I just thought this movie tried WAY too hard to be something that critics and pretentious douche bag "film buffs" jerk off over.

And from reading this thread, it looks like it succeeded in that. Being a quality movie, though, I'm not so sure about.

2/11/2012 1:00:46 PM

What about the non-pretentious film buffs?

2/11/2012 3:27:02 PM

What about them?

2/11/2012 3:56:32 PM

Did it try too hard to please them, too?

2/11/2012 3:57:41 PM

I felt like there was 45 minutes of staring, almost smiling, then back to staring, which had no value add, at all. I thought the soundtrack was horrible. If I heard about someone being a human hero one more time I probably would have snapped.

Overall, I can see why people think this is a good movie; but I think those people are stupid.

2/11/2012 4:00:42 PM

I definitely think that the target audience was someone who thinks they're too good to watch a mindless action movie but wanted permission to try one out.

2/11/2012 4:02:37 PM

Watched today, didn't like. Tried too hard to be something it's not, all the staring and off conversation was annoying

2/11/2012 4:28:53 PM

I thought that it was boring at slow in some parts.

Also, I thought that Driver is a character that should have been played by somebody much older than ryan gossling. A Daniel Craig type would have been better. RG just seemed to young for the part.

But, any time that Ron Pearlman kills it in a move, I am happy.

2/11/2012 4:32:44 PM

"I prefer the films that put their audience to sleep in the theater. I think those films are kind enough to allow you a nice nap and not leave you disturbed when you leave the theater. Some films have made me doze off in the theater, but the same films have made me stay up at night, wake up thinking about them in the morning, and keep on thinking about them for weeks."

-Abbas Kiarostami, Iranian filmmaker

note: i wasn't "bored" during a single moment of Drive

[Edited on February 11, 2012 at 5:01 PM. Reason : ...]

2/11/2012 5:00:52 PM

Just wanted to say again that I really enjoyed this movie.

2/11/2012 5:41:10 PM

I agree with most of the comments in this thread - on both sides of the aisle. I enjoyed this movie, but mostly because I thought Gossling pulled off the role of a one track mind badass flawlessly. This movie had that whole "Indy film" vibe going for it with all the long silences and moments where youre supposed to feel the actors emotions, which I didnt like a ton.

But I do feel like this was an original plot and Gossling earned some Brad Pitt, George Clooney cool points in my book for this role.

It's funny cause my wife reallllly wanted to watch this movie because RG starred in it, but in the end she hated it and I liked it a lot.

2/11/2012 10:11:37 PM

I fell asleep during an Abbas Kiarostami film during a college course. I think that was the point, though.

2/12/2012 3:21:59 AM

i wish christina hendricks had more screen time in this

2/12/2012 5:35:57 PM

^^^ +1 to pretty much everything you just said

2/12/2012 7:39:11 PM

2/14/2012 9:19:31 PM

watched this last night and minus some gratuitous violent scenes (stomping the guys head in, for example) i thought it was a really good movie. it is definitely no fast and furious or transporter which is awesome. this had depth and i agree had a indy feel to it with the way it was shot and with the pauses, looks and overall tone. the storyline was great and not once was i bored with it. but the gore was a bit over the top. and christina hendricks should have had more screen-time; she is one smoking hot woman and her walking into the pawn shop in those jeans and heels omg :drool:

2/20/2012 2:37:56 PM

fucking awesome movie. it was surprisingly gory

Quote :

"i wish christina hendricks had more screen time in this"

I dunno, they did a pretty good job of making her not attractive

2/20/2012 5:26:23 PM

Quote :

"I just thought this movie tried WAY too hard to be something that critics and pretentious douche bag "film buffs" jerk off over."

I liked the movie...but I actually agree with this a little bit. I think they drew out those awkward silences a little too much because of this reason.

2/20/2012 7:31:21 PM

Quote :

"Also I didn't really understand what the part with him threatening the redneck dude in the diner was supposed to show us."

During the phone convo at the very beginning, he clearly states he never works for the same person twice. Since the redneck wanted to hire him again, he put him in his place.







The arm scene with Brooks and Cranston got to me for some reason. I can take head stomping, throat slitting, even eye gouging with a fork, but for some reason the arm scene bothered me.

2/21/2012 10:25:59 AM

^ I thought it was because the dude was talking to him about "work" in a public place and/or "recognizing" him. It's like walking up to a hooker while she's trying to listen to a sermon in church on Sunday and talking to her about the blow job she gave you last night. That shit don't fly.

2/21/2012 10:53:43 AM

Perhaps. Either way, I agree with most posters here that the movie tried a bit too hard to straddle the line between brutal action flick and art house. I didn't hate it, but feel like Gosling came across more as borderline mentally retarded than the dark mysterious guy he was supposed to betray.

2/21/2012 11:00:09 AM

Quote :

"I thought it was because the dude was talking to him about "work" in a public place and/or "recognizing" him"

that's how i took it as well

2/21/2012 11:02:07 AM

Quote :

"Gosling came across more as borderline mentally retarded"

lolwut

2/21/2012 1:54:36 PM

Quote :

"I thought it was because the dude was talking to him about "work" in a public place and/or "recognizing" him"

Is this really the confusing part of the movie? I though the confusing part is the clusterfuck behind the pawn shop job and why it's always necessary to kill people who just want to get out.

2/21/2012 2:25:37 PM

I don't think there was anything confusing about the movie. Just ONE dude had a question. It was answered (wrongly by Slave...but that's not the point).

2/21/2012 2:53:34 PM

Its a matter of opinion. I think, as per usual, that I'm right.

2/21/2012 2:54:37 PM

Quote :

"Gosling came across more as borderline mentally retarded than the dark mysterious guy he was supposed to betray."

Quote :

"lolwut"

He had high-functioning autism/asperger's, I think.

[Edited on February 21, 2012 at 3:04 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2012 3:01:17 PM

Yeah, it was definitely something along those lines. When the only person you have consistent conversation and eye contact with is an eight year old kid, somethings not quite right upstairs.

2/21/2012 3:20:06 PM

About halfway through the movie my wife commented that Gosling had autism. I just thought he was focused. Whatever

2/21/2012 7:14:33 PM

Gee, I wonder who wears the pants

2/21/2012 7:22:52 PM

I deal with a handful of people with Asperger's on a regular basis. None of them act anything remotely like the Driver. That's not to say that there isn't a high-functioning autistic somewhere who does, but at no time does he exhibit the inability to read social cues. If anything, he's hyper-sensitive body language and inflection, the exact opposite of Asperger's.

2/21/2012 7:32:01 PM

I just said half retarded. Socially, at least. Sub brains for brawn and he's Sheldon Cooper.

2/21/2012 8:25:36 PM

^^

[Edited on February 21, 2012 at 8:25 PM. Reason : asdfasdf]

2/21/2012 8:25:43 PM

^^ Change his character completely, and he's a completely different character? Got it.

2/21/2012 8:29:56 PM

OK, maybe not asperger's but it's definitely not unreasonable to read the film from a psychological standpoint and determine that the driver is... off. Slave's "retarded" was not the best choice of words

or i suppose he could just be shy

[Edited on February 21, 2012 at 9:02 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2012 8:58:33 PM

Sorry, but I used 'retarded' as an all encompassing term for any type of non-physical handicap, be it mental, social, or otherwise. I find it gives me a bit more leeway than trying to play armchair psychiatrist.

2/21/2012 9:07:38 PM

2/21/2012 9:11:37 PM

2/21/2012 9:32:34 PM

3/8/2012 10:18:30 AM

Ok, that was fucking funny... I won't lie

3/8/2012 10:24:13 AM

Redbox'd this movie and really enjoyed it. Glad it was free, but really enjoyed it.

4/28/2012 4:22:45 PM

good movie, but not some life changing cinematic masterpiece by any means

4/28/2012 4:29:23 PM

^^^^ hahahahahah that's good. this movie was awesome though.

4/28/2012 10:01:15 PM

It was an awesome movie. yes there was a lot of silence, but thats a refreshing change from how ridiculous and silly the fast and furious movies have gotten.

4/29/2012 2:46:41 AM

fast five was awesome.

4/29/2012 5:01:07 AM

just in case that wasn't a joke: fast five was horrible.

4/29/2012 3:41:03 PM

It was far from a joke, and you're wrong.

Fast Five is a good movie.

So is Drive.

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 6:22 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2012 6:16:08 PM

Fast five wasn't bad, but adding Channing Tatum instead of The Rock would have made it a classic.

4/29/2012 6:23:56 PM

4/29/2012 6:40:25 PM

I def made a crack that Gosling got dropped by his parents during his scenes with Mulligan (who didn't fit in this movie at all).

This movie reminded me of Kill Bill without as much dialogue. Stylish movies are cool. I agree with all the comments negative and postive. I really don't like watching Bryan Cranston die.

5/3/2012 10:07:06 AM