Jennifer Lawrence - mother! #4 - mother! is finally upon us. So let us gaze upon Jen's lovelyness and endurance! - Page 4

**Violent Delights** · 09-15-2017, 03:18 AM

because it's justified.

~~I'll support the movie too... next week. I just can't be bothered going this week, when I don't think I'll like it.~~

Scratch that, I finished work early and I'm seated to watch it.

... well I didn't hate it, but I'm not in a rush to watch it again!

It shocked me and I hated every character that wasn't Jen.

mlkj13 · 09-15-2017, 05:08 PM

I saw it this afternoon too.

I didn't love it and I didn't hate it. I'm not sure if I'll go to the theater again to see it but I may go again to try to absorb more of it.

Perhaps I knew too much about the themes to embrace what Darren was putting forth. It didn't shock me, even what should have been horrifying (not in the scary sense), didn't gut me. It was dark themes sure but not to the point that I was thinking it was overwhelming. Maybe I have a dark soul, lol.

I'm left with...eh. But I will say, I went to happy hour after the movie and we were talking about it and trying to decide what certain things in the movie represented. What we all were saying was, that it was weird movie.

Jen was superb. For the amount of time the camera is on her, a lesser actress wouldn't have been able to bring enough emotion and depth to her character like Jen did.

Interesting afternoon to say the least.

**Jen's Herald** · 09-15-2017, 06:03 PM

i still have plans to see it Saturday night

**J-LawForever** · 09-15-2017, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devil's Cry (View Post)

.. well I didn't hate it, but I'm not in a rush to watch it again!

It shocked me and I hated every character that wasn't Jen.

I saw it today, but I agree. Jen was the best role and character. She was so kind, and caring and gentle and beautiful. I felt sorry for her during the house being destroyed. As she put so much work into.

But the most raw and emotional scene was in the third act. Dave knows what I mean.

a 4/5 for me. Jen made the movie, but overall the story was a little eh. I will see it again tomorrow as I know what to expect now. But now I am prepared for it.

**Violent Delights** · 09-16-2017, 05:44 AM

Quote:

But the most raw and emotional scene was in the third act. Dave knows what I mean.

that's where it earned its rating.

mlkj13 · 09-16-2017, 08:45 AM

Well it's looking like a $8 million weekend.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...assin-nabs-6m/

Quote:

Well, my prediction came true. mother! earned an “F” from Cinemascore, and in this case, I’d argue that Paramount/Viacom Inc. and Darren Aronofsky should wear that like a badge of honor. But, yet again, I must wonder, when a weird/unconventional/challenging/etc. movie like Killing Them Softly or mother! opens as badly as this one did, who are the folks who A) bother to see it in a theater and B) don’t know what they are getting into? Yes, plenty of folks fell for Paramount’s impressively cryptic/misleading previews, but you’d think that the deluge of “Wow, this movie is something else!” reviews and media coverage should have warned the general moviegoers.

Then again, maybe they did and everyone else just glanced at the previews or noticed the high Rotten Tomatoes score. No matter, mother! is arguably the best movie (give or take Killing Them Softly) ever to get such a low grade from Cinemascore’s audience polling services, so it has that arbitrary record to its credit. And that the film opened as poorly as it did means we may have a contender for a record-breaking drop next weekend, but that’s for next weekend. Yeah, It was a big problem in terms of luring folks into an R-rated horror this weekend. It had the reviews, the buzz, the source material and is a safer choice.

Audiences are taking their kids to It as a rite-of-passage. I don’t think there were many ten-to-13-year olds at the Jennifer Lawrence/Javier Bardem/Ed Harris/Michelle Pfeiffer chiller last night. With a $3 million Friday (for a likely $8m weekend), I’d wager not too many folks were seeing mother! at all. Jennifer Lawrence’s star power notwithstanding, this was always a tough sell, especially one weekend after It. You can make the case that Paramount distributed the $30m picture partially to stay in the Aronofsky business as part of their attempts to reclaim their prestige. That’s also the plan with George Clooney’s Suburbicon (due next month) and Alexander Payne’s Downsizing (coming in December), although frighteningly enough mother! scored better festival reactions than those two.

What do you guys think, is it concerning for her career, in terms of what studios believe to be her box office draw?

It's hard to tell, because this was never going to a mainstream movie to me, especially after seeing it. Regardless of the financial success of Black Swan, that's not what Darren Aronofsky films are about in my view. General audiences tend to want mind numbing films, not those that are different and weird (that's not a negative comment about mother!).

There's no question that directors & studios will want her in their movie because of her talent. Yet again her performance is fabulous. But is mother! an issue for her future films to easily get funding from big studios?

**Violent Delights** · 09-16-2017, 01:14 PM

Yet again - no. Plus Jen wouldn't care in the slightest if all she ever made going forward was indies. If she likes the script, the director and/or isn't getting screwed on the pay cheque compared to her co-stars, then she'll do it. She'll still get nominated for her performances, because she's amazing and will deserve to.

tl:dr - She's in it for the craft, not the money. Always has been. The best directors will always want the best actors. Those that don't cast her because they're thinking about the box office - good for them.

**Firecrest** · 09-16-2017, 02:22 PM

Love the pics!

**J-LawForever** · 09-16-2017, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlkj13 (View Post)

Well it's looking like a $8 million weekend.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme...assin-nabs-6m/

What do you guys think, is it concerning for her career, in terms of what studios believe to be her box office draw?

It's hard to tell, because this was never going to a mainstream movie to me, especially after seeing it. Regardless of the financial success of Black Swan, that's not what Darren Aronofsky films are about in my view. General audiences tend to want mind numbing films, not those that are different and weird (that's not a negative comment about mother!).

There's no question that directors & studios will want her in their movie because of her talent. Yet again her performance is fabulous. But is mother! an issue for her future films to easily get funding from big studios?

I had this same worry too. but others said I was over reacting. But with how this is being treated. I would say its a case for worry maybe.

but again i'm sure everyone even Paramount knew this wouldn't be a huge money maker.

The person though I think will take the biggest hit from this is Jen herself. and studios and people worry about her creditability to carry a move anymore.

I feel people wanted a generic horror movie and got something else and wee pissed they wee made to think. Hence the F on Cinemascore and The rotten tomatoes score having its freshness pulled. Which I didn't think it was possible. to remove something once it was certified.

I guess we will have to see how Red Sparrow does. He next big future studio film with her as the lead Hopefully more like it . As it seems lore Mainstream.

saw mother! today and liked it a bit more knowing everything that was going on the second time. Jen just nearly broke my heart at the end. I let out a tear or two.

Manly tears of course.

.

And so true Dave on that.

mlkj13 · 09-16-2017, 09:29 PM

I have no concerns that she's going to be lacking work. And this was never going to be a monster money maker. It's an art house film, some times they hit it big, and sometimes time they don't. Guess the negative anti-Jennifer chatter is getting to me. It's bs.

Rotten Tomatoes took the certified fresh away? I'm surprised, thought that was based on critic reaction, which seemed pretty positive.

**Jen's Herald** · 09-17-2017, 07:33 AM

mother! made 3.1 million on 2,368 screens in the USA, numbers are only for Fri/Sat nights, no overseas numbers are available yet. most big releases are between 3,500 and 4,200 screens, so this is definitely a smaller release obviously. i believe it will make money eventually, especially overseas where a lot of viewers tend to be more sophisticated and intelligent in seeing the themes of a film. it is an arty film, as said earlier in this thread, and arty films are viewed both negatively and positively by certain demographics of the general movie-going populace. a lot of moviegoers here in the USA, just want to be mindlessly entertained and don't want to think or be preached at, regardless of how subtle and nuanced the perceived preaching is.

boxofficemojo won't have the full opening numbers til midweek, and they still don't list how many countries are showing it outside the USA.

mlkj13 · 09-17-2017, 10:08 AM

For those that have seen the movie, here's some commentary from Darren via EW.

For those that haven't seen it or care to have there own interpretation of the movie... there are spoilers...

Quote:

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Are you surprised by how extreme the reactions to the film has been?

DARREN ARONOFSKY: I think I knew it was going to be a lot of stuff. Anytime you do something that aggressive there are going to be people who enjoy it, who want to be on that roller coaster ride, and then there are others who say, “Oh no, that was not for me.” It’s a strange one. You see Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, and Michelle Pfeiffer and people are conditioned for a certain type of movie. And… we didn’t do that type of movie. [Laughs] It’s all good. I don’t mind people are upset by the film because it’s supposed to be a reflection and a cautionary tale of what’s happening to the planet. And it’s hard, because I’m pointing at all of us saying, look what’s going on! Let’s think about this! I’m also guilty, I’m not any better. But the one thing I can’t understand is how people can’t acknowledge the filmmaking — there are three camera shots in the whole film: over the shoulder, on her face, and her point of view. There’s no score. There are all these things we did that are really hard to pull off. I couldn’t have done this five years ago. It’s only because my team and I have been together for so long that we took the chance.

Why did you want to shoot it in 16mm?

It’s become part of my style and interest. I think some shots on video look remarkable but they’re all beginning to look alike. I think audiences like unique experiences and I like to make things different. When we did The Wrestler it made a lot of sense to shoot on 16 and then we carried it over to Black Swan, and I think it’s just become a stylistic choice. Unfortunately, I can’t begin to tell you the technical difficulties with shooting on film. Everyone is shooting digitally and no one does this anymore. It just made the process so difficult. I always say it feels like slightly burnt butter or the top of a perfectly cooked tiramisu. It just has a creamy unique texture to it. It’s something different than what you see, and I think and hope that’s cool for audiences.

Can we talk about the title? I had heard it was originally called Day Six?

No, that was the fake name we used internally. We used it because thematically it made sense — the film starts on day six of the Bible, right before man is created. So we used that as our internal name. The very first thing I wrote — before I started on the script — were the six letters of ‘mother’ and then I paused for a second. I remember this so clearly: I pressed shift-1 and put the exclamation point. That title was there before I wrote a word.

What was with that yellow powder concoction that Jennifer’s character drinks?

Oh no, this is the one I don’t love answering. [Laughs] I think Jen has a better answer for this than I do. Let’s just say it’s it’s harkening back to Victorian novels and this idea of a deeper connection for her and the house. But I don’t love to go deeper into it than that.

Okay, fine. Next question: Does every one of the characters have a correlating biblical character?

Everything is connected. That was the breakthrough for me — I had this idea, this allegory with a return to the horror genre and a take on the home invasion genre because I feel like everyone can relate to that feeling of having guests that won’t get the hell out of your house. And turning that into a nightmare could be interesting. But then I thought to try to talk about the people on this planet by using the great stories of the Bible. So I would say every single beat and character is related to the Bible in order — all the way through the Old Testament and the New Testament. That’s the fun — for people to put that together. Even some of the dialogue — and people haven’t picked up on this yet, is verbatim from the Bible.

So who was Kristen Wiig supposed to be?

So, okay, I guess I should say not every single character — like the guy pissing in the toilet or the drunk don’t have direct connections. But Kristen’s character name is “Herald” which is a biblical kind of name, and people can connect it to Elijah and a lot of different characters. Plus, you know, there’s this other very human story going on so it goes in and out a lot.

Was Michelle Pfeiffer the seven deadly sins?

Nope. If Ed is the First Man which is another name…

Oh, he’s Adam and she’s Eve?

Mmmmhmmm.

So what does it mean to reboot or restart again if we’re continuing to talk about mother as the earth?

I don’t know if it means anything for us, per se. It won’t be our story anymore.

Isn’t that a scary thought?

Yes, of course it is. That’s why it’s a cautionary tale. The final chapter hasn’t been written. Life on Earth will continue to go on. Life holds on. I just read an incredible article in The Times that they’re finding potentially new life forms in caves deep under the Antarctic and all these new organisms might be discovered. We get life on this planet in many ways. Even though we’re eliminating all the large mammals on this planet, there are all types of insects and bacteria that are not getting affected in any way, and some are even thriving.

I guess there’s a kind of hope to be found somewhere?

Well, by staring into the darkness you reveal the light. That’s what Hubert Selby taught me in Requiem for a Dream: lean into the darkness because out of it could come catharsis and movement.

Okay, but what was that bloody thing in the toilet?

[Laughs] Well… all I can tell you is that it’s the scene right after we see the wound on the back of Ed Harris. So if you think about that in terms of the Bible and that character, I think you can put it together.

It was a rib? Yuck!

Ding ding ding.

Kiane · 09-17-2017, 10:21 AM

I went to see mother! Friday night. I had a mix of emotions. I was sad in tears when the baby died. I cheered when she called that satanic cult murderers when her baby died, then she cut into them. I was mad and angry as ********g hell that she died for leashing that fire, but they didn't have her kill Javier Bardem's character. He couldn't be killed. I couldn't watch that again. It was too much for me.

Jen gave a powerhouse performance. To those who say she's one dimensional and bring nothing, they can go STFU.

mlkj13 · 09-17-2017, 11:14 AM

**Violent Delights** · 09-17-2017, 12:41 PM

nice to see some insight and meaning from DA about WTH we watched.

Forum Affiliates
The Hunger Games Fansite, X-Men Daily, Hunger Games Daily, Jennifer Lawrence Source, JLaw Online
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page


Fan Forum > Female Celebrities > Jennifer Lawrence > mother! #4 - mother! is finally upon us. So let us gaze upon Jen's lovelyness and endurance!