Why do people hate this movie?

The fuck are you talking about? Explain yourself.

Casuals and mainstream critics hate these experimental movies, it was pretty good

>Why do people hate this movie?
Two words... Darren Aronofsky.

Attached: 1579815474893.jpg (429x441, 28.42K)

Because it constantly steps on its own metaphors.

because it insists upon itself

yeah it's ultimately quite shallow it only has one definite interpretation that even a moron could pick up. Wow he hurt side and then a women appeared I wonder which biblical figure is associated with his ribs and creating women. It's so deep.

>random shit but one of the characters is called john
>IT'S THE BIBLE BRO!!!

Attached: file-20180904-41720-xwahre.jpg (1200x1200, 197.07K)

they hate the CIA?

It’s very very silly and should’ve just gone the dark comedy route

It was darkly comic in my opinion

They're pissed because they know they're going straight to Hell.

>>Because it's a shitty pretentious vanity project for the director's girlfriend. J Law sucks at acting

Attached: image.jpg (580x568, 67.14K)

Is Bardem the demiurge?

SELF INDULGENT TRIPE

because people hate j-law

Kek

Given its depictionof the unwanted proximity of others, I'd say it was quite prescient

People who are full of themselves think the allegory is obvious. But there is no allegory. It is a direct, condensed retelling with the addition of a voice given to Earth. That's all it is, and the goal of the movie is to confront a specific group of viewers with the actions of humanity as told in their own holy book.
It's not a twist, it's not pretentious, it's an evangelical film by design.

>talentless whore who fucked and sucked her way into hollywood front and centee in every shot
>even woese she was seeding and feeding the directoe at the time
>earrape constantly
>pretentious and bland with overplayed christianity allegories
it was shot nice but it's hardly above a 6/10
this

>muh suffering
Being mad at God because youve had a bad week makes no logical sense. Try this instead; why would a 10 dimensional artist give a flying shit about your suffering? The darker brush strokes contrast with the brighter ones to make everything much more beautiful. God isn't here for you. Hes here to preserve the majesty and grace of his infinite creation, part of which is your suffering. Thats his design.

nailed it

That post really riled you up

>implying that this abomination isn't spoonfeed
also arofnosky is unoriginal hack and should be beaten to death

>GET OFF THE SINK ITS NOT BRACED

Then in all honesty: If he doesn't care, why should we?
And that's why I don't spend time on trying to please an imaginary boyfriend.
I rather spend my time, love and affection on real people I care about.

You're missing the big picture. You dont need to please him, you need to become him.

>People say that Hollywood nudes are NEVER actual nudes of the actress
>J Law has nude shots in this one
>Compare to the fappening pics
>It's definitely her.

Okay, question: Before I watched this movie, all I knew about it was that it was an Aronofsky movie starring JLaw and Javier Bardem. I had no idea that the movie was supposed to be allegorical for anything before watching. I enjoyed the movie, but I didn't realize until after I went online and read about the movie a little bit that it was an allegory for the book of Genesis, with JLaw being Mother Nature. I felt so fucking stupid afterward, knowing that it was probably the most obvious allegory in the world. I was raised in a Christian household too, so it's not like I didn't know about the events in the book of Genesis.
How much of a fucking brainlet was I?

Attached: benshapirologicandreason.png (2048x2048, 2.39M)

I'd rather become the Buddha satwa to be honest.
I think that's possibly achievable.

It's stupidity to expect men to live by logic. Your rational picture of God, the result of philosophy and theology which has argued away the difficulties, is not the same as the initiative God that presents himself to the non-philosohpers and sometimes even to the most learned and most pious man in times of weakness. See Job. See Ecclesiastes. See Christ on the cross.

initiative God = intuitive God

This. Why have so many feelings and emotions about something in which you have no stake?

The only person full of themselves are the director. It's an allegory, the most embarrassing ever put on screen. There was some disgusting message in the movie when Javier invites everyone in the house and they all start stealing and wrecking havock. It look like there was a xenophobic message in the movie, definitely catering to the racist audience. A disgusting message within a disgusting allegory. I was so glad when the film bombed hard. We know Weinstein passed JLaw around to the director.

Man's explanations for the indefinable to comfort himself in the face of infinity. Neutrality is the only real base for philosophy.

Sight hateful, sight tormenting! thus these two [ 505 ]
Imparadis't in one anothers arms
The happier Eden, shall enjoy thir fill
Of bliss on bliss, while I to Hell am thrust,
Where neither joy nor love, but fierce desire,
Among our other torments not the least, [ 510 ]
Still unfulfill'd with pain of longing pines;
Yet let me not forget what I have gain'd
From thir own mouths; all is not theirs it seems:
One fatal Tree there stands of Knowledge call'd,
Forbidden them to taste: Knowledge forbidd'n? [ 515 ]
Suspicious, reasonless. Why should thir Lord
Envie them that? can it be sin to know,
Can it be death? and do they onely stand
By Ignorance, is that thir happie state,
The proof of thir obedience and thir faith?

stupid piece of shit a movie trying to be deep when it's all so in your face that is enraging to watch, arofnosky can't write a good movie to save his life, it's either shit like this or blatant ripoffs like black swan

Stupidity. The Nothing is no ground at all.

>knowing that it was probably the most obvious allegory in the world

mother! wasn't an allegorical film. It's a nearly literal retelling with only superficial changes. It's like doing Shakespeare in contemporary clothing. Allegory implies subtext or hidden meanings. This movie has none by design.

I thought that it was obviously about how shitty the human race is. Isn't it an environmentalist thing?

>Implying 911 wasn't the cause for a holy crusade in the ME.

The bible Is too mundane to define God. It's like trying to depict the complexities of all the oceans with a styrofoam cup.

The idea there's a directed plan of reality, and this plan includes torture, rape, murder, etc is a lot more disturbing to me than those just being unfortunate byproducts of chaotic development.

Even the typical theological counter-arguments that those problems are from mankind's free will and sin don't excuse what then becomes a mass punishment of innocents while God presumably smugly jacks off in the corner doing nothing and lets mankind's wickedness devolve into hell on earth as some sort of "teachable moment" or whatever the fuck it's supposed to be.

Deep-seated fear that they're wrong

Well you got the weight.

Aronfsky is dumb as bricks and just as vulgar an intellect, just see any interview with him -- Mother (without a script reference or pop-up cast info) remains inscrutable; likely ghost written. Lawrence's best (and last) performance, Bardem et. al. are all solid.

>there is no allegory
It's gnostic, not strictly Judaist.

>Javier invites everyone in the house and they all start stealing and wrecking havock
"Creator keeps Book of Jobing us, it can't possibly be our fault; HE broke the covenant! Let us return to our national, matriarchal Goddess." Political subtext innit wasn't very . . . subductive.

They probably have a heavy trauma about religion.

The bible defined who deserve forgiveness and who doesn't. what do you mean?

What is there to like?

You can rub my belly if you want.
Is good luck.

Attached: Laughing Buddha.jpg (413x480, 32.31K)

Youre thinking too small. The negatives are the dark colors on the canvas, contrasting with the light colors. What does the rape and torture of one, or even thousands, compare to the timeline of the entire universe? Its inconsequential, and fretting over it is childish thinking.

I love this film as a surrealist black comedy
I hate it as a symbolic piece

youtube.com/watch?v=fjkobobYahU

more the last minute or so than the beginning

Definitions are arbitrary. I can define my words to mean anything, however we must agree on definition to communicate. And definitions are secondary outside of maths textbooks. We do not acquire language as children by reading a dictionary, but through hearing language, by imitation, by analogy. It is so with God. It is so with fairness and forgiveness. You are unintelligible to those outside of the religion and to most in it. Even God himself in the new testament does not appear to possess such a logical understanding of his being and duty.

Let's see you say that while nailed to a cross.