Babylon

Babylon

A tale of outsized ambition and outrageous excess, tracing the rise and fall of multiple characters in an era of unbridled decadence and depravity during Hollywood's transition from silent films and to sound films in the late 1920s.

  • Released: 2022-12-23
  • Runtime: 188 minutes
  • Genre: Comedy, Drama
  • Stars: Diego Calva, Cici Lau, James Wellington, Trisha Simmons, Armando Cosio, Taylor Nichols, Todd Giebenhain, Bregje Heinen, Li Jun Li, Kaia Gerber, Frederick Koehler, Vanessa Bednar, Douglas Fruchey, Aurielle Simmons, Margot Robbie, Jimmy Ortega, Circus-Szalewski, Samara Weaving, Katia Gomez, Hayley Huntley
  • Director: Damien Chazelle
 Comments
  • passenger88 - 10 June 2024
    Hollywood Fallacies by Damien Chazelle
    This is nothing more than one more of the savage and exacerbated satires that came from Mel Brooks, through Natural Born Killers, Woody Allen's Celebrity and revived in The Wolf of Wall Street, these types of films make money today, and Chazelle was no stranger, from his hand this script came out with many lies about Hollywood, and I really think that the director would have seen a hundred documentaries and read many books, but it is known that many of those excesses are fallacies, Chazelle knows that if he had If this happened, there would not have been Hollywood today. The film follows many generic scenes through stories previously told, even the ending seems taken from some Biopic made for television. It would be fair to say that the cinematography is very good but not surprising, in the sex scenes Chazelle did not go further, which is strange due to the overflow of the subject matter here, but he directed it well and Margot Robbie always gave her best as an actress . But we remind Chazelle that Hollywood is not lost or abandoned, decadent, vicious, disgusting, or delinquent, as he thinks it is, and that remembering how everything was at the beginning was not the best, because the best has always been and will be to come.
  • pobergoff - 29 April 2024
    best movie 2022
    This is the first time I didn't notice how 3 hours of the movie went by. The timing of the music and the movement of the characters are so consistent that your brain can't stop receiving dopamine. This is the only film that really managed to show the natural history of hollywood. I'm very disappointed that this movie failed at the box office. I hope this doesn't affect Chazelle's next films. I'm so overwhelmed with emotions that I don't want to spoil anything, you need to watch it. Trust me it's worth it. This is what a quality movie attraction should look like.

    P.s. Unless you're a prude and afraid of the sight of naked breasts or drugs.
  • jamespmadison-52401 - 20 February 2024
    Make it stop!
    In the first five minutes of this movie, you see a elephant take a dump on a guy's head. I'm assuming that this a metaphor for the entire movie that follows. The director is the elephant, and we are the guy covered in elephant dung. And the director just keeps on dumping more and more dung on us. Imagine the basic plot of "Singin" In The Rain" (movie studio goes from silents to talkies) but with no music, wit, charm or talent. Imagine beautiful people like Brad and Margot used as window dressing for three hours of pompous excess. Unsexy sex. Enough swearing for three Scorsese movies. Completely pointless scenes that go on forever. Repulsive and annoying characters you want to slap. People that liked this movie may need therapy. I gave the two stars because some lunatic wrote a check that financed this dreck, and I'm always amazed when I watch a failure this gloriously bad. I doubt if the director can overcome this truly repulsive fiasco.

    Enjoy!
  • filmtravel101 - 11 January 2023
    Great cast and directing but script too long and needs editing
    I am a huge fan of Damien Chazelle, and I was really looking forward to this ode to Hollywood , especially after loving whiplash and La La Land and first man, and truly wondered if this was going to be a masterpiece or another flop like Amsterdam, which was yet another film that seems to fall into the same category as this one - a bloated confusing script that requires loads of editing.

    For some reason it seems like some of these star directors just don't have the ability to edit their scripts/ films in a cohesive manner that removes the messiness does not move the story forward in an entertaining and fulfilling manner to complete the message and journey of the film. Where are the producers to guide the captain in troubled waters when they miss their mark - much like Brad Pitts character that gets laughed at in his last film.

    Instead we end up with this overindulgent narcissistic, 3+ hour bloated film that instead of being a master piece it ends up being a missed opportunity and sadly enough - a mediocre clumsy film.

    I felt like the Director tried to cover way too many characters and an epic amount of a timeline with a massive goal of trying to make a historical film about Hollywood from the 1920s to the 1960s or modern day for that matter and it was way too much for the writer/director to accomplish in one film.

    The film boogie nights was initially a 3+ hour bloated film and it was turned into 2 1/2 hour masterpiece thanks due to the Producer providing proper guidance to reduce the directors vision to a tighter 2.4 hours and it was much more effective and a masterpiece.

    Unfortunately this film requires similar direction yet somehow it was allowed to be released in its entirety which is commendable yet it fails in a painful manner where people in the theatre are looking at the time on their phones wondering when it's going to move forward and end the misery of such pointless sloppiness.

    The film has many wonderful elements and beautiful moments, and the cinematography is fantastic and the acting is stellar - and the music had some solid moments yet I felt it had too many elements, similar to La La Land that just did not work , but still these are minor issues compared to so many bloated scenes that could've been cut - like the dungeon scene with Tobey Maguire was totally unnecessary, Sidney Palmer's role did not really add much flair to the whole story, the opening scene was almost 30 minutes long that could've been cut down - but overall the one part that really did carry the film was Diego Calvers Manny Torres character was the one surprising element that carries the film from beginning to end - and the love story with him and Nellie Laroys character was reduced to the point that it was meaningless.

    I really enjoyed Jean Smart's character Eleanor Saint John scene with Brad Pitt which pretty much depicted the whole film storyline - and the ending was simply a botched attempt to somehow blend it all together yet by this time it feels so out of place with this lame self indulgent reference to the timeline of all Hollywood films even modern ones , which seems a bit far-fetched for a film that is such a flop and missed opportunity that it doesn't deserve to even be in the caliber of the films it's mentioning.

    I give it 5 stars because it was such a wonderful attempt to make a Hollywood tribute film but unlike so many other films have done a better job this one just felt like an overbloated complex mess,

    Damien Chazelle is a master director and storyteller so looking forward to his next film and maybe the director will learn lessons from this one and maybe his next film will be more realistic and within his grasp as this film could've easily been three feature films or a shorter length masterpiece.

    5 stars.
  • s0apt0ken - 9 January 2023
    Babylon: The Most Magical Place in the World
    Babylon makes up for its convoluted message and unsure direction with beautiful and creative cinematography, terrific acting, and pure obscene ambition. From the very first scene, Babylon makes itself clear of what it wants to be. The disgusting (and hilarious) opening sequence is followed by an even more chaotic and obscene party sequence that both properly introduces the numerous colorful characters that inhabit Damien Chazelle's absurd world, along with showcasing the pure chaos that we should expect throughout the rest of the movie. And the expectations he sets for us are definitely met, because the first half of the movie is both absolute confused debauchery and some the best cinema I've ever seen. However, unfortunately it does lose a lot of steam in the second half, which isn't unexpected, but still disappointing. Luckily, it regains some traction in a third act that may not be as exciting as the first half of the, but still a delivers a proper and tragic ending to an absurd movie.

    While the first half of the movie could have stood on it's own without the participation of the terrific actors, I attribute the entire success of the second half of the movie to the participation of the main actors, especially Margot Robbie, who absolutely steals the show. Every moment she's on screen, the movie becomes better in every way. Her performance manages to be both all over the place and streamlined, properly portraying her bipolar and surface, and adding real depth to the already interesting character. From the moment she crashes onto to screen to the moment she walks off into the darkness, the movie is hers. That is not to discount the other academy award worthy performances delivered by Brad Pitt, Diego Calvra, and Jean Smart. Each performance could've been enough to carry this movie, but they all pale in comparison to Margot Robbie.

    While Babylon is often inconsistent, one particular story presents itself as a near perfect character arc. While the stories of Margot Robbie and Diego Calvra are chaotic and at times incoherent, the story of Brad Pitt's character is a perfect and sad story of how the biggest star in the world slowly gets left behind and becomes a thing of the past. This long and drawn out trajest serves as the majestic emotional core of the movie.

    Now, I've talked about the chaotic story and great acting, but I haven't really mentioned the way it's all presented: the cinematography is incredible. It shifts between long extended shots that portray the disorder being shown on screen, and single camera shots that feel a lot like classic shots from the silent film era. One shot in particular is one of the most mind blowingly beautiful and creative shots I have ever seen.

    Babylon is one of the craziest and most enjoyable films I've seen in a very long time, and it definitely deserves an academy award. However, because of a slower second act, I'm only giving it an 89/100. Still great, and I hope to see it again in theaters.
  • halleyscomet-13378 - 5 January 2023
    A disgusting movie
    This movie was gross, disgusting, vulgar with so much bad language. I don't find it entertaining to see someone eat a live rat. I kept thinking it would get better but the whole movie was terrible! The acting was not bad but I can't believe back in the 1920's people were snorting cocaine and a lot of sex and partying like crazy! Brad Pitts last two movies sucked. I was totally shocked having all this unnecessary filth about the transition of silent movies to speaking movies. Why? I had no idea the movie would be so vile. I wouldn't have paid to see it. I didn't see the end. We walked out of the theater.
  • scottycl-28388 - 3 January 2023
    a mess
    Music was wonderful. Costumes were superb. Set decoration excellent. Appliances excellent. Secondary character were well selected. Items like period appropriate automobiles of the 1930's perfectly selected and positioned. There were a lot of them. Huge number of extras in several scenes well directed and positioned. Incredible amount of money invested, truly awesome production values top to bottom. I always like to break down moviemaking into its component parts other than script and directing. Now the awful reviews. At least 1.5 hours too long. Several subplots could have been eliminated without affecting the overall theme of the movie. Always a bad sign. Numerous thoroughly disgusting scenes could have been eliminated with zero affect on the plot or character development of the main characters. Another bad sign. The overall arch of the movie took several bizarre turns which made no sense at all, and conclusively made this movie unrecommendable at anyone. Did not connect with any of the main characters. Several scenes of making the first 1930's talkie was fun to watch. The directing was excellent for what the script calls for but the script overall was a waste of time and effort. The director was obviously closely involved with the writing of the script, so he is blame for the awfulness of the movie.
  • bartgodboy - 2 January 2023
    Old Hollywood debauchery
    What a wild ride! Damien Chazelle hits another home run with this movie. Captivating, visually dazzling, performances who shined on the screen and a story that kept refreshing itself. I can see why the mixed reception tho, it is kind of all over the place at times but for any film lover, this movie is a true experience.

    Cinematography was pristine. The acting was perfect all around. Chazelle's direction could be felt at times with his signature whip pans but there was clear investement in the story. The character's relationships were all well depicted.

    I gotta say tho, that last half hour was kind of depressing.

    Go see this if you love movies. This is the kind of movie experiences we need more of.
  • SimmyDontPlayDat - 1 January 2023
    Wasted my time intentionally
    Much of the movie was good. As in the first two hours or so. Chop off the last hour and it would probably be much better.

    I don't mind the excess and there was some really cringeworthy scenes that got you prepared for what you had in store. Ultimately it's a rags-to-riches-to-rags story. Which I can appreciate. But the end of the story got very weird and dark. And the ending turned into this annoying mishmash of edits which caused the audience to laugh.

    I personally felt annoyed that my time was wasted. As if the film makers were intentionally dragging it out to take out some frustrations on movie goers. It felt disrespectful intentionally. It's a very strange feeling to have from a movie and I've never felt before.

    I wouldn't waste my time with this unless you want to cut it off after a couple hours.
  • brianjohnson-20043 - 30 December 2022
    Tried to be too much
    This film is gross and odd and vulgar from the start. There is an initial party sequence which felt to me like I was watching a depiction of the Garden of Earthly Delights painting. It didn't feel like a genuine depiction of a rich Hollywood 1920s party. More like a rich 1960s-present day party. I didn't get a lot of humor from it or poignance. It was a clue for much of what was to come within the movie.

    Maybe I'm just an idiot, but the style just felt odd to me. I didn't find it funny. It sometimes felt dramatic. But it didn't seem like we were ever meant to take a dramatic scene as too dramatic or the comedic moments especially didn't seem like they were meant to be too comedic. So it mostly felt uncomfortable and unrealistic in spite of certain issues being real and important deep issues for society.

    Maybe if more of it the events depicting actual actors or films, I would have supported the style of the filming and storytelling. But most of the movies and characters were made-up. Yet they still seemed uninterestingly like characters seen in a million other movies about artists trying to make it in an indifferent capitalistic world.

    I did like some of the commentary at the end of the film when three timeline made it to the early 50s after skipping about 20 years. But it wasn't enough to salvage the movie. And it didn't seem as clever as they might have been hoping for it to seem.

    There was so much going on that it was hard to grasp a message or a clear point to what we were being presented-with.

    The busy style made it hard for me to take the overall story too seriously. But it also had all 3 main characters dealing with dramatic narratives and obstacles. Plus a couple smaller side characters also dealing with dramatic obstacles.

    I didn't feel that they adequately showed one of the main characters attain his success. He was just suddenly a success. I didn't see much humor or cleverness to the way these different characters existed. Their storylines didn't really come together enough to make it feel like an audience benefited by all of them being explored the way they were presented in this film. Margo Robbie and Diego Calva were good companion characters through the majority of the film. Brad Pitt and especially the two or three smaller side characters didn't seem very meaningful to most the overall story. I enjoyed Toby McGwire's cameo part. But it wasn't going to save the movie.

    I think I overall just wanted to feel like I knew what they were doing so I could maybe enjoy and appreciate their intent and execution if it was good. And in the end I just didn't feel that it was understandable to have the chance of being good. If felt like the script was a first draft of too many ideas by too many writers. And no one took charge and streamlined the entire product into something worth consuming and appreciating. There were good moments from time to time. Which is why I gave it more than 1-3 stars. But those moments seemed to exist in spite of the rest of the movie's troubles.