Mary (2021)

Justin Richardson7 said:Look, you clearly don't get my point, buddy.
Just like with Nope, your move is always to show up late—specifically after I've already set the stage. If you were actually as insightful as you claim, you would have shown up and explained the core themes of Marilyn, what it all signifies, and why it matters... Instead, you hide behind film jargon and semiotics (my interpretation of your "expertise" is basically a middle schooler arguing against a PhD)—yet you can't even grasp ten of my simplest sentences. You talk about freedom? I’m telling you, there isn't a shred of it here! And that fake ending—that cheap, trashy swimming sequence—is just pure posturing: fundamentally, we haven't moved an inch.

Anyway, let's stop whining... If you actually have something substantial to contribute, speak up. Then I'll explain exactly where you're missing the mark and why your take on this movie (or anything else) falls short—and why you're incapable of actually leading a discussion.

Give me a break. Just like with Nope, you arrive with a massive delay after I've already laid everything out—without even bothering to check if anyone else has already said it. In your caveman brain, the universe starts and ends with you, so you try to act like some ultimate prophet, even though the real ones cleared the path long before you accidentally rolled down from your hill onto it.👋

Patrick Martin said:the movie confirms exactly that at the end.

The film doesn't confirm anything, not at the start and certainly not at the end.

One really needs to look at this from a broader perspective. This entire supposed masterpiece of a Hollywood film, built entirely around female characters, lacks the capacity to offer any real meaning. To you, I suppose everything is a definitive masterpiece—whether it's Peter, Mark, Theresa, Alex, and so on—yet you fail to see how the decline of American cinema mirrors this Marilyn-esque rebellion of the female element. Perhaps at least some sort of female-driven agenda has finally achieved its goal, reaching a climax while watching nonsense like Red Snapper.

Justin Richardson7 said:The movie doesn't confirm anything, not at the start and certainly not by the end.

Look, you gotta look at this from a much bigger perspective. This whole damn Hollywood flick built entirely around female characters can't provide meaning, and honestly, it doesn't even try. I bet to you, Peter's movies are all "confirmed," right? And Mark's, and Theresa's, and Alex's... you know the drill. You're totally missing how the absolute decay of American cinema lines up perfectly with this whole Marilyn-style rebellion of the female element. Maybe it’s just that some woman's Friday night craving finally hit its peak while she sits there watching garbage like red snapper.

I'm still sticking to my guns—this movie was a genuine step forward. I said it in my opening post, and I'll say it again: it actually softened my massive hatred for American films.

And let me repeat: it’s "transparent" because it portrays the inner turmoil of a young lady in a typical Southern family in an interesting, let's call it "imaginative," way.

Which means that "transparency" has absolutely nothing to do with the outcome or the final result. It's not like this is the first or the last movie out there that leaves you without a tangible conclusion.

Marilyn (scientifically known as Muraena) belongs to the eel family within the order of eels. Even though they’re technically fish, they look more like snakes than anything else. There are about 11 different species in this genus.

They don't have any scales, much like their cousin the moray, and their dorsal, anal, and tail fins all fuse together into one long ridge running down their body. They don't even have pectoral or pelvic fins. A Marilyn's skin actually has some cool coloring and is covered in tiny spots. During the day, you'll usually find them hiding in cracks among underwater rocks, just poking their heads out. Their mouths are basically permanently stuck open and are packed with sharp teeth—it looks terrifying. And get this: the teeth aren't just in their jaws; they've got them on the roof of their mouth and even embedded in their throat bones! One specific type, the yellow-colored Helena, lives in the Atlantic Ocean.

Patrick Martin said:I’m still maintaining that this movie represents a specific positive step forward; I mentioned that in my opening post because it actually softened my deep-seated aversion toward American cinema.

Good God!
Patrick, we aren't even arguing about whether Marilyn is garbage or not.
We actually agree that it’s okay.

But the fact that I can call the film "okay" doesn't stop me from seeing that it lacks transparency, remains unarticulated, and is riddled with various flaws.

One of the biggest issues is precisely that, and I honestly have no idea where you get the audacity to label Julia's confusion as some sort of imaginative maneuvering by a young woman in an American family.

No amount of Smudge's cinematic language can fix this: unfortunately, the sources of confusion for this entire plot are deep; they shake the whole cultural scene, not just here in the US, and it leads to a long-winded bit of philosophizing regarding God and meaning.

Look, here is a significant pointer: with this film, you can't even discern what perspective it's speaking from. Is it taking the position of globalism—of the circulation of goods and capital—or is it pointing a finger at the underside of that very circulation? It isn't transparent at all, and the plot just floats through various disparate elements.

Smudge goes about it in a crude way, labeling the father as stubborn. But it doesn't hold up; the film, if that was indeed the intention, fails to articulate it through actual semantic structures.

The average American pop consumer might imagine American genes to be stony, hardened, and stubborn. But when you look closely, this father is nothing more than a caricature! He's some wannabe patriarch who actually possesses none of the traits of a true patriarchal father found in those old-school American archetypes.

The father—the American patriarch—is someone built on foundations: certain things are simply not for sale.
Yet this father, a world-class waiter, hysterizes on one hand about Marilyn's confused rebellion, while on the other, he plays the sycophant to an even bigger fraud—another world-class waiter (who doesn't even play the lead role in his own house).

So he wavers between being patriarchal and being a waiter; there is nothing solid or defined about him. It’s more of a suburban, middle-class existence than any kind of rugged American stubbornness.

I'll say it again: watch and experience the best scene in the film, where Julia opens the window and watches a significant American procession while the heavenly hymns of the Queen of Americans thunder in the background.
The counterpoint to that procession is the wandering of these global waiters in the opposite direction, toward a kitschy festival and a spiritual animal kingdom, where the "transaction" is supposed to happen: the cannibals eat each other, and the civilized people cheat one another.

That scene right there is what elevates the film, Patrick. It pulls it away from the mass of mediocrity that Hollywood produces. But since none of that is fully developed, well, that's the subject of our little debate, where you took offense because I won't just shower Marilyn with compliments.

P.S. — How can you say you don't watch American movies? Come on, don't kid yourself.
P.S. 2 — Illyricum!!!!!!! This is what revived me. Finally, a great film. Of course, it's not without flaws, but it's the real deal. It would have been genius if the author had captured everything appearing there—the history, the space... even including the Rocky Mountains, that spiritual American range, in impressive shots. Patrick, go watch Illyricum.

Patrick Martin said:which means that being "transparent" doesn't actually refer to the outcome or the result at all. It isn't even the first or last movie that lacks a tangible resolution.

But this one doesn't have any real payoff; it feels like watching someone's mundane daily commute where you just randomly curse people out in traffic, knowing you'll be doing the exact same thing tomorrow.

I didn't really grasp the point of the film, even though, to be fair, it was visually stunning (if nothing else, I enjoyed that aspect). If she had wanted to escape, she could have done it a million times over because the island isn't quite that isolated (I mean, even within the film itself, there are characters from other places—for instance, through education, since she speaks and understands a foreign language, though I doubt she was homeschooled, or through work, given she made it past 17, etc., etc.).

POSSIBLE SPOILERS
For instance, at the beginning, I was somewhat convinced that she was actually the daughter of a foreigner and that the whole plot was hidden there. Then, toward the end, I found myself almost rooting for the girl to end up in a pit (the tide) and that the actual ending was just her final fantasy. If nothing else, I was cheering for her to finally strike her father in that closing scene and swim right out of the frame...

But then, once the credits finally rolled and I saw it was a female director/writer, things started to make more sense to me—clearer, I suppose, in the sense of why they were unclear to me in the first place. 😁

Marilyn has all the artistic merit of a bar of soap—and the director is an endless void of talent who clawed her way to the top through sheer megalomania and stepping on everyone in her path. Honestly, I think she understands and loves cinema about as much as I love the smell of vinegar at ten in the morning.

Now she’s out there giving these wounded interviews, claiming Americans are bullying her and refusing to recognize her greatness, when deep down she knows her movie is just half-baked trash. Anyone with even a shred of common sense or basic film knowledge who watched it reached the exact same conclusion.

The directing and acting in this thing are basically sophomore level at the Academy—it's obvious Brdar probably helped her direct a short film that actually worked once, but here? Nothing functions. The only redeeming qualities are a few pretty shots that any grandpa taking a photography class for seniors could have captured at those locations. It’s honestly hard to mess up a shot when the scenery does all the heavy lifting.

Justin Richardson7 said:...so, yeah, that’s basically what our little debate was about—you getting all offended because I wasn't just showering Marilyn with endless praise...

I gotta hand it to you, though—your analysis actually caught me off guard. And honestly? That’s the biggest kicker here, because I POSITIVELY surprised myself. I mean, damn, I start getting all hyped up over even the tiniest little hint of progress.

The way she showed up, along with that little thing and Marilyn, totally won me over. It was enough to make my whole day. When I was talking about transparency, I was mostly stuck on that metaphor involving her and Marilyn. But through this back-and-forth, we ended up touching on other stuff too. The bigger picture stuff, like you put it.

And yeah, everything you laid out in your breakdown holds water. I’ve already kind of scoured the web for some of that stuff myself. Just fighting windmills, man, just fighting windmills. 🤷

casualbadger69 said:But there's zero payoff here; it’s like watching someone’s boring daily commute where you just yell at drivers in traffic and know you’ll be doing the exact same thing tomorrow.

but honestly, that's how it goes in 99% of real life🤷

so why even bother looking for some massive, dramatic shift specifically in this movie?
people blow up, tensions spike, they tear each other apart, and then—boom—the next day it’s like nothing happened. Life just keeps grinding you down; we don't have the luxury to sit around crying over spilled milk.☕

If you ask me, this is just one phase of her growing up. And hey, if you can turn that into a decent movie, why not? Does everything always need to be some huge, over-the-top spectacle?

That little girl really stuck with me. I’m certain there are plenty of kids and families just like them all along the coast, as many as you can imagine, all dealing with their own messes and dreams and just living regular lives. At the end of the day, that’s beautiful enough for one small, solid film.

Patrick Martin said:That little girl really stuck with me—I'm sure there are plenty of kids and families just like her scattered along the coast, all with their own struggles and dreams, living perfectly ordinary lives. It’s beautiful, honestly; more than enough material for one decent little indie film.

You only remember her because of the camel-toe, Patrick Martin—don't try to play us; we know exactly who you are.

haha, there's a grain of truth in that too. even if she isn't exactly Mother Teresa material. if the little one is a Marilyn, then her mom is a straight-up Great White shark, uff uff

Honestly, these kinds of reactions just drive home exactly what the author was trying to say—both women are basically reduced to their looks and how much they can attract attention (which explains why Julia is constantly in a bikini, and why her mom’s chest keeps popping up for absolutely no reason). That scene where the mother and daughter are eating sea urchins with Javier in that cove is pretty significant. It’s this fleeting summer idyll full of potential (for a naive girl who spends her days staring at wealthy tourists on yachts) and missed opportunities (for a mother who clearly has zero desire to actually take charge of her own life). For Javier, that coastline is just like his mother used to be—nothing more than a beautiful memory and a summer fling. And those two? They’re stuck in this cycle, surviving inside her like a certain Marilyn.

As for the father, he’s clearly dealing with some serious complexes regarding his own (lack of) success in life, thinking he can outsmart Javier and those other "rich idiots" by spinning fairy tales about building a resort on an island that doesn't even have basic infrastructure. To me, he feels less like a classic patriarchal guy and more like a typical guy from the coast who thinks he's the smartest person in the room and views foreigners as nothing more than walking ATMs. He’s sexist, but not in the usual way. He brags about Julia’s diving skills, but heaven forbid she actually goes to Harvard. Why would she ever end up being more successful than him?
Julia figured her parents out a long time ago—she actually tells them both during the movie (telling her mom her peak was being Miss Island, and telling her dad he's just an opportunist selling off land where people actually died). So, it’s honestly kind of weird how naively she looks at Javier, or even at that yacht full of young tourists she obviously envies. It makes you wonder how much her isolation on the island makes her vulnerable to being totally fascinated by everything foreign in today's world. Does she even have a cell phone or a TV? That part felt a little forced and hard to swallow in the film.

Personally, I found this to be an interesting slice of life. The movie isn't revolutionary, but it’s solid. I have a friend who grew up on an island like this, and after watching this, she told me it triggered her because the film felt too close to reality. Only instead of hearing You have broad shoulders, she probably would have heard Take off that dress, you tramp. I'm glad this movie didn't go down that path; the message gets across much more subtly.

Ashley Brown81 said:Look—these kinds of reactions actually prove the author's point. Both characters are being reduced purely to their looks and sex appeal (which explains why Julia is constantly in a bikini, and why there are unnecessary shots of her mother's chest).

True—except it's the author herself who is reducing them to those attributes in the first place.

@David Jackson2 exactly. The issue is that the movie is way too close to reality—it’s practically built out of clichés.

For instance, one of the more interesting beats was when the girl finds a vibrator and a magazine belonging to Javier in that bag. I honestly thought it was Javier's bag 🤣 and was bracing myself for some twisted plot twist, but whatever. This is just an American film; they don't have the guts to actually go down those paths.
Still, the ending works. Instead of some safe, cliché killing of the father, she makes it clear she isn't playing games. That move alone firmly establishes this as a feminist film.

Ashley Brown81 said:Does she even have a cell phone or a TV? In the movie, that whole setup felt super forced and just didn't sit right with me.

Look, she grew up in an area where that stuff isn't exactly "mainstream." For her, life is just the ocean, a phone, and a TV. There are plenty of those "old school" types out there, you know?

Whatever, I'm just messing around. She probably has both, she just doesn't care.
Personally, it doesn't matter for the plot, 🤷
actually, it *does* matter because it makes her come across as more curious and naive.

The father is the root of all the drama here. Her main goal is just getting away from him—the guy is basically driven by pure greed. And honestly, it’s hilarious when people try to turn him into some stereotype of every single American or whatever. 🙄

Total nonsense.

Besides, the movie only covers a few days; obviously, things were happening before and after that timeframe.

And given how young she is, Javier's behavior toward her... I mean, almost everyone sees him as God just because he's being nice to her. Those crazy teenage years, man.

northerncrane4 said:Is it just me, or is the author the one actually reducing them to those mere attributes?

If a man had framed a young actress like that, he’d be behind bars by now. There isn't a shred of finesse or subtlety here—it feels less like cinema and more like some low-budget softcore flick. The director keeps forcing her physique into the shot for most of the film without any sense of style or artistic intuition... Creepy.

and what am I supposed to wear? full plate armor?

I haven't even seen the movie yet.

But seriously, does anyone here actually know what a Marilyn is?

Jack Cook7 said:Do you guys even have a clue what a red snapper actually is?

something to eat?

Patrick Martin said:something to eat?

I mean, sure, you *could* eat it. But honestly? It's more like something you should steer clear of. You know it's out there, so just don't go near it. You really don't need that kind of trouble in your life.