Discussions
Explore the latest discussions related to this domain.
What’s The Consensus on Richard Paterson’s Whiskey’s? : whiskey
Main Post: What’s The Consensus on Richard Paterson’s Whiskey’s? : whiskey
Official Discussion: Paterson [SPOILERS]
Main Post:
Please remember this is a spoiler friendly zone. You don't have to use spoiler tags in this thread. If you haven't seen the film LEAVE NOW. If you want to see the opinions of redditors check the poll below. Also any comments that clearly show the commenter has not seen the film IT WILL BE REMOVED.
Poll
If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll.
If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll, click here.
Summary: Paterson is a bus driver in the city of Paterson, New Jersey – they share the name. Every day, Paterson adheres to a simple routine: he drives his daily route, observing the city as it drifts across his windshield and overhearing fragments of conversation swirling around him; he writes poetry into a notebook; he walks his dog; he stops in a bar and drinks exactly one beer; he goes home to his wife, Laura. By contrast, Laura's world is ever changing. New dreams come to her almost daily. Paterson loves Laura and she loves him. He supports her newfound ambitions; she champions his gift for poetry.
Director: Jim Jarmusch
Writers: Jim Jarmusch
Cast:
- Adam Driver as Paterson
- Golshifteh Farahani as Laura
- William Jackson Harper as Everett
- Chasten Harmon as Marie
- Barry Shabaka Henley as Doc
- Rizwan Manji as Donny
- Masatoshi Nagase as Japanese Poet
- Kara Hayward as Female Student
- Jared Gilman as Male Student
- Method Man as Method Man
- Sterling Jerins as Young Poet
Rotten Tomatoes: 96%
Metacritic: 90/100
After Credits Scene?: No
Top Comment:
Re-sharing my thoughts on Paterson from an r/truefilm thread not too long ago:
Adored this film. I've said this in a few other threads, but I think it offers a perspective on the nature of art that, if I'm not being too naive, you're unlikely to find anywhere else. Paterson is none of the cliché's you typically find in films about artists, even the good ones - he's not a struggling visionary trying to bring their magnum opus to life, he's not a kid with a dream, he's not particularly deep or somber (at least not outwardly), and he's not charismatic in any way. He's just a listener. He absorbs the world around him from his bubble - the bus window - and it filters out onto a page in his own innately personal way. He needs no validation, attention, or praise - for him the point is the process.
I think that's an important and potentially powerful thing to put on screen. It does away with the, perhaps, dangerous notion that all great art must come from struggle or strife. Paterson says it can come from anywhere, to anyone, for any reason, even if it never leaves that persons hands. More importantly, it says that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Your creativity doesn't have to be neither passionate nor burdensome, if you don't want it to be. It says that the key, really, is just to be present and willing to accept inspiration, no matter where it originated. The mundane can often be your strongest tool.
You see this reflected in the other characters too. Laura, the stalker actor in the bar, the little girl towards the end, even Method Man - their art, or what little flashes of it we get to see, are all overtly informed by what's around them. Laura has no endgame to all her endeavors, at once endearing and irritating, she simply enjoys hopping between activities. The actor almost seems to enjoy the spectacle he puts on as he begs for the girl he loves. Method Man works on his lyrics while he does his laundry, and is open and friendly when he realises Paterson has been listening in. The little girl's worldview is innocent, without nuance, but she is neither shy nor insistent about sharing her work, she simply does, with no knowledge that Paterson is a poet too. By contrast, Paterson is the only person who is deliberately precious over his work, only indulging it from the privacy of his basement or his favourite spot. And yet he is portrayed as the most emotionally centered character in the film, a stoic. In fact, though we're aware that he's a sensitive and contemplative character by nature, the only strong emotion he ever displays is when he finds his work destroyed. Even then, Paterson doesn't sink into any kind of depression, or lose sight of all the beauty in the world. He just carries on, with the help of a kind stranger.
I had an overall point but I feel I lost it somewhere. I guess I just like that it shows that your creative pursuits don't have to take over your life, and that a creative person who doesn't feel the "burning passion" that so many serious artists talk about might see this film and realise it's okay. There's no pressure. We don't have to try and change the world with what we make, even if we want to. The point is the process.
For me, the best film of 2016. I love it more every day.
Help me understand Paterson (2016)
Main Post:
I just finished watching this about 20 min ago, and I'm lost as to how people find this to be a feel-good movie.
It seemed to me that Paterson was using poetry as a form of escapism from his mundane life. I didn't get the sense that he was happy with anything outside of writing, which he kept to himself. He drives his bus, eats alone, and goes to the bar alone each weekday. Everyone around him acts quirky but has little personality. All this made me think he was a depressed hermit struggling to live a normal life after serving in the military.
I'm probably misinterpreting the movie based on the overwhelming praise it's received. I can enjoy a good drama or art film, so I want to figure out what I'm missing here.
Top Comment:
I don’t remember it being about whether he was happy or not but it was more just a snapshot of these peoples lives that allow us to reflect on our own lives. All they do is work and live which is all most of us do anyways. We connect to him through his art though and we become passionate about his poetry because he is passionate about it. Maybe I am misunderstanding the movie but I think it was meant to highlight how we are all interconnected through art even though we live mundane and often isolated lives. I found it to me primarily positive though so perhaps you are misunderstanding something or I could be. I just found the movie to be beautifully made and a well made exercise in the art of film making. I think his struggles aren’t anymore different than anyone else’s struggles at feeling content with the mundane life we all live. We connect and escape and live through art which is what I gathered from the film.
Thoughts on “Paterson” (2016)?
Main Post:
I feel like I was predisposed to love this film. My family is originally from Paterson, I went to college in the area, I write poetry, grew up in NJ, and love Adam Driver... but it just did nothing for me. Didn’t move me, inspire me, nothing. I feel like there is a fine line between a film being quiet and contemplative and it being just a repetitive bore. Yes, I’ve read all the glowing reviews. It’s a “masterpiece,” it is “a celebration of the mundane,” etc. and I will say that there was a vibe and I didn’t hate it while watching it, but there is virtually no story, the characters are forgettable, and I feel like we learned nearly nothing about the main character other than that he likes writing, solitude, and is willing to put up with an annoying, selfish partner for seemingly the rest of his life.
Anyone else feel this way? Everyone seems to adore this film who has seen it, and I’m happy for them, but I just don’t get what makes it great.
Top Comment:
I love it. Usually movies that kind of meander without a plot can feel long to me, even ones I like, but Paterson just flies by. Such a pleasant and beautiful movie.
Paterson: "What? Is that it?!?"
Main Post:
Spoilers:
I just saw Paterson with my girlfriend last night. It was a terrific night for both of us. We walked the streets for an hour afterwards talking about it, had dinner, and were randomly served at the restaurant by the girl I went on three dates with before I started dating my girlfriend. I bring that up because it's hilarious, but also because it seemed to drive home the fact that sometimes life can actually produce happenstance just like it appears so often in film. Bumping into a character on the street, being named after a hometown, running into an ex-girlfriend, meeting a Japanese tourist who gives you a notebook.
Anyways, I had a good laugh about that and then had a long, in-depth conversation with my girlfriend about life. Something about this movie put us both in that contemplative state. So, as a film, to us, it worked.
As we sat there in the theater, letting the credits roll, I had a thought immediately: "I loved this, but I can totally see why a lot of people might not..." And on cue, someone cried out in the back of the theater: "WHAT? IS THAT IT?" As we left the theater, another couple was sitting in the back, the girl about my age, maybe a bit younger (I'm 31), talking about her experience. Essentially, she was waiting for the plot to start the entire movie, and when it didn't, she was apoplectic, having sat there in anxious anticipation for over an hour.
I related to her that I had the exact same experience watching the Tree of Life for the first time. I went with two male friends of mine (I'm a guy, so three buds in their 20s). None of us knew anything going in other than good reviews. I remember twisting in anxiety the entire film waiting for the plot to start. I remember thinking about how angry my friends must be getting, watching this 'artsy flick' with no plot. In that state of anxiety, I perceived the movie to be horrible; pretentious and over-wrought.
When I saw the movie again, without those expectations, alone, I cried. It's now one of my favorite films.
Paterson is not on the level of Tree of Life. Like it's character, it's content to sit in the middle ground of seeming-mediocrity. The acting outside of Adam Driver is... well, average. One or two bit characters (Guys on the bus), I would classify their performance as 'Amateurish,' which is my biggest gripe with the film. Nothing much happens. The poetry is not earth shattering. It's also pretty average. Paterson is not William Carlos Williams. But his poetry is raw, honest, emotional. Everything he cannot express. It amplifies his performance, because you can sometimes see the emotions ripple under his jaw. The things he notices, if you look carefully, are true poetry in life: Shadow people walking between buildings, twins, water falling like hair. The ending with the Japanese tourist could have gone sideways to me, but somehow, was pitch perfect. Paterson is not a poet, he's a bus driver. The tourist knows otherwise. The movie lays this out like it's just one simple week... but actually, it isn't. It's the week where Paterson is challenged by his girlfriend, loses his life's poetry, and is awakened by a stranger at his favorite spot to sit. Or maybe it's a week where nothing happens.
Paterson walks that extremely fine line for its whole run-time: on one side of the line, is melodrama and soap opera. On the other side of the line, nothing happens at all. On the line itself, little moments of life are building and happening and revealing themselves. As a viewer, I have tremendous sympathy for those in the audience yelling 'IS THAT IT?' Truly, I get it. And I have no desire to convince them otherwise. With a film like Tree of Life, maybe I do, because it's a top-5 film for me. With Paterson, which was a meditative night out with a girl I love very much, it's simply OK.
Maybe it doesn't hurt that I'm a music teacher and a treatment center counselor who writes and records dozens of songs that nobody will ever hear, with a girlfriend that encourages me to share them. Maybe it doesn't hurt that people say I look like Adam Driver, or that I went to college with Lena Dunham (wasn't an acquaintance) and that she said she modeled her Adam Driver boyfriend character after someone she met in college, and his character in Girls reminds me of myself during those years. Maybe there will be no way for me to totally disassociate myself from these thoughts as I watch these movies from his expanding career. Maybe that's why I'll never have total objective perspective on a movie like Paterson, and therefore my enjoyment of it is suspect, and really it is a pretentious little movie where nothing happens.
Other things of note: all the little plotlines that could have happened are neatly subverted: will he break up with his girlfriend? Is she irresponsible with money? Is she an awful cook? All subverted. Will his bus break down? Will there be an accident? Will it be traumatic and crazy? Subverted. What about the little girl and her poetry? She doesn't come back. The emotional guy at the bar? He's the opposite of Paterson. Still, nothing much happens with him. The only plot that really happens is that Paterson says he'll copy his poems on Sunday, and his poetry is destroyed on Saturday, and when he goes on a walk, he meets the tourist. Is it too much happenstance? Maybe. Maybe a film like this needs exactly one moment of happenstance just to tie it together. It's poetic, after all.
Anyways. This post is not a endorsement or indictment of the movie. It's just the morning-after thoughts. Yours?
Top Comment:
Adored this film. I've said this in a few other threads, but I think it offers a perspective on the nature of art that, if I'm not being too naive, you're unlikely to find anywhere else. Paterson is none of the cliché's you typically find in films about artists, even the good ones - he's not a struggling visionary trying to bring their magnum opus to life, he's not a kid with a dream, he's not particularly deep or somber (at least not outwardly), and he's not charismatic in any way. He's just a listener. He absorbs the world around him from his bubble - the bus window - and it filters out onto a page in his own innately personal way. He needs no validation, attention, or praise - for him the point is the process.
I think that's an important and potentially powerful thing to put on screen. It does away with the, perhaps, dangerous notion that all great art must come from struggle or strife. Paterson says it can come from anywhere, to anyone, for any reason, even if it never leaves that persons hands. More importantly, it says that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Your creativity doesn't have to be neither passionate nor burdensome, if you don't want it to be. It says that the key, really, is just to be present and willing to accept inspiration, no matter where it originated. The mundane can often be your strongest tool.
You see this reflected in the other characters too. Laura, the stalker actor in the bar, the little girl towards the end, even Method Man - their art, or what little flashes of it we get to see, are all overtly informed by what's around them. Laura has no endgame to all her endeavors, at once endearing and irritating, she simply enjoys hopping between activities. The actor almost seems to enjoy the spectacle he puts on as he begs for the girl he loves. Method Man works on his lyrics while he does his laundry, and is open and friendly when he realises Paterson has been listening in. The little girl's worldview is innocent, without nuance, but she is neither shy nor insistent about sharing her work, she simply does, with no knowledge that Paterson is a poet too. By contrast, Paterson is the only person who is deliberately precious over his work, only indulging it from the privacy of his basement or his favourite spot. And yet he is portrayed as the most emotionally centered character in the film, a stoic. In fact, though we're aware that he's a sensitive and contemplative character by nature, the only strong emotion he ever displays is when he finds his work destroyed. Even then, Paterson doesn't sink into any kind of depression, or lose sight of all the beauty in the world. He just carries on, with the help of a kind stranger.
I had an overall point but I feel I lost it somewhere. I guess I just like that it shows that your creative pursuits don't have to take over your life, and that a creative person who doesn't feel the "burning passion" that so many serious artists talk about might see this film and realise it's okay. There's no pressure. We don't have to try and change the world with what we make, even if we want to. The point is the process.
Paterson(2016) I'm just grateful.
Main Post:
It's just a simple gift of a movie that emulates how a happy fulfilled man who happens to love poetry would live his life. While showing us his life we also get to enjoy his craft and process.
I remember I really disliked Marvin the dog when I first watched this movie. Because I was watching the first time from Patersons perspective and he also never cared for the grumpy goofball.
But the third time, recently, I realized Paterson was the one who took all the attention and love from Laura. From Marvin's perspective, Paterson was the intruder. Before Paterson, Marvin was the center of all the love and attention.
It's basically a side plot about two dudes vying for the love of our damsel. I actually love that he was anthropomorphized to such an extent that we get to see his every grumpy grunt and disapproval when she loves Paterson more than Marvin. He makes a point at bending the letter box just to bother Paterson.
There's a genre in anime called "slice of life". I feel that defines these movies more simply and aptly, where we are not experiencing any drama or story, rather just a slice of their simple life. I'm so glad we were gifted such a sweet movie.
Thank you Jim Jarmush.
Top Comment:
Paterson will always be one of my favourite movies.
Amongst all the films about serial killers, big events and the such, there's this one about a dude that is living his life and seems pretty content about it. Nothing really happens and I was shocked (in a good way) because of that when I first watched it. Probably one of, if not the best, experiences I had watching a movie.
Paterson (2016): My theory completely changed the way I viewed this film.
Main Post:
So after further evaluation, I’ve come to realize the reason why all of y’all like this movie is probably very different than why I love this film. This is my first time watching it, without any prior knowledge or context. I honestly thought homeboy was a UPS driver prior to going in. I thought the movie was extremely fascinating due to the power of creation and thought, as well as passive acknowledgement. My theory on this film makes this movie so much more interesting than if I took it for face value. It’s not really my type of film if everything you see is true. However, I feel like this blatantly isn’t the case.
First bomb I’m going to drop is, his wife is dead. Probably months and maybe years before this week in Patterson’s life takes place. What we see is just his memories of the best versions of herself. It’s possible, since he’s so routine heavy, that every single week is the same with her actions of cupcake baking and seeing a black and white old movie. The first tell that she is dead, she’s never seen interacting with anybody else except Paterson. Even when she “leaves” it’s never given concrete evidence. Second tell, she gives him a lot of knowledge he already knows. Which seems to be a reoccurring theme. A sort of blending the walls of reality and his mental simulation. Third tell, she is extremely inhumanly pleasant, perfect some might describe. She does not get upset or worried that he goes to the bar every weeknight. Or the fact he leaves the dog chained up outside. When she’s home all day and could walk the dog. She is his conscious or psyche. She’s constantly reminding him to walk Marvin or come up from the basement to eat/make dinner. Fourth, Marvin growls anytime he interacts with “Laura”. It’s possible that marvin misses her and anything Paterson does that he would have done When she was alive, sets him off. Like when Paterson picks up the guitar he gives a growl. The way Paterson looks at the guitar isn’t as if it’s a new guitar but rather one he has seen many times and is reminiscing about. Fifth and final is my prediction of how: I think she died while driving and texting. That’s why he doesn’t have a cell phone, nor does he drive to work, when clearly it is shown he has a car in his garage. Plus, he’s seen writing a poem about thinking about other women. This is him writing a plight about how he can’t forget or move on from her. He can’t get her out of his mind. Lastly, she is everything he is not. She was extremely creative and artistic and he is very bland and mundane. I don’t believe he took up poetry until she died. It was his way of trying to be more like her. That’s why that secret notebook meant so much to him. She never read any of the poems because he was writing them for a deceased her.
Second bomb I’m going to drop, his nightly visits to the bar are in his head. The bar is certainly there, and perhaps he does visit the bar? Not convinced he actually does, since hes never shown leaving or returning home from it. However, for certain what happens inside the bar is fictional of his own creation. Paterson appears to be a very observant deep thinker. Many of the things he sees every day or in his past get reflected and drawn out in the Bar. The bartender brings up things that Paterson already knows about every time. Like the Costello statue he drives past every day on his bus route. I believe Paterson is just his work nickname because that’s the route he takes but he wants to be called that so he simulates it as his real name. Furthermore, the two signs of negative relationships, the “Romeo and Juliet” and the bartender and his wife with the savings money, are just Paterson replaying the past negative situations with Laura. He doesn’t want to imagine it happened with her, so he projects it on other people. He wants to believe it was perfect before she died, when in fact it was much worse than he wants to remember. She fell out of love with him. Furthermore, the whole heroic gun thing, is probably a allegory of him wanting/trying to kill himself when she wanted to leave him. Him taking the gun away from “Romeo” was doing what he wished he would have done when he had similar thoughts. Then everyone viewing him as heroic was him just boosting his ego when in fact that never happened, perhaps an allusion to his time in the Marines?
His final poem, definitely has a gentle guiding to this false reality he’s creating when Paterson writes, “As if the rest of the song didn’t have to be there”. Basically saying, his wife isn’t there or even though he’s doing the same things as when she was there (i.e. making the same lunch as she did) that he’s imagining it. The twin theme is one that has to reflect with duplicate or false realities. Like his Sit down with the young girl who was a poet, never actually happened. There was no twin. He was just writing a poem and she happened to be there. It doesn’t make sense for a 12 year old girl to use terms like “hair on a young girls shoulders”. Those descriptors sound much more like someone observing behavior from a distance much like Paterson was. And the twin was never actually seen entering the car to leave anyways. The two kids from Moonrise kingdom literally reprise their roles and attitude while on the bus. This is him projecting a false reality again. More than merely listening in he is taking other mediums and placing them into his world that he’s forced into. Maybe if she wasn’t wearing the same eyeliner as she did in the movie or maybe if she wasn’t dominating the conversation with him just gently guiding it, then maybe it could be a coincidence but too specific.
Top Comment:
I find it very interesting how you interpret Paterson as a surreal, abstract piece, while most viewers find it an exercise in minimalism. I'll admit your claims sounded a bit absurd at first, but your evidence is well thought-out.
That said, I'm not convinced Paterson is anything more than the exercise in minimalism that most viewers make it out to be, and therein lies the beauty. While there's not any great evidence that your theory is incorrect, there certainly doesn't seem to be much evidence that that is what Jarmusch was going for. And I think it simply works better as a glance into the life of an individual.
One thing I would criticize about your points, however, is that you make a lot of claims based on what the film left out. That's not a very good method in my opinion, since films have to leave things out all the time due to the runtime; those things being left out is not evidence for your theory, as much as it is evidence that Jarmusch found them insignificant.
Third tell, she is extremely inhumanly pleasant, perfect some might describe
I don't think so. She's certainly passionate, but she's also somewhat directionless. In a lot of ways she's the antithesis to Paterson. She's flawed, but he loves her warts and all.
You're certainly entitled to your interpretation, and you support it well, but I don't think it's the best-supported interpretation. I just got an overwhelming sense of peace and contentment from Paterson, and can't really see it being interpreted as sadness and/or psychosis.
Paterson
Main Post:
Anyone see this 2016 film starring Adam Driver? I think his character has figured out simple living, such a lovely, inspiring movie.
Top Comment:
One of my absolute favourites. Such a gentle, simple, inspiring movie that showcases the joy in small pleasures!
Not only did I enjoy watching "Paterson," but I also walked away from the movie wanting to treat people the way Paterson (Adam Driver) treats people. Very heart-warming and kind movie.
Main Post:
Adam Driver shines as Paterson, a simple man who works as a bus driver. When I say simple man, he doesn't even drive a car to work. He takes his lunch in a lunch pail. He drinks exactly one beer every night at his favorite bar. He also writes vivid poetry through his observations of life. In contrast, his wife is very eccentric and creative. She brings him ideas most people would brush off as naive. Yet Paterson offers nothing but support. Watch this movie. Watch how he treats people. It's inspirational.
Paterson has a 95% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and 90/100 on Metacritic.
Top Comment:
I was so worried someone was going to steal his dog outside the bar every night. I really enjoyed the movie.