studios didn't want to produce it. There is no script and it is the sum of incomprehensible philosophical scenes. Very BAD and a failure at the box office and in critics, even though there are some who rescue something from this disaster, probably some snobbish critic and friend of Coppola?
largely agree but c'mon - Aubrey Plaza is the best part of this movie. She was one of the few actors who had an actual character to play!
I love The Rainmaker. Underrated Gem. Is it as good as The Godfather or Apocalypse Now? No, it's not. But I think it's a really solid movie in his catalog.
"The Rainmaker" is fine. I don't think it in any way demonstrated what this was or that anything like this was coming.
One of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. Over the past few years I’ve seen some of the worst movies ever: this, Men, Beau is afraid, and Babylon.
Beau Is Afraid is a very fine film
Coppola had one great decade (1969 to 1979) in a six decade career.He's directed stinkers before, FINIAN'S RAINBOW and JACK. For the last 45 years he's been a mediocre director.
Hey Brian, I was entertained by your review, but I watched BKR: Be Kind Rewind's review video and was educated! She spent 40 minutes telling Coppola's saga of bringing the film to the screen and the fits and starts along the way. Her review was sympathetic, and she said she didn't want to go into seeing the film with knives out! She did, however, treat Mr. Coppola with kid gloves. She entertained and educated me! If you have any time, take a look at Be Kind Rewind.
Cant belive mr coopola will be bowing out of the industry with this film. Yikes
Good riddance... we don't need anymore weird kisses and awkward hugs on set
That movie was good it just wasn’t a typical story
I really am looking forward to seeing this. Is it me but are critics more interested in pulling faces than anything else.
it's not worth seeing? for real?
people should really develop their own opinions about this movie by watching it, not by watching you. this is what happened to Babylon.
Art Is Of The Individual For The Individual....Not For Specifically The Masses.
Idk the crowd consenus seems pretty obvious. Maybe one percent of the audiencr claim to understand it.
Thats a failure.
Why not tell some real Roman history?
@@lawrencerinehart5747and evo and hubris are what hollywood is made of.
He can have his art and let pwople kewp their 2.5 hours.
That would bw fine ya know if he wqsnt trying to sell it to the masses.
@@jhoughjr1 the fact that so many people fail to understand a movie that is pretty straightforward in its plot and in its message means that the crowd is really getting incapable of understanding, honestly!
admismid I agree with you: for me, Babylon is a GREAT movie which will be reevaluated in 10 or 20 years. Megalopolis is not the best movie in the history of cinema, but it's not the worst movie ever. And what's up with all the people who do not 'understand' it? What's so difficult to understand??
I’m going to go see it because of two things: One, I read the NYTimes review and it was stellar and a critics pick and Two, I want to see it. I’ll come back to your review after I see it… the wild difference between your labeling it an “Abomination” and the Times saying it’s masterful is far too wide of a contradiction for me to not see it first and then hear your thoughts.
This isn't even the worst film I've seen in theaters this week
Adam Driver always sleepwalks through movies, he is the most boring A list actor
Agreed,...That space movie he did (Not Star Wars) was equally atrocious and un-memorable,..Yuck~
I've never liked him and I think he's super overrated. Like, I don't get the hype. He also doesn't have any charm or charisma on screen. Really baffled by who Hollywood chooses for their new "stars" today.
@@xoxo20000 That is how Hollywood operates nowadays I am afraid, blend generic movies, blend generic actors
I gave it a very generous 4 because I love FFC and really, desperately wanted to like this. But it's a strangely cold and uninvolving film.
And Considering how Coppola managed to show red blooded passion from undead creatures of the Night in his Dracula adaptation, that says a lot....
Is it a possibility it wasn’t marketed properly? I heard one reviewer say it’s not what people think it is and it’s more of an allegory like Aranofsky’s Mother. it says right in the marketing “A Fable”. It seems most people hate it but some people did enjoy it knowing what it’s trying to be.
All I could think in the first 20 minutes was “so this is what an ai film would look like”
lol sure an idiosyncratic film financed and creatively controlled by a single guy is what an AI film would look like, not the superhero slop the studios keep pumping out.
@@STNKbonesuperhero slop is more competent than whatever this was
Ugh I was hoping this was a "so bad that it's almost good" movie. :/
Thank you for actually being honest! So many reviewers are hesitant to go in on bad performances but you don't shy away.
9:29 - I’ve personally never enjoyed Adam in any of his roles, though to be fair I haven’t seen everything he’s done. In my opinion, he’s always sleepy or detached and very robotic and stiff. He’s not enjoyable to watch.
I think that's such an odd take. You sound like you are talking about that walking, talking valium called Jessie Eisenberg. Driver is hot blooded, loaded with passion. I have never seen a performance from him that remotely resembles being robotic and stiff.
Cinema used to mean something and not box office bankability. We used to make space for art films in the conversation. Now that conversation has shrunk to the size of a cell phone. We live in a highly polarized society where every piece of entertainment, stylistically resembles the next, all equally forgettable. Then, once in a blue moon a film comes along that does not fit into conventions or popular tastes. Give it a year or two, or ten and let it ruminate. Perhaps Megalopolis is so hated because it hits so close to the mark of where society is truly at, and what is at stake.
I agree with you 100%. The hand that takes the Moon and the woman that dissolves into many different bodies are images that will remain with me forever.
Leaving this comment before I watch your review. It's a mess but the ridiculousness of most of the dialogue and some scenes made me smile and laugh. So I kinda enjoyed it, i think? I dont even know what the ending meant and it got boring in the middle until the final act but I really liked whatever Aubrey Plaza and Shia Labeouf were doing 😅
Megalopolis would’ve been a beautiful ballet but it’s not a good movie
That's exactly what they said about Apocalypse Now. I saw it in the trailer.
It's also what they say about a lot of terrible movies that remain terrible movies over time. Apocalypse Now is an outlier.
I went to watch Megalopolis again and noticed a few things were missing from the print I saw on opening day. The first time I saw it, there was this really intentional delay in a scene where Cesar was talking-a super long pause. I’d heard it was meant to give a member of the audience or staff a chance to read a line from the script or something like that. Also, the slogans shouted by the protestors in the film seemed to be cut in the second viewing.
The film felt like a mix of things: it had this play-like quality at times, but it also had elements of film noir, Fellini’s surrealism, and that campy Gotham City vibe. It felt nostalgic in a way, like the director was pulling from the styles and themes he connected with in his youth. By mixing in those familiar elements, I think he’s getting the audience to experience the film on multiple levels-part homage, part commentary on the issues we’re dealing with today.
I really enjoyed it more the second time around, once I stopped comparing it to Coppola’s earlier films. This one’s different. It’s got a lot going on, and I think people will be talking about it for a long time. Honestly, I think given time it nay earn a place amongst the greats.
I watched it for 2nd time yesterday and also thought I noticed some slight changes. Do you recall in what scene the long pause occurred?
So, can reactors really be on the payroll for Hollywood, the real guys attacking Coppola?
So, I find myself morbidly curious. Is this movie fun if you've been drinking? I saw the Adam Driver "club" clip and the visuals make me think that this might be a fun buzzed watch.
Same here but I can't even make it to the movies for stuff I want to see like the "Beetlejuice" sequel.
@@vinnym5607 oh true. Gotta decide how you wanna spend your 2 hours 😔. Very good point. Spend your 2 on something good!
Your reaction to the movie is the consensus but like you, I have so much respect and admiration for Coppola, I’ll have to check it out. But I’ll tread carefully.
Maybe see a cheap matinee.
Read my comment in the main section. The movie is better when you understand it.
And the consensus is always right! lmao..... sheep
@TheNewyorkmets01 It's a good movie. Don't know if it's great but I'll watch it again when it comes to the small screen. But I understand it and everything connected.
@@lymphomasurviveif it’s anything like Babylon I’ll watch it