Nope - Jordan Peele's next movie

[Michael J Glocks]

55 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

  Hide contents

 

The animal aspect is muddled thematically by the fact that he doesn’t actually know it’s an animal he’s dealing with. He thinks it’s a UFO full of little guys. In principle that could’ve been a front for the show, but the movie doesn’t gesture that way.

 

 

Spoiler

That is a very good point! You wonder if he might have worked it out for himself in the previous six months, had he actually tried to understand it instead of just looking to monetise the spectacle. You can assume he probably realised in his final moments.

 

[Triple A]

ooh... 🤩

extremely cool poster - as I dodged most pre-release material for the film, this image really resonates now!

look closely…

[mindgames]

On 15/08/2022 at 12:22, Triple A said:

ooh... 🤩

extremely cool poster - as I dodged all the pre-release material for the film, this image really resonates now!

look closely…

 

Is  it

Spoiler

the shape of his hat being the same shape as Jean Jacket

?

 

I really enjoyed this. I was a bit bemused about

Spoiler

the shoe and the chimp

as I walked out but in hindsight I think they are great moments in a film with lots of strange details. 

[Gambit]

Spoiler

Keke Palmer doing the Akira motorbike slide.

 

Enjoyed this film. Not as good as Get Out but then I've come to accept that Jordan Peele is likely never going to top it.

[Triple A]

6 hours ago, mindgames said:

 

Is  it

  Hide contents

the shape of his hat being the same shape as Jean Jacket

?

 

I really enjoyed this. I was a bit bemused about

  Hide contents

the shoe and the chimp

as I walked out but in hindsight I think they are great moments in a film with lots of strange details. 

Re poster

Spoiler

It’s not a hat - it is Jean Jacket!  Hiding in plain sight as it likes to, the cheeky scamp.

re 

Spoiler

the shoe and the chimp - I too was bemused at first, but I came to realise it’s essential viewing to understanding character motivations and thus the plot - and of course yeah themes too.

re 

Spoiler

the Akira bike slide yeah that’s cool.  The folks getting squished inside Jean Jacket remind of Akira as well (Kaori!!!).

Tons of Evangelion references and nods are in the film as well I think.

This movie has grown on me.

[SteveG]

Also: 

 

Spoiler

Regarding the bike slide, I assume everyone knows that Jordan Peele was offered the live action remake and turned it down. I didn’t, thanks IMDb trivia!

 

There’s so many nods and references. Love that Antlers Holst is basically Quint from Jaws and his hand crank camera is a homage to the bespoke fishing reel. And then he dies the same way  

 

[Stig]

Took a day to think on this before scoring and reviewing. I was umming and ahhhing about what to put down for a score and whilst I thought it had elements that were really fantastic, the story ultimately left me feeling a little cold. I've pretty much come away from it thinking "yeah that was decent, I enoyed it, but didn't love it".

 

It looks amazing, has really great performances (Kaluuya & Palmer have wonderful chemistry), some interesting ideas and cool visuals. The sound design is fantastic and really effective.

Spoiler

I liked the twist on it not just being a flying saucer with aliens inside. The fact it's a creature, stalking people from the clouds was really cool. It was basically Jaws in the sky and the homages to Jaws were not lost on me at all. Neither were the Akira references. All that was pretty cool.

 

I liked how the monster started to peacock itself towards the end too because its prey were refusing to look at it, so it resorted to other tactics to draw their attention. Also when it chuckeeld up the blood over the house, that was a cool visual.

 

Where it loses its way is the pace, length and side stuff that should have ended up on the cutting room floor.

Spoiler

The whole story about the chimp really wasn't needed. I get what he was trying to say and do, but we didn't need to revisit that scene again half way through. The opening scene and Ricky's story was a enough to convey that message. The flashback scenes with his dad I found very uneventful and I also think the TMZ guy on the bike was unnecessary. Asking for a picture his socials as he lays on the floor in pain was so hamfisted into the message of fame and fortune, I found it rather cringey. All of those things could have been cut completely and the film would have lost nothing.

 

Ultimately this is Peeles weakest film for me, its not nearly as masterfully as Get Out or as interesting as Us. There's lots to like, but also enough to dislike.

 

3/5

[Alex W.]

Spoiler

I just could not get Jean Jacket out of my head for the first two days after this film. Trying to figure out why it's such a compelling creation got me reflecting on effective monster design in general. It occurred to me that it's so striking precisely because it's not just a monster, it's an animal. It has function, and you can look at it and go "holy shit, how is that even alive?" You can start to second guess what it's doing while at the same time being absolutely bamboozled by how it does it. Why's it doing that, how does it do that? It's probably the same drive as everything from freak shows (appropriately enough) to deep sea monsters. Jurassic Park did it well: the raptors are comprehensible as living things. Jaws is such a fearful killing machine in part because we know it's not just killing people like a slasher villain, it's feeding. I think part of what makes the first two Alien movies work is that they're critters whose life cycle (in the first film) and nest (the second) we get wound up in, and we can grasp that.

 

It's been a very long time since I saw a critter that balanced being weird enough to be hypnotic but animalistic enough to be convincingly alive like this.

 

[Stig]

A nice bit of trivia

 

Spoiler

When Ricky (Steven Yeun) states that in "one hour you will leave here having witnessed a spectacle", there is exactly one hour until the film's end credits.

 

[freezycold]

I just saw this tonight having known nothing about it beforehand. Was it just me or were there a lot of moments where the music, scene composition, movement etc seemed inspired by or referential to

 

Spoiler

Spirited Away

???

 

Also….it was a bit meandering.

[Triple A]

12 hours ago, Stigweard said:

 

  Hide contents

The whole story about the chimp really wasn't needed. I get what he was trying to say and do, but we didn't need to revisit that scene again half way through.

For me that stuff is fundamental.

Spoiler

What doesn’t help it, is the dissonant way it’s cut into the present day content.  That really threw me at first and I too initially thought it wasn’t needed.  But I later thought that without the context this story provides, the characters and overarching plot would feel much more flimsy and undeveloped.

The incident at the studio completely shapes Ricky’s worldview, which in turn drives the plot through his present day behaviours and actions.  That Ricky wasn’t also killed during the studio incident, and that he bore witness to everything including the standing shoe, both a) makes him think he’s special/immune/chosen/can converse with dangerous beings, and b) gets him super-hooked on spectacle, to the point that he becomes absolutely compelled to go and create similar, with the false understanding of a) driving him.  It’s a false understanding because Ricky was so blinded by the spectacle of the studio incident and perhaps not too trained in working with animals either (reinforcing the earlier horse/studio scene), that he couldn’t understand that the table cloth of the table he was under, was a veil - thus preventing the eye contact that could trigger the chimp’s attack reflex.

I probably missed some stuff but think that covers it in the main.  You may know all this already of course and still disagree - I do wonder a bit if I’m being too apologist to the film not to mention condescending to you!
 

 

[Triple A]

3 hours ago, freezycold said:

I just saw this tonight having known nothing about it beforehand. Was it just me or were there a lot of moments where the music, scene composition, movement etc seemed inspired by or referential to

 

  Hide contents

Spirited Away

Yeah this tracks for me especially with the 

Spoiler

Akira and Evangelion references that are included too.  Peele confirmed for weeb!

 

[robdood]

Well I thought this was fucking superb. 

 

Sometimes the comments I see from other people baffle me. 

 

Anyhow re Jean Jacket. 

 

Spoiler

That CG and creature design in general was incredible.  I loved the scene were we actually got to go inside with the people from the cowboy park.  Grim! 

 

I also love how the horrible noises Jean Jacket made as it flew around was the noises of whatever living things were trapped inside it at the time! 

 

[Stig]

2 hours ago, Triple A said:

For me that stuff is fundamental.

  Hide contents

What doesn’t help it, is the dissonant way it’s cut into the present day content.  That really threw me at first and I too initially thought it wasn’t needed.  But I later thought that without the context this story provides, the characters and overarching plot would feel much more flimsy and undeveloped.

The incident at the studio completely shapes Ricky’s worldview, which in turn drives the plot through his present day behaviours and actions.  That Ricky wasn’t also killed during the studio incident, and that he bore witness to everything including the standing shoe, both a) makes him think he’s special/immune/chosen/can converse with dangerous beings, and b) gets him super-hooked on spectacle, to the point that he becomes absolutely compelled to go and create similar, with the false understanding of a) driving him.  It’s a false understanding because Ricky was so blinded by the spectacle of the studio incident and perhaps not too trained in working with animals either (reinforcing the earlier horse/studio scene), that he couldn’t understand that the table cloth of the table he was under, was a veil - thus preventing the eye contact that could trigger the chimp’s attack reflex.

I probably missed some stuff but think that covers it in the main.  You may know all this already of course and still disagree - I do wonder a bit if I’m being too apologist to the film not to mention condescending to you!
 

 

 

No dont worry, that wasn't condescending.  It's good to read other peoples interpretation.

 

After reading others thoughts, I think I'll have to have a 2nd viewing of this once it's out on streaming.

[robdood]

On 16/08/2022 at 18:37, Triple A said:

Re poster

  Reveal hidden contents

It’s not a hat - it is Jean Jacket!  Hiding in plain sight as it likes to, the cheeky scamp.

 

I don't know man

 

Spoiler

his hair just doesn't make sense if that's true. don't get me wrong, it still is clearly meant to resemble JJ!!

 

[robdood]

I still don't get 'the shoe' though, wtf. 

[Triple A]

2 hours ago, robdood said:

I still don't get 'the shoe' though, wtf. 

Spoiler

I took the message there, perhaps a bit reductively, that weird spectacular shit sometimes happens, but it’s best not to become too dazzled by it (or stare at it/look into its eyes)

 

[jonathanhoey]

Saw Nope last night at Cineworld and loved it. Four stars. 

 

I previously loved both Get Out and US, as well as Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot. So I did go in expecting to enjoy myself. 

 

I do wish I had been able to avoid knowing anything about the story. The original teaser trailers were very good (IIRC they were basically just close-ups of the main characters looking scared while weird shit happened around them, like the lights going off or things going whoosh) but I later had the misfortune to catch a much longer and far more explicit trailer (before Top Gun, I think) that gave away large portions of what was going on. So, sadly, I did go in with the foreknowledge that it was 

Spoiler

aliens.

 

Looking forward to watching the whole thing again to get a better look at how things are set up in advance, then either paid off or subverted. 

[Triple A]

Yeah I got lucky in that I missed everything apart from the posters.  Since watching the film and then interviews etc., I saw they used plenty of shots that would have spoiled certain things for me.

It’s not an easy movie to sell in today’s instant gratification culture, without giving important things away.

[Treble]

lay me down next to @robdoodas a big fan of this. I thought it started pretty slowly - and arguably you could remove 20m or so from around the point at which Angel joins the story - but it was a really slow build that earned its studied unpleasantness and discomfort.

 

WRT the shoe...

 

Spoiler

Nope! Don't have an answer other than the repeat of the eye/shutter/reflection/being seen dynamic. The spot of blood on the left side matches the gap in the helmet the motorcyclist wears; a helmet which also is reflective like the globe that spooks Lucky.

 

Whether all these cohere into a clever meta-commentary or not is beyond me, tbh. I did observe that the 'eye' at the centre of JJ was basically a shutter, keeping with the theme of observation, staying below the radar etc. 

 

I'm just happy he's around, as his films are gut-wrenchingly hard to watch in places, whilst exploring some pretty challenging social themes at the same time. I think people chuck around Stephen King comparisons far too often, but as a screenwriter he's closest to King's stuff than anyone I've seen in years. Particularly in how he spends lots of time building character so that the WTF moments can both be crazier wilder on the fantasy level AND hit harder on an emotional level.

[Mikes]

On 19/08/2022 at 03:00, Alex W. said:

  Hide contents

I just could not get Jean Jacket out of my head for the first two days after this film. Trying to figure out why it's such a compelling creation got me reflecting on effective monster design in general. It occurred to me that it's so striking precisely because it's not just a monster, it's an animal. It has function, and you can look at it and go "holy shit, how is that even alive?" You can start to second guess what it's doing while at the same time being absolutely bamboozled by how it does it. Why's it doing that, how does it do that? It's probably the same drive as everything from freak shows (appropriately enough) to deep sea monsters. Jurassic Park did it well: the raptors are comprehensible as living things. Jaws is such a fearful killing machine in part because we know it's not just killing people like a slasher villain, it's feeding. I think part of what makes the first two Alien movies work is that they're critters whose life cycle (in the first film) and nest (the second) we get wound up in, and we can grasp that.

 

It's been a very long time since I saw a critter that balanced being weird enough to be hypnotic but animalistic enough to be convincingly alive like this.

 

 

My feelings entirely. One thing about Peele's movies that have struck me is how 70s they feel, in that he doesn't care what's been popular, he has a vision and he's damn well going to follow it through. 

[Dark Soldier]

As someone highly critical, in this thread even, of Get Out and Us, I fucking loved this.

 

Easily his strongest, best film.

[macosx]

Saw this last night and both loved it. Only criticism was 

Spoiler

the ending which was flat and unearned: an almost silent 30+seconds of watching a comical inflatable drift up and away from the main characters.Hardly the tension of a great white shark swimming towards you and you have to shoot an air tank. If they had A teamed it and thought up a plan it would have made more sense, or a scene of her looking at the gas tanks that fill the thing rather than just riding in and untieing some ropes.

 

[yakumo]

Whn Steven Yeun tells his audience that they’re not prepared for what they’re about to experience in one hour just as there’s about one hour left for the movie to be over.

[schmojo]

I loved Get Out as a complete film, and thought Us had some exceptional set pieces but didn't stick the landing. Which is ok, horror films rarely do, and I don't judge them harshly for that.

 

Nope left me cold though. It felt flat, the stakes felt low and I didn't care what happened to anyone. The performances were great, but they were hanging off something too empty and flimsy for me to attach to them. I appreciate his commentary about our prurient nature, but largely keeping the creature transformation off-screen felt like a missed opportunity rather than a clever observation.

 

The goodwill Jordan Peele has (rightfully) earned seems to have people tying themselves in knots discovering subtext in this. But the connections are all so wafer thin that it's just not on the screen in any meaningful way. Natty background easter eggs do not a story make.

 

I think it's perfectly fine to see Peele as a human who is capable of middling output as well as excellent output. Anyone who watched his sketch show can attest to that. 

 

I'll be watching Get Out and Us again, but cannot imagine what would bring me back to this.

 

2.5/5

 

[cassidy]

Now that was a fuckin ride.  So confidently directed. The subtext didn't slam you over the head and it was a very funny movie. 

 

Sat on the end of my sofa for the last 30 mins.  

 

Buying this and will be viewed regularly. 

 

5/5 for me. 

 

[MechE]

I was pleasantly surprised by this having heard mixed things. I think it really shows Peele maturing as a film maker. By that I mean with both Get Out and Us the biting social commentary was pretty overt, and occasionally on the nose. That's not necessarily a bad thing - it enhanced Get Out, but made Us a bit too ham-fisted for my tastes.

 

But with Nope, he has just as much to say about modern society as in previous films, but he has the confidence to let the thrill-ride horror movie aspect stand on its own two feet. If that's all you were hungry for you can come away from this with a reasonably full belly, but if you choose to unpack it a bit more I think he's got some fairly interesting takes on some subjects that tend to be treated in quite a heavy handed way these days.

 

Spoiler

All the characters represent different aspects of the way filming things has changed us as individuals and as a society. With the main protagonists even being direct descendants of the first man ever filmed.

 

I liked that all anyone's ultimate goal was to film the monster, not kill it, understand it or communicate with it. Even the climax of the film focuses on Emerald's struggle to get the perfect photo using the well, rather than the fact she killed the monster.

 

The interesting exception to this is Stephen Yeun's character who represents our fascination with watching gruesome spectacles. When he has a momentary flashback showing OJ and Emerald around the secret room, it doesn't seem to distress him, he appears to have more complex feelings about the event. This is reinforced by the full Gordy section which shows that whilst he's clearly petrified, he also can't look away from the spectacle. His live show is him trying to evoke that feeling in others.

 

I also liked the bored cinematographer, listlessly scrolling through graphic images of animals eating each other, clearly trying to find something to once again ignite the senses, but being desensitised from a lifetime of looking at these types of things (much like how I imagine many of us are now fairly immune to the images we found shocking and provocative when we were younger). He ended up giving his life to get the greatest shot of all time.

 

I enjoyed TMZ guy being more concerned that his accident wasn't caught on camera than for his own safety.

 

And then we have Jean Jacket, representing the destructive need to be in front of the camera. A being who literally gets energy from being seen by others. When you're a large flying saucer you don't have to do much to get everyone to look at you, but once OJ starts denying it this it has to become increasingly flamboyant just to get noticed, which eventually leads to its destruction.

 

[Triple A]

Good stuff, love it

[smithstock]

I imagine this has already been mentioned, but...

 

Spoiler

Not

Of

Planet

Earth

 

[Triple A]

Ooh that’s good