Glass Onion (Knives Out 2)

[b00dles]

19 minutes ago, Made of Ghosts said:

It’s an interesting example though, since in the original stories Holmes isn’t the POV character. 
 

  Hide contents

In a typical whodunnit you’d see all the same clues as the detective, you just wouldn’t know their conclusions until the climactic moment - so in theory you could’ve worked it out yourself if you were as smart as them. That’s a bit different from simply not being told the information in the first place. For the first hour or so of Glass Onion you don’t even know that there’s been a murder!

 

Well I'd recommend you don't watch the cumberbatch sherlock then, as they decided to make them all about how great he is, rather than (as you say) the original structure of the books and also the kinds of cases. 

 

Every single one is related to moriaty in that show in the stupidest way imaginable. 

 

I won't even go into what they did with Irene adler 🤦‍♂️

[Alexlotl]

I enjoyed it, but due to being exhausted from kids etc. we had to watch it in roughly three 45 minute chunks, and I sussed out 90% of the denoument by turning things over in my head in the 24hrs between the 2nd & 3rd chunks. That made the final act satisfying, but less exciting.

 

Spoiler

It occurred to me very early on that there was an obvious way to be forever remembered in the same breath as the Mona Lisa, glad to see the payoff. As for the debate about whether it’s the real one, I think that, in universe, it absolutely is. That and the Serena Williams cameo are driving home the message that the trillionaire class have access we can’t even dream of, particularly during a pandemic when the world isn’t looking. Also, it has to be real to ensure Miles’ defeat.

 

I hadn’t joined the dots between the final sequence and the disruptor speech, but you’re entirely correct. Note that the ending was also foreshadowed by Helen’s method of opening the box earlier. Screw the puzzles, cut the Gordian knot, even if it means destroying something beautiful. Blanc would therefore have understood that aspect of her character. 

 

I found Blanc’s apparent buffoonery in the opening hour to be a bit jarring, but I’m looking forward to watching it again with the added context of the reveal. I also enjoyed the very Bond-like camera swoop down to the dock, complete with soundtrack, only to reveal Craig looking as un-suave as possible. They definitely had some fun with that, and with the parallels between tech trillionaires and Bond villains.

 

The Covid/mask stuff was a great way to reveal character and fix the film to a moment in time (as well as explain the presence of the Mona Lisa), then they sensibly got rid of it as soon as it was convenient. 

 

Not as good as Knives Out, I don’t think, but still very good, and may improve on a rewatch, while I feel like Knives Out will never be as good as that first time.

Speaking of cameos, that’s Yo-Yo Ma at the start who tells them the music is by Bach and explains Fugues - he is, of course, most famous for his recordings of Bach’s Cello Suites. 
 

Oh, and I’m absolutely here for Craig’s accent, which is great fun to adopt when doing silly voices for the kids. 

[luth714]

6 hours ago, b00dles said:

Well I'd recommend you don't watch the cumberbatch sherlock then, as they decided to make them all about how great he is, rather than (as you say) the original structure of the books and also the kinds of cases. 

 

Every single one is related to moriaty in that show in the stupidest way imaginable. 

 

I won't even go into what they did with Irene adler 🤦‍♂️

I read a bunch of Holmes books in chronological order a while ago and I thought they held back evidence and clues until the big reveal, which felt like a cheat. I thought they’d be more play along and guess but after several stories where it didn’t feel like you were in full possession of all the facts it got on my goat. (There was one with a murder in a tower in particular which felt like some bit of evidence was revealed at the end, or an aspect of the evidence was revealed)

 

I also read Christie’s And Then There We’re None and Murder On The Orient Express which probably aren’t the best examples as their solutions are…not as expected…I enjoyed them, they were great page turners, but it did feel again that there were certain aspects held back for dramatic effect.

 

So none of the grumbles affected me with Glass Onion. I did prefer Knives Out as I think there’s a joyous clockwork to it (and er Ana…but I also felt she was a genuine heart to the film) but Onion was just a fun daft breezy ride hanging with obnoxious people.

[b00dles]

35 minutes ago, luth714 said:

I read a bunch of Holmes books in chronological order a while ago and I thought they held back evidence and clues until the big reveal, which felt like a cheat. I thought they’d be more play along and guess but after several stories where it didn’t feel like you were in full possession of all the facts it got on my goat. (There was one with a murder in a tower in particular which felt like some bit of evidence was revealed at the end, or an aspect of the evidence was revealed)

 

I also read Christie’s And Then There We’re None and Murder On The Orient Express which probably aren’t the best examples as their solutions are…not as expected…I enjoyed them, they were great page turners, but it did feel again that there were certain aspects held back for dramatic effect.

 

So none of the grumbles affected me with Glass Onion. I did prefer Knives Out as I think there’s a joyous clockwork to it (and er Ana…but I also felt she was a genuine heart to the film) but Onion was just a fun daft breezy ride hanging with obnoxious people.

Well yeah, it does happen in the books too but it's really egregious in the show. It's a fine line though because sometimes it's too obvious if it is all shown along the way as it were. 

It's part of the reason I like Colombo so much because you know who did it, so it's more of a "howdunnit"

[Cheyenne]

Something that initially did bother me in the film but on reflection does fit the tone and in particular the characterisation is the huge amount of namedropping.

 

I'm generally not the biggest fan of it as more often than not it does negatively date a film in my mind. We have no idea who might still be famous or topical even 5 years from now, so I was left a bit wanting with all the references to real life individuals. But then I chewed on it, and it does make sense in the world of the film. It's following a bunch of vacuous chodes who greatly overestimate their significance and intelligence. These are the kinds of people that will casually reference all manner of unrelated celebrities because they believe it gives them an air of significance. I'm only surprised now that there wasn't a Piers Morgan analogue in the film.

[Darren]

Piers Morgan wouldn't get invited to that island in a million years (even the vacuous chodes would regard him with contempt), but he'd be telling everyone via every channel he has how they're all such great friends of his anyway.

[ChewMagma]

1 hour ago, Cheyenne said:

Something that initially did bother me in the film but on reflection does fit the tone and in particular the characterisation is the huge amount of namedropping.

 

I'm generally not the biggest fan of it as more often than not it does negatively date a film in my mind. We have no idea who might still be famous or topical even 5 years from now, so I was left a bit wanting with all the references to real life individuals. But then I chewed on it, and it does make sense in the world of the film. It's following a bunch of vacuous chodes who greatly overestimate their significance and intelligence. These are the kinds of people that will casually reference all manner of unrelated celebrities because they believe it gives them an air of significance. I'm only surprised now that there wasn't a Piers Morgan analogue in the film.

 

If, and it is a big IF, people were to watch this film in 100 years, would they understand the face masks and oblique references to Covid I wonder? I don't think they ever explain any of that in an explicit way because a contemporary audience understands it implicitly but it is a very specific thing that happened in a very specific period of time.

 

Undoubtedly we will try to forget it all like the Spanish flu, but someone will write an interesting essay on "Traces of the 2020-2022 Covid Pandemic in contemporary culture."

[b00dles]

Covid won't be forgotten like Spanish flu, I think there's just a lot of people trying to forget it ever happened and acknowledge the fact it could happen again. 

 

It's very strange in that respect, there's been a lot of "new" media (YouTube etc) recently that do a joke about 'remember the pandemic?' Because an absurd amount of people seem to be intentionally pretending it never happened.

[ChewMagma]

I don't know, I think you will be surprised how rapidly this disappears from the collective memory outside of historians and certain medical professionals (again assuming it doesn't power back in some form).

 

For me already the details are getting vague, it is hard to comprehend anymore what lockdown was like or how it was possible or even the exact timeline of events.

[Loik V credern]

 

The consideration that goes into directing.

 

It's simple but i love camera pull backs in scenes that reveal characters into the frame.

 

I wonder why the shot of the motorbike stand being pushed down would be hard to get right. Maybe the way the boot moves, pausing every half second you can see the flair put into it but at normal speed it's barely noticeable.

[Art Vandelay]

I love stuff like that. When I used to do more animation work I was always completely terrible at the stories but used to get so immersed in how it let you spend ages researching fun little bits and pieces of detail only you might notice, like making big mood boards of René Clément movies and going through old Cuban poster books to stick things in the background of a scene. I think Erica Dorn has my dream job of being Wes Anderson's go-to designer as that would probably be the most fun ever. It's great when that hard work ends up on screen like it does in this and really adds something. 

[Loik V credern]

not all exciting..

 

Quote

Mr Gates also told Norton his ancestors owned slaves.

 

His third great grandfather held "seven human beings in bondage", including a 55-year-old man, a 37-year-old woman and five girls, ages 10, 9, 8, 6 and 4, the PBS host said.

"What's it like to see that?" Mr Gates asked.

 

"The short answer is these things are uncomfortable," Norton said. "Everybody should be uncomfortable with it."

 

"It's a judgment on the history of this country and it needs to be contended with," he added. "When you read 'Slave, age 8', you just want to die."

 

[JohnC]

About the Mona Lisa

 

Spoiler

Johnson talked to the Empire Podcast. He mentioned that they shot a credits scene where Blanc is on the phone with the Louvre, confirming they still have the real painting. But they cut that, because he prefers that the burned painting is the real one. So that's his take on that debate. It was real.

 

[Gabe]

I think that was the right choice.

[Benny]

Whilst also leaving it nicely ambiguous in the film for anyone who wishes to believe otherwise.

[Popo]

Was there any ambiguity? The movie presents it prima facie as the genuine article. 

[Alex W.]

18 minutes ago, Popo said:

Was there any ambiguity? The movie presents it prima facie as the genuine article. 

Yeah, the movie’s unambiguous about it, and the story comes to a point if you read it straight which is satisfying. It’s definitely something you think about after the movie, and it makes sense as an inference about that world, but it’s not as good a story.

[Professor Puzzles]

Yeah, that was a good time. I like that Benoit Blanc is a detective that is concerned with actual justice rather than the rule of law. I also like his stripey bathing suit thing. 

[Steve McQueef]

Janelle Monaé shoplifted that entire thing. 

 

Then again, Ana De Armas stole the first one.

 

Benoit who?

[jonamok]

Indeed. I’m drawing a blanc.