Vox Lux

smh, you guys didn't know how to have fun. Make way for the baddest sci-fi bitch in the house

Im having difficulty finding the right words of endorsement to describe just how fantastic this film looks and how well it's shot, it's a masterpiece of visual storytelling rivaling even the best work of Roger Deakins, and a must see to anyone who can appreciate not only the organic warmth and depth high-end film brings, but the themes of fame and trauma this film so well explores

Irreverent, dynamic, and portentous; the picture it paints of the increasingly indistinguishable divide between celebrity and notoriety isn't pretty though

A story about popular art born amidst violent trauma. A thriller about the remorseless and cannibalistic machinations of fame. An allegory for the calcification of celebrity-obsessed American society. A study of the interactions between pop culture and global terrorism. A bildungsroman about the possible consequences of a troubled childhood. A dark fairy tale about the music industry. A threnody for a pre-Columbine and 9/11 world. The bold, wildly ambitious Vox Lux is all of these. And more. Written by former actor Brady Corbet and his partner Mona Fastvold, and directed by Corbet, the film takes the basic A Star is Born template, and gives it an angry and bitter 21st century makeover, mercilessly torpedoing Bradley Cooper's whimsical paean to Old Hollywood romanticism into neon-soaked glitter-adorned oblivion. As a director, Corbet exploded onto the scene in 2015 with the sensational, out-of-nowhere The Childhood of a Leader, a visually stunning examination of the birth of 20th-century fascism from 19th-century aristocracy. And although Vox Lux, a film about a contemporary pop star, seems to have no thematic connection to Childhood, there are marked similarities between the two films - they both examine troubled formative childhood years intertwined with global tragedy that ultimately produce less than admirable adults; they both use the specifics of a small group of people to synecdochally engage with larger socio-political issues; they both unapologetically indict a culture in its death throes; they are both fundamentally built on asking questions without providing answers; neither is especially interested in conventional psychology or character arcs. There are a couple of problems (the film could be accused of relying too heavily on voiceover; it strays into cliché on occasion; it's front-loaded, with the best scenes happening in the first act; it walks a very fine line between portentousness and pretentiousness), but all things considered, this is another superb film from a director who, at only 30, is already a unique and exciting cinematic voice.

For my complete review, please visit: https://boxd.it/HQcrf

My third eye is open. I will now perform stanning!!!

In all honesty if Natalie's performance had been better, and the music wasn't so awful (like AWFUL @ SIA what is it you doing bb????) this movie would have worked SO well for me. It's just that the darkness of the story has so much potential but i felt like Corbet was afraid to really just go full twisted nightmare, and ended up with a mix of generic story about a pop star and a full on thriller about the pornographic society we live in. Damn it, I really wanted to love this one.

(oh that scene where young Celeste [spoiler] talks about the tunnel in her nightmares [/spoiler] THAT'S what the film should have been aaall about... sad)

7/10

I wasn't sure what I expected going in, but whatever it was, I got something wildly different. This film has, essentially, two halves that can, honestly, be seen completely independently of one another. The first half is equal parts violent & grim and hopeful & positive, showing the genesis of a pop star emerging from the tragedy around her. The second half of the film is really carried by Portman and feels much less interesting. It's a glimpse into the life of a pop star, but you never end up really caring about Portman's character, her sister, her daughter, or any related character really. And then there's a big performance number before the credits roll. The second half is kind of a mess and doesn't pay off what is built up in the first half, leaving you feeling pretty numb to the film as a whole.

Great performances here, especially by Portman, but I am unsure as to the point the director was trying to make. Still, he has come a long way since his role in the 2004 fiasco that was Thunderbirds, and he does have a lot of talent. Perhaps his next film will be a little more coherent - or perhaps I should attune my mind to the messages he is trying to convey.

A true concert film in the sense watching it feels like attending a pop / rock concert. Sadly, they left off the encore that could've tied it all together.

Also, weirdly balanced in the sense that half the cast weren't even trying while the other half were overdoing it to make up for them.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. It's definitely interesting but I'm not sure if I'd recommend it.

I wish I liked this more, but it didn't do it for me.

The subject matter is great and unfortunately still relevant today. How frame can attach itself to a person during the most unexpected, but it's the overall presentation of this idea falls flat.