Edgar Wright's BABY DRIVER

[The Batman]

Why do people like this so much and like it's one of the best movies of the year?

Because maybe...just maybe....they don't feel the way you do about the film.

Just a thought.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Because maybe...just maybe....they don't feel the way you do about the film.

Just a thought.

You know what could be a better thought? If not from you, then someone else; a substantive explanation that can show me instead of taking it in a negative way and going around my point. That truly would be a thought.

 

[Doctor Jones]

He safe zoned the frick out of this one and yet some way some how he's thrown together a colorful band of misfits, slick action set pieces (practical sfx I think), and dialogue so witty on top of its delivery it tickles intellect. The gimmick helps to stand out from the crowd.

Not to mention it had plenty of substance in terms of Baby's back story with his mother and his relationship with Debora. And then the twists and turns were great also. Wright gets you really invested in the main characters.

Okay. But does it rely on these things to make it great? I liked a couple of the characters. And to be honest, there wasn't any memorable lines of dialogue. The relationships were find I guess? I liked the stuff with his uncle but that felt out of place. I liked Debora more because of the casting than he character and their chemistry and their relationship on paper. Other than that I'm not seeing it. I need better explanations as to how and why these things work in a context of the whole movie. To me, these things aren't what make a totally solid, great movie. They're just things, the parts of something that works better than the sum of it. And the parts of it work great, but again, I don't think they get by on making a sum great movie just because it uses a gimmick. The gimmick should come from a great story. It's like Wright had this gimmick and wrote the story of the movie around that instead of the other way around which is why it doesn't work as well. Nothing necessarily wrong with coming up with the gimmick first, it just could have been executed a lot better and not come off like it was just a gimmick.

 

[Spider-Fan]

So, people are feeding you reasons the movie worked for them, but you're still asking for reasons people thought it was a great movie because you're dismissing their opinions?

I think I am seeing a bias you have against it as opposed to lack of evidence the movie is good.

 

[2kt09]

Okay. But does it rely on these things to make it great?

Yes, yes it does or else there's no point in bringing them up.
When I said "safe zoned" that's in relation to the rudimentary action thriller plot that Wright made more worthwhile through the various refreshing parts that make up the whole or ie it's the most mainstream thing he's done yet it still retains Wright's immense creative proclivities.

Also, as much as I may have downplayed the gimmick...it's integrated very well throughout beyond just going from track to track to set the various scenes.
It's the slightly impaired MC's way of life. It's ironic to a deaf foster parent. It's what he uses to bond with others. It's what gets him into trouble...and, unless I'm mistaken, it's what gets him out as contrived as that might be to you.

 

[The Batman]

You know what could be a better thought? If not from you, then someone else; a substantive explanation that can show me instead of taking it in a negative way and going around my point. That truly would be a thought.

No offense, but my response is pretty much all the response you deserve, particularly for the reasons Spider-Fan laid out:

So, people are feeding you reasons the movie worked for them, but you're still asking for reasons people thought it was a great movie because you're dismissing their opinions?

I think I am seeing a bias you have against it as opposed to lack of evidence the movie is good.

 

[Broseph44]

Edit

 

[Schlosser85]

I feel like a movie working for some people and not for you is just a subjective matter of taste and no one can really “explain” to you why it worked for them if the same aspects didn’t work for you. It’s just a matter of opinion, or preferences.

 

[Doctor Jones]

So, people are feeding you reasons the movie worked for them, but you're still asking for reasons people thought it was a great movie because you're dismissing their opinions?

I think I am seeing a bias you have against it as opposed to lack of evidence the movie is good.

No, I actually did regard them. Then I just disagree with those reasons and don't think they're good enough. If I dismissed them, I wouldn't have regarded them at all.

Listen, it's hard for me to see this as better than I already do. But that doesn't mean I'm not open minded to hearing someone else's view on it to change my mind on some things. I would just like to hear substantive reasons from someone who loved it to gain perspective at the very least.

Yes, yes it does or else there's no point in bringing them up.
When I said "safe zoned" that's in relation to the rudimentary action thriller plot that Wright made more worthwhile through the various refreshing parts that make up the whole or ie it's the most mainstream thing he's done yet it still retains Wright's immense creative proclivities.

Also, as much as I may have downplayed the gimmick...it's integrated very well throughout beyond just going from track to track to set the various scenes.
It's the slightly impaired MC's way of life. It's ironic to a deaf foster parent. It's what he uses to bond with others. It's what gets him into trouble...and, unless I'm mistaken, it's what gets him out as contrived as that might be to you.

Thank you for actually responding to me and taking my views on their own terms. I appreciate it. I wish The Hype did this more.

I still disagree though. I agree he brought a new spin to a conventional story and genre, and I like what you're saying and all these ideas. They're in the movie, but these things weren't as well executed on those terms enough to really connect with Baby and his relationships. The casting made them more likable, but to me all these things seemed more like in service to the gimmick and style. I can tell Wright cared about depth and wanted it, but it seems the gimmick and style overtook the focus on the story. My question is, if you strip away the gimmick, how does this story and characters function and can they function on their own? I think they do somewhat, but there isn't great writing that matches it. This movie's story tries to function with the music and I don't think that works and loses out to style.

I'll use an example like Drive, similar movies somewhat. Drive is a stylistic film with a lot of mood going for it. Yet it works if you strip away Refn's direction and on paper it's a very well executed story with characters you love and connect with. How different the style is is irrelevant here. Wright's script is just kind of eh compared to his other movies where he's so much better with story and character. It just comes off more as he's focused on the gimmick, which is inconsistent for him as his other films have equal proportions of style and substance. My whole thing is people keep comparing this so highly to his other films like it's no different but I argue his other films are much better and don't understand the logic. It's like suddenly all the merit to Hot Fuzz is lessened when people mention this in the same breath as that.

No offense, but my response is pretty much all the response you deserve, particularly for the reasons Spider-Fan laid out:

Thanks, Batman, you really gave me new perspective on Baby Driver like I wanted.

 

[The Batman]

Thanks, Batman, you really gave me new perspective on Baby Driver like I wanted.

You're welcome, Doctor Jones!

 

[Kane52630]

The last 20 minutes of it felt like it became another movie almost. It lost me when Jon Hamm came back.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The last 20 minutes of it felt like it became another movie almost. It lost me when Jon Hamm came back.

It doesn't become another movie. The final act is the culmination of everything hinted at earlier in the film. The general violent nature of what Baby is involved with, but is never quite so apparent until he himself does something. Then it becomes stark. The finale reveals the true nature of all the characters.

 

[Kane52630]

I know you love defending this movie, but Jon "Terminator" Hamm didn't work for me. Like I said in the last page, Wheelman was a better movie overall.

 

[Broseph44]

I feel like a movie working for some people and not for you is just a subjective matter of taste and no one can really “explain” to you why it worked for them if the same aspects didn’t work for you. It’s just a matter of opinion, or preferences.

Yep pretty much this.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I know you love defending this movie, but Jon "Terminator" Hamm didn't work for me. Like I said in the last page, Wheelman was a better movie overall.

He is not a terminator. At what point is he a terminator? He basically becomes a "killer car". But at no point is he a terminator.

Also your gif is not working. Tumblr has been weird on here.

 

[Kane52630]

He is not a terminator. At what point is he a terminator? He basically becomes a "killer car". But at no point is he a terminator.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I feel like a movie working for some people and not for you is just a subjective matter of taste and no one can really “explain” to you why it worked for them if the same aspects didn’t work for you. It’s just a matter of opinion, or preferences.

I disagree and I think that's a cop out and a blanket statement and isn't truly dissecting a movie on its own terms. But I do believe in subjectivity and I don't think art is like a science with facts. I can't factually prove to you a piece of art is bad and I wouldn't have it that way. There is truth to these things that you can't ignore. There's a difference of opinion and judging a movie on its own terms. If someone loves something isn't the point, I do think you can be objective and still admit to the truth of a fault. Batman v Superman is a terribly made movie. A person can subjectively love it and enjoy it, but if you honestly try to make an argument as to why that movie works and is on the level of something in its genre like TDK, then they're just going to be wrong. They can argue Lex Luther's plan wasn't convoluted but it's hard to do that when you realize what convoluted and confusing means. These things are how we can define and figure out why and how a movie is bad. It's the difference between what makes BVS and TDK, otherwise, we wouldn't be able to tell. I'm not making the argument that someone can't love and enjoy TDK and BVS equally, I'm saying that there is a clear difference here and we all know that and discuss them. These aren't absolutes or fact, they are just truth that can't be ignored.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well on that we can agree. t: