This message has been edited - 03-feb-2012 @ 23:33

Originally posted by Keanes Road:
Good film but not a great film.

Excellent sound track and well made but its a type of film thats been done to death.

Gosling was good but not outstanding imho. Bit like Ledger in the batman film decent performance but talked up way beyond what he was. I didn`t like the end at all. Kinda poxy. I would put the end up there with the end of Heat as another good film with a poxy ending. Almost seemed rushed to get the film finished.

7/10.

Originally posted by Kneebreaker:
All style no substance. Never looked forward to a film as much but it was hugely disappointing.

Incredibly shot film, great soundtrack but the plot was thin. They had one central metaphor about the scorpion and the frog which was quite subtly done until he phones the bad guy and tells him "the frog didn`t make it across the river." Talk about ramming it down our throats. A stylish film with little to say and lacking in any subtlety or originality. Because I expected more from it I was hugely disappointed, had I gone in with no expectations I might have thought it was alright.

This message has been edited - 04-feb-2012 @ 12:33

Originally posted by frasiercrane:


What was your issue with the ending.

I thought Gosling was excellent he had real presence and create  d a very mysterious character that you wanted to learn more about.His character was just coolness personified

Originally posted by Keanes Road:


You were asking questions about Goslings character because you were given nothing at all to work on in the film. He was just a driver one minute and the next a one man wrecking machine with psycotic tendencies. Never told where he came from and ended up wondering where he went. We were parachuted into a few weeks of his life - indeed all the main characters lives.

  (they never even tried to tell us how Hal fell on such hard times after walking out on his family  )  

The ending saw this killer who was cleaning house, and have practically all loose ends tidied up - except this one last guy - and he then lets this guy get the drop   on him. It just did not sit well with me as an ending to the film.

He drives off as the wounded road warrior - where have we seen that before.

Kneebreaker said it - all style no substance.

Originally posted by frasiercrane:


A back story for Goslings character would have ruined the edge and aura around him.Obviously something happend in his past that caused him to be such a solitary figure prone to violence but I think it is better that it is left to our imagination.

Originally posted by liverpool for liam:
brutel film boring as hell films these days r rubbish

Originally posted by frasiercrane:


It is an action film and action films have very little to say in general.Did any of Tarantinos films have anything to them apart from entertainment.

Drive is really like Tarantinos films an homage to films, and it has an excellent realistic love story which drives the plot.Its very rare a film has a central character that you want to know so much about but thankfully it is left to our imagination in lesser films we would have had some pointless backstory that would taken away alot of the edge.

This message has been edited - 05-feb-2012 @ 00:40

Originally posted by Kneebreaker:
All style no substance. Never looked forward to a film as much but it was hugely disappointing.

Incredibly shot film, great soundtrack but the plot was thin. They had one central metaphor about the scorpion and the frog which was quite subtly done until he phones the bad guy and tells him "the frog didn`t make it across the river." Talk about ramming it down our throats. A stylish film with little to say and lacking in any subtlety or originality. Because I expected more from it I was hugely disappointed, had I gone in with no expectations I might have thought it was alright.

Originally posted by Kneebreaker:


Respectfully, I disagree with a couple of points. It would be a stretch to call this an action film as so little happens between the action. The lulls are interminable and serve to remind you that you are watching a director indulge himself in over-the-top violence and pretentious dialogue.

Although also violent, Tarantino`s films are laced with great dialogue and, fundamentally, characters you could warm to.There is great entertainment in Tarantino films because he judges the tempo perfectly, Refn has not with Drive imo.

I felt sorry for Ryan Gosling, he had very little to work with but made the best of a bad job. The love story was pretty disengaging I thought as Carey Mulligan`s character had nothing about her. I don`t think staring blankly into each others eyes for 15 minutes without talking is tantamount to a realistic love story.

Don`t get me wrong, I see why some people like it, but to be talked about as a great film, as a piece of art, it comes up short for me.

This message has been edited - 05-feb-2012 @ 09:48

Originally posted by Kneebreaker:


Respectfully, I disagree with a couple of points. It would be a stretch to call this an action film as so little happens between the action. The lulls are interminable and serve to remind you that you are watching a director indulge himself in over-the-top violence and pretentious dialogue.

Although also violent, Tarantino`s films are laced with great dialogue and, fundamentally, characters you could warm to.There is great entertainment in Tarantino films because he judges the tempo perfectly, Refn has not with Drive imo.

I felt sorry for Ryan Gosling, he had very little to work with but made the best of a bad job. The love story was pretty disengaging I thought as Carey Mulligan`s character had nothing about her. I don`t think staring blankly into each others eyes for 15 minutes without talking is tantamount to a realistic love story.

Don`t get me wrong, I see why some people like it, but to be talked about as a great film, as a piece of art, it comes up short for me.