I'm not picking sides since I haven't seen 2:37, but Elephant did pay homage to the style from the ORIGINAL Elephant(1987) Well, at least Gus Van Sant mentioned Elephant when filming Elephant.
@elchamber I've seen both, and Gus van Sant was thanked by 2:37's director Murali Thalluri in the final credits. Seems like its just a lot of paying homage to me ;-)
i've seen both films... and they are both touching works of art and yes there similarities are plentiful but the context is different as elephant is supposed to be a remake of the events of columbine (done very poorly as for historical accuracy) and 2:37 is about suicide and one major difference i feel is the ending as in elephant it's expected in 2:37 it catches you completely of guard but still they are both great great movies neither of which deserves slander
fuck it i like both films. actually maybe i like 2:37 better because a bunch of characters were seriously developed and I didn't know exactly what would happen at the end. Like I had an idea that someone would kill themself at 2:37 but it wasn't as obvious as Elephant's ending. Elephant left me wanting more because it ended quite abruptly and because I wanted to know the blond kid's deal. either way Gus Van Sant knew what he was doing and 2:37 was great as well.
"Polytechnique" diverges from Elephant in terms of character development, narrative style and emotional atmosphere; however I was curious to see your take on all the cinematographic parallels.
elephant was hardly related to comlumbine so dont anyone cop out behind: "oh elephant mimicked columbine" most of the stuff in elephant is made up. the only connection was some kids shot up a school. if you wanna boil it down elephant came out before 2:37 let that settle your quarrel.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Slow motion is hardly something to compare, 2:37 used slow motion through opening credits. And the website thing isn't a big deal, a lot of films have that. Talking about homosexuality when there are homosexual characters isn't too uncommon either. As for the sounds, it was done by the same sound director.
Omg, so........I saw 2.37 for the first time today....and I've seen Elephant a dozen times because I own it.....but oh gosh. I picked up similarities when I first starter 2.37. I gotta say though, I love both movies, but each for different reasons. Idk. Hard to explain. So Elephant mimicked Columbine, and 2.37 mimicked Elephant. Whats next?
iv seen both many times, 2:37 has great dialog and character development throughout, but the end is a little anti climatic.
elephant has great scenes with Eric and Dylan but most of the movie is pretty boring, most of it is just people walking and not saying anything except the occasional mundane bullshit like "hay man how are you"
However, I likes it much more than elephant, for a few big reasons.
The main things that elephants lacks are character and theme development. They spend most of the movie watching characters walk around, where as in 2:37, there is more dialogue, and the characters personalities become evident.
If elephant had the characters converse more, it would have been much, much better.
i actually prefer 2:37 to Elephant just because 2:37 kind of surprises you more about who kills themself and in Elephant you can pretty much predict straight away who shoots up the school.
but then again i'd already heard a loy about Elephant before i saw the movie so it was kind of ruined for me.
I'm also Australian and enjoyed seeing a pretty good aussie film haha plus my mum dated Gary Sweet ages ago but that has nothing to do with anything.
this stuff is taken out of context dumbass. when the teacher says "someone shooting up the whole school", it was an example. the actual essay was about incest. regardless, 2:37 is a way better movie with more meaning and deeper issues
tsss Eric Satie's music is no "classic". just because it's slow and it use piano does not make it "classic". He invented the bases of the modern music, with Debussy and a few others. Calling him a classic compositer is an insult to his memory.
2:37 reused a lot of the cinematography and a few of the story elements, yeah. I'm not gonna lie and say I think 2:37 is extremely original, but overall the plot was pretty different, and the whole interview narrative thing definitely separated them enough for me to be cool with it. As for all the audio, I mean they had the same audio engineer or whatever, you can't blame them much for that similarity
Yes - it's Eric Satie's Gymnopedie. If you listen carefully to the credit song "Don't Forget Me" written by Chloe Moldovan, uses snippets of that tune in her song. It's amazing. overall, this movie has great music - one thing Elephant DOESN'T have.
i enjoyed both of these movies but i think that thalluri's is a little more special because it's very personal for him. it was inspired by the death of his friend that killed herself at 2:37 in the afternoon. the character of kelly is based on her.
i agree that there are a lot of similarities but there is nothing wrong with being inspired & gus van sant has not complained, so why is everyone else?
and to be fair, you've put together even the tiniest similarites, like girls pulling shirts over their heads? please, you might as well call every movie in history a copy if you're going to focus on silly things like that ...
There is a difference between homage and rip-off, and in my opinion this movie tips heavily towards the latter.
If you can make a video that shows the same level of similarities in terms of aesthetics (both visual and sound design) and themes using two unrelated films, I'd love to see it. Seriously.
i actually worked on 2:37 and it was common knowledge that murhali got his ideas from elephant. he would say that the cinematography will be much like that in elephant. he says his story was original but the cinematography was defineately a copy .
LOL! I got what they were trying to DO! Maybe they were trying to do what the Elephant director director did-wait-isn't he the guy who made exact shot by shot remake of phsyco? That might be a diffrent guy, but if it is the same guy, maybe they wanted to make an almost shot by shot remake of one of his own movies. To express anger out of remaking a classic perhaps? Oy maybe they just felt like it or had no other ideas.
the children, birds and sounds in the background probably is just a result of having the same sound editor on both films.
the only thing I thought was a bit of an obvious rip was the talk about homosexuality.
but yes I agree the films have a close resemblence, as many films do with other films in their genre. I think what this is is just the opening up of a new situational based observational subgenre of drama, for which gus van sant will get the credit has having pioneered.
People are WAY too eager to call ANY film a copy just beacause there are a few similarities, but for me, anyone that calls a film a copy just looks stupid & pretentious if the films don't even have any similarity in plot - and in this example, of course, 2:37 is character-driven, whereas Elephant is event-driven, so I couldn't disagree more. Also, every time you jump on a film website there are people making these kind of unjustified accusations just so they can use the word "derivative"! :P
2:37 was a really good movie. i think it was better than elephant becuz it went more in depth. in elephant u dont get 2 c how all the characters r important. like the 1 girl who got shot in the library. i nevr could figure out y she was wearing pants in gym class. however, in 2:37 were not told much about the girl who kills herself either. all in all they r still both good movies
What's your problem with this great film? It's like you have something against the director! This is one of the greatest films out there dealing with real subject matter.... I compared both films and yes he copied the technique but it's a better story in the end. In Elephant the characters felt unemotional you couldn't connect to any of them it was detatched..... In 2.37 I felt like I could relate to all the characters it was real!!!
This is the first real film that has dealt with an issue like suicide for what it really is...... it isn't glamourised it just is..... I mean if a movie like this can make people discuss an otherwise taboo subject and prevent one suicide happening then the creator diserves full credit. It really makes me sad to see people who have no idea how important a film like this is especially to teenagers.
I sympathise with you a little because your heart is in the right place, but saying 2:37 will save lives seems to be repeating its marketing hype rather than anything based in reality.
2:37 has an R18+ rating in Australia because mental health experts are concerned the graphic suicide depiction would trigger copycats suicides in vulnerable teens, not act as a deterrent.
Teenage suicides had already been dropping for 10 years to 30+ year lows without 2:37. I'm not convinced it was important.
I never saw the advertisements for this movie but if this movie can help people realise what they are feeling isn't wrong or stupid... or helps someone notice the signs that their friend is in trouble then it's definatley helping in one way or another.
And The R18+ wasn't just for the suicide scene it was for the rape scene as well. But come on how many people have you heard of that have committed suicide cause of this film...
And I'll tell you now just cause it's rated R doesn't mean people under 18 aren't gonna watch it... I did at 17. And my 16 year old sister rented and watched it last week and no neither of us went "hey... that suicide scene looks fun let's go try it out". Instead... we saw the truth that suicide isn't glamourous it just happens and could happen to anyone. What's the harm in knowing that? Guess where going to agree to disagree then hey!
Your suicide stats. which country are you basing that on?
The harm is the medical literature shows instances of suicide in the media can trigger copycat deaths in high-risk teens, especially if the location and method are shown.
The Mindframe media initiative in Australia came in 10 years ago to depict suicide in responsible manner.
Teen suicides have since gone down. True, correlation isn't always causation, but it hasn't done any harm.
Those stats were for Australia, but I understand the trend has been similar for most of the developed world.
Yes.... but again there are no suicide connections with this film and I'm sure alot of teenagers have probably watched it. If a teens at risk of suicide I don't think watching this film is going to be the catalyst... If someone wants to check out a how to guide we've got the internet which seems to be what most teens turn to... Are we going to blame Myspace, YT, Google? Think about all the copycat suicides in the UK.
I believe that the suicide scene in the movie was done responsibly in a way... You can't tell me that that scene looked like fun? In the end she's pleading for help wishing she hadn't slit her wrists.... she's in pain. They made it look like what suicide is they didn't glamourise it(like in most movies) it just was... You can't tell me that a person would watch that even a high-risk person and want to do that?....
You had essentially paraphrased the director's marketing spiel, which made me think you might have heard it before.
For an anti-suicide film, 2:37 misses some important things, like showing the terrible extended impact of suicide on the family. It also doesn't show any strategies for coping with stressful situations or what warning signs others should look for.
As far as I can see, telling people to just "be aware", even if well-meaning, is pretty useless if they don't know what to look for.
Okay so I'm like replying section by section and have written a whole lot.lol...
I know this movie misses alot but again it's only a movie it can only go on for so long and maybe next time someone else will make a movie on the after affects of suicide... but again this is just a movie it's not a self help guide... the director's just telling a story that he needed to tell.... And I guess when watching the movie I just got it... it all just clicked.
The movie got it's point across. Suicide can happen to anyone! And maybe by watching this film people will become more aware of this.. the suicide rate may be down but it still happens all around us.. ofcourse were not gonna know about it they don't broadcast it on the news now do they.. unless it's a cluster like in the UK.
Guess we're gonna have to agree to disagee:)) Everyone has there own opinions that's what's makes us who we are. As long as you don't say State's Evidence was a better more realistic film I'll be happy.lol:))
It sounds like you've never seen an after school special or a series like Degrassi. There's actually quite a few works out there that explore teenage issues in a naturalistic manner.
I found the characters in 2:37 to be rather cliche and one-dimensional. This might make them easier to understand them, but I don't think it adds anything to the empathy or realism. Let's agree to disagree.
No I've seen Degrassi..... before they cancelled it.... and I don't think you can compare this movie to a show like that. They are totally different. This movie is here to make people aware of an issue. SUICIDE an act no one talks about... You must know one person (if not you yourself) that has gone through at least one of the issues the kids in this movie went through..... and what are we doing now.... talking about this film so I guess it's had to have some effect even on you.
Degrassi is actually still going strong, and has been going, on and off, in some form since 1980.
Both it and 2:37 are vehicles for examining extreme cases of teen issues. Degrassi has at some point looked at the same issues as 2:37: suicide, sexual orientation, drugs, rape etc. so they're not completely different.
My interest in the film lies in its abundant similarities to Elephant and the dodgy way it was promoted. But the potential irony of its anti-suicide message is also interesting.
Yeah...but they don't show it in Australia anymore only The N I think.... and yes I know there the same thing but 2:37 is a movie goes for about an hour and a half and Degrassi:Next Generation has been going on for what is it now 7 Seasons... which is what I meant the movie is not going to be able to look into this issue as thoroughly as a t.v. show cause there isn't major character build up... it can't be as indepth... it's trying to get everyones point of view in a limited amount of time....
And as for how it was promoted I guess I can't really argue with that cause I never saw the advertisements just the movie.
And I'm not saying Elephant isn't a great film and techniques weren't copied cause obviously they were. But I guess what I'm trying to say is how many suicide films are there that are just about suicide not shootings or anything else just suicide with no other implications.... does that make sense. The most obvious person is never the one that kills themself...
I saw Elephant before 2:37 and even as the opening sequence of 2:37 came on I thought 'Damn, I remember this style from somewhere'. Then I looked up to my movie shelf and saw the DVD of Elephant and thought 'oh yeah, that.'
When I was done with 2:37 I watched Elephant again and I thought, 'shit that 2:37 flick was a plain copy' Its just ones a teen shooting, and ones a teen suicide. Both of which happen pretty often.
I heard almost all of these similarities while watching 2:37. I mean, it doesn't make me hate the movie or anything; I still really enjoyed it. It was just funny to listen and hear the sounds and think back to where they were in Elephant.
i'm not quite sure i understand your point in these videos. yes, the movies have very similar music/sound, and they were done by the same person.
but the movies are about two completely different things- suicide and school shootings.
while i'll give you that some scenes do seem very similar, i think a few of these were quite a stretch. you were matching them up as though they went together, when really they looked nothing alike.
I think that 2h37 gets more close to reality than elephant you can see shotting on a school once or twice but suicide it's a big problem on all students I really enjoy the movie, I'm 16 and , i think that it's a reality in all countries
The reality, according to the WHO, is that in most countries children and teenagers are actually the demographics with the lowest suicide rates compared to the rest of the population.
Suicide in general is a problem, teenage suicide is a small fraction of that problem.
Elephant didn't try to be realistic. It's an art film, plain and simple. I don't think Gus Van Sant intended for teenagers be able to sympathize with the events of Elephant.
Hmm, why bother with 2:37 if Elephant is a great film anyway? I was quite interested in it but now I don't care. I love Elephant, and I dont want to see this obvious rip off.
it looks to me like 2:37 take every subtle aspect and theme from Elephant and thrusts it into your face to make it all more obvious thus, taking the thought provoking element away. Basically, is 2:37 just Elephant for dumb people? Meh I shouldnt be judging when I havent even seen 2:37. and dont plan to. haha
From the sheer number of similarities, I think 2:37 tries to copy as many elements of Elephant as it can get away with, probably to trying to emulate its credibility.
But 2:37 fails to capture the subtle, reflective atmosphere of Elephant, supplanting it with dreary, overblown melodrama. It's like a soulless clone that feels more like an exercise in manipulation rather than giving any actual insight.
If you could please point me towards another movie that rips another movie off in such a meticulous way, I might be inspired to make a video about it.
Elephant isn't mainstream American schmaltz, so how is a non-American "remake" better?
Gus Van Sant did that shot for shot rip off of Hitchcock's Psycho, but that was the whole point. And yeah, maybe he ripped himself off when he remade Good Will Hunting as Finding Forrester.
Could you please point me towards some movies that rip off Gus Van Sant in the same way as 2:37?
And the remake of Psycho, well, he knew that would fail, just like I'm pretty sure he knew Gerry and the other films of the death trilogy wouldn't do well.
Though I can't think of anything right now, there's a film called Heart of America by Uwe Boll. It's about a school shooting and uses many (all) of the techniques used in Elephant.
I'm not picking sides since I haven't seen 2:37, but Elephant did pay homage to the style from the ORIGINAL Elephant(1987) Well, at least Gus Van Sant mentioned Elephant when filming Elephant.
elchamber 6 months ago
@elchamber I've seen both, and Gus van Sant was thanked by 2:37's director Murali Thalluri in the final credits. Seems like its just a lot of paying homage to me ;-)
"Thank you"
"No, thank YOU"
"No, please, thank YOU!!"
"No no, I thank you ALL!" ... and on it goes.
Appropriation - its inevitable.
jimmyjimmyshortcakes 5 months ago
If the first vid made sense, I think this one is more useless, cause the scenes uses and the arguments you have are less good.
lilitifrock 8 months ago
i've seen both films... and they are both touching works of art and yes there similarities are plentiful but the context is different as elephant is supposed to be a remake of the events of columbine (done very poorly as for historical accuracy) and 2:37 is about suicide and one major difference i feel is the ending as in elephant it's expected in 2:37 it catches you completely of guard but still they are both great great movies neither of which deserves slander
gg36music 9 months ago 2
"Band Pactice" :D
jwkublick 10 months ago
Man, you're good! How did you manage to spot all these details anyway?
Mutantgamer 1 year ago
fuck it i like both films. actually maybe i like 2:37 better because a bunch of characters were seriously developed and I didn't know exactly what would happen at the end. Like I had an idea that someone would kill themself at 2:37 but it wasn't as obvious as Elephant's ending. Elephant left me wanting more because it ended quite abruptly and because I wanted to know the blond kid's deal. either way Gus Van Sant knew what he was doing and 2:37 was great as well.
BleedingxRainbow 1 year ago
"Polytechnique" diverges from Elephant in terms of character development, narrative style and emotional atmosphere; however I was curious to see your take on all the cinematographic parallels.
Oh, and Elephant FTW.
choppedlogic 1 year ago
Ebert & Roeper's review was much better.
g805ge 1 year ago
Elephant is awesome.
WisconsinRebals2010 2 years ago
Uhm.. Thaluri actually said he based his movie on Elephant.
And the music being similar makes sence because it's the same person who made it.
ikkedoch 2 years ago
unlike elephant almost all of the music in 2:37 is based on Gymnopedie by erik satie.
aidagrotesque 2 years ago
elephant was hardly related to comlumbine so dont anyone cop out behind: "oh elephant mimicked columbine" most of the stuff in elephant is made up. the only connection was some kids shot up a school. if you wanna boil it down elephant came out before 2:37 let that settle your quarrel.
violenceinc 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Slow motion is hardly something to compare, 2:37 used slow motion through opening credits. And the website thing isn't a big deal, a lot of films have that. Talking about homosexuality when there are homosexual characters isn't too uncommon either. As for the sounds, it was done by the same sound director.
WillowedMoon 2 years ago
Omg, so........I saw 2.37 for the first time today....and I've seen Elephant a dozen times because I own it.....but oh gosh. I picked up similarities when I first starter 2.37. I gotta say though, I love both movies, but each for different reasons. Idk. Hard to explain. So Elephant mimicked Columbine, and 2.37 mimicked Elephant. Whats next?
apetherandom 2 years ago
in the columbine were the two guys actaully gay
CUTEpandaDancing 2 years ago
Comment removed
thelineleader 2 years ago
No. The both had "sort of" girlfriends. Dylan went to prom with Robyn Anderson, and Eric soent that night with Susan Dewitt.
Plus Dylan was in love with some girl in the school, and Eric dated someone almost 8 years older than him at one point
wyldemannx 2 years ago
iv seen both many times, 2:37 has great dialog and character development throughout, but the end is a little anti climatic.
elephant has great scenes with Eric and Dylan but most of the movie is pretty boring, most of it is just people walking and not saying anything except the occasional mundane bullshit like "hay man how are you"
pinkdog1992 2 years ago
2:37 DEFINATLY took a lot from elephant.
However, I likes it much more than elephant, for a few big reasons.
The main things that elephants lacks are character and theme development. They spend most of the movie watching characters walk around, where as in 2:37, there is more dialogue, and the characters personalities become evident.
If elephant had the characters converse more, it would have been much, much better.
NotUnintelligent 2 years ago 2
yeah and its so sick that he fucks his sister like an animal
Speichel 2 years ago
in 2:37?
CUTEpandaDancing 2 years ago
i actually prefer 2:37 to Elephant just because 2:37 kind of surprises you more about who kills themself and in Elephant you can pretty much predict straight away who shoots up the school.
but then again i'd already heard a loy about Elephant before i saw the movie so it was kind of ruined for me.
I'm also Australian and enjoyed seeing a pretty good aussie film haha plus my mum dated Gary Sweet ages ago but that has nothing to do with anything.
lucylovesklaus 2 years ago
Well which ever movie they both seem a bit too adult rated for an innocent like me.
Signed : Elefant
inese12345 2 years ago
i saw 2:37 before elephant and i thought "well the acting was stupid so without the originality of the idea it would be complete shit."
then i saw elephant and realized that 2:37's "original idea" was just a copy
...that just makes it shit then
btw elephant is genius
AgentFuckhead007 3 years ago 14
this stuff is taken out of context dumbass. when the teacher says "someone shooting up the whole school", it was an example. the actual essay was about incest. regardless, 2:37 is a way better movie with more meaning and deeper issues
kangaross88 3 years ago
i know something about columbine to know what inspiration is, i´ve never seen 2:37, but if you know elephants first, then you know, what copying is.
gauchokotso 3 years ago
i havent saw any of the films
but i suppose once youve saw one youve saw the other, right???
xx
93spud 3 years ago
Wow to some of the comments on this.
...So some people like 2:37 better, and others like Elephant better, and still some like both.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
X4592 3 years ago 2
X4592 = voice of reason re 2:37 v Elephant
sraphael 2 years ago
Thank you. I've seen both, and I personally like and dislike things about each of them.
X4592 2 years ago
I like the 2:37 versus Elephant part 1/2 u made
that one was awsome
DawnToDusk 3 years ago 6
Danke!
Demlocke 3 years ago
ANOTHER SIMILARITY: both trailers are laid over classic piano pieces
hgblover 3 years ago 6
tsss Eric Satie's music is no "classic". just because it's slow and it use piano does not make it "classic". He invented the bases of the modern music, with Debussy and a few others. Calling him a classic compositer is an insult to his memory.
amiraltoto 3 years ago
alright, alright,
no need to get your panties in a bunch
I said CLASSIC, not CLASSICAL
Classic. An adjective. Definition: "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind"
so no offense to Eric Satie or Beethoven for that matter...
hgblover 3 years ago
Hgblover's point is valid enough. Both have sounds an unaccustomed ear would label "classic". Pick your battles, amiraltoto.
Demlocke 3 years ago
I still found 2:37 a better watch, regardless
caspash13lds 3 years ago
can some one help me find the link to watch elephant? plzz?
leaveloveleave 3 years ago 3
so what if both those movies were similar?
they both were very good in my opinion.
(:
thefangirl09 3 years ago
what's background song that sounds along the first half of this video?
ahor65 3 years ago 4
nevermind I remember now.
I'ts angel by massive attack.
ahor65 3 years ago 3
-both use slow motion
-both show a kid on an internet site
-both have a guy talking to a girl, and both are emotional....
If you found every movie with all those things in (LEGASP! IT CAN'T EXIST; CAN IT?!) you'd have a hell of a lot of movies, kid.
yes. the film styles were the same.
get over it :)
xXKatieVengeanceXx 3 years ago
What is the song in the beginning called? It sounds so good!
3sth3n 3 years ago
Gymnopedie by Eric Satie i think...the credit song, at the end is called "Don't Forget Me" by Chloe Moldovan. Amazing song.
carsel1 3 years ago
2:37 reused a lot of the cinematography and a few of the story elements, yeah. I'm not gonna lie and say I think 2:37 is extremely original, but overall the plot was pretty different, and the whole interview narrative thing definitely separated them enough for me to be cool with it. As for all the audio, I mean they had the same audio engineer or whatever, you can't blame them much for that similarity
ShinigamiKyo 3 years ago
why is it bad to use the same ambient noise?
although the film are pretty similar in cut, soundtrack, noise and location, they have two absolute different statements and perspectives.
2:37 is about, how ignorant people can be, that they are only fixed on their own problems to take notice to someone else.
Elepahnt is about the sheer ignorance , too but in another type. That everybody can be an applicant for an assassination at school.
Baumwollfell 3 years ago
hey do you know what is the name of the piano theme in 2h37? thanks
hitchman091 3 years ago
Yes - it's Eric Satie's Gymnopedie. If you listen carefully to the credit song "Don't Forget Me" written by Chloe Moldovan, uses snippets of that tune in her song. It's amazing. overall, this movie has great music - one thing Elephant DOESN'T have.
carsel1 3 years ago
it seems you've made a great point: Elephant and 2.37 are both really good movies.
carsel1 3 years ago
Well, maybe you're half right... ;)
Demlocke 3 years ago
i enjoyed both of these movies but i think that thalluri's is a little more special because it's very personal for him. it was inspired by the death of his friend that killed herself at 2:37 in the afternoon. the character of kelly is based on her.
thebodiescannotveto 3 years ago
Actually, it seems she never existed.
when the movie came out in Australia there was a lot of press about how Thalluri had made up the story of her death just for publicity.
Fellow Aussie filmmaker Daniel Krige said he heard the cinematographer claim it was all made up.
Nobody at Murali's old school ever heard of the suicide.
There are no obituaries that match Thalluri's description.
This "friend" was never identified.
It's so dodgy.
Sorry if you were conned by him. He should be ashamed.
Demlocke 3 years ago
i agree that there are a lot of similarities but there is nothing wrong with being inspired & gus van sant has not complained, so why is everyone else?
and to be fair, you've put together even the tiniest similarites, like girls pulling shirts over their heads? please, you might as well call every movie in history a copy if you're going to focus on silly things like that ...
thebodiescannotveto 3 years ago 4
There is a difference between homage and rip-off, and in my opinion this movie tips heavily towards the latter.
If you can make a video that shows the same level of similarities in terms of aesthetics (both visual and sound design) and themes using two unrelated films, I'd love to see it. Seriously.
Demlocke 3 years ago
i actually worked on 2:37 and it was common knowledge that murhali got his ideas from elephant. he would say that the cinematography will be much like that in elephant. he says his story was original but the cinematography was defineately a copy .
flavapromoprincess 3 years ago
LOL! I got what they were trying to DO! Maybe they were trying to do what the Elephant director director did-wait-isn't he the guy who made exact shot by shot remake of phsyco? That might be a diffrent guy, but if it is the same guy, maybe they wanted to make an almost shot by shot remake of one of his own movies. To express anger out of remaking a classic perhaps? Oy maybe they just felt like it or had no other ideas.
Neakra 3 years ago
the children, birds and sounds in the background probably is just a result of having the same sound editor on both films.
the only thing I thought was a bit of an obvious rip was the talk about homosexuality.
but yes I agree the films have a close resemblence, as many films do with other films in their genre. I think what this is is just the opening up of a new situational based observational subgenre of drama, for which gus van sant will get the credit has having pioneered.
BretagneShrew 3 years ago
Elephant inspired 2:37. Period.
acilegna202 3 years ago
People are WAY too eager to call ANY film a copy just beacause there are a few similarities, but for me, anyone that calls a film a copy just looks stupid & pretentious if the films don't even have any similarity in plot - and in this example, of course, 2:37 is character-driven, whereas Elephant is event-driven, so I couldn't disagree more. Also, every time you jump on a film website there are people making these kind of unjustified accusations just so they can use the word "derivative"! :P
Ilionabebe 3 years ago
2:37 was a really good movie. i think it was better than elephant becuz it went more in depth. in elephant u dont get 2 c how all the characters r important. like the 1 girl who got shot in the library. i nevr could figure out y she was wearing pants in gym class. however, in 2:37 were not told much about the girl who kills herself either. all in all they r still both good movies
MyVisionEvanescences 3 years ago
on elephant are the girls making them selfs be sick to lose weight coz that anit good for you it makes you teeth fall out
verno123456789 3 years ago
Sorry
I'm tired to read
but who copy who?
thesunmaygoout 3 years ago
elephant came first
Eragon00125 3 years ago
What's your problem with this great film? It's like you have something against the director! This is one of the greatest films out there dealing with real subject matter.... I compared both films and yes he copied the technique but it's a better story in the end. In Elephant the characters felt unemotional you couldn't connect to any of them it was detatched..... In 2.37 I felt like I could relate to all the characters it was real!!!
K8Video 4 years ago
This is the first real film that has dealt with an issue like suicide for what it really is...... it isn't glamourised it just is..... I mean if a movie like this can make people discuss an otherwise taboo subject and prevent one suicide happening then the creator diserves full credit. It really makes me sad to see people who have no idea how important a film like this is especially to teenagers.
K8Video 4 years ago
I sympathise with you a little because your heart is in the right place, but saying 2:37 will save lives seems to be repeating its marketing hype rather than anything based in reality.
2:37 has an R18+ rating in Australia because mental health experts are concerned the graphic suicide depiction would trigger copycats suicides in vulnerable teens, not act as a deterrent.
Teenage suicides had already been dropping for 10 years to 30+ year lows without 2:37. I'm not convinced it was important.
Demlocke 3 years ago
I never saw the advertisements for this movie but if this movie can help people realise what they are feeling isn't wrong or stupid... or helps someone notice the signs that their friend is in trouble then it's definatley helping in one way or another.
And The R18+ wasn't just for the suicide scene it was for the rape scene as well. But come on how many people have you heard of that have committed suicide cause of this film...
K8Video 3 years ago
And I'll tell you now just cause it's rated R doesn't mean people under 18 aren't gonna watch it... I did at 17. And my 16 year old sister rented and watched it last week and no neither of us went "hey... that suicide scene looks fun let's go try it out". Instead... we saw the truth that suicide isn't glamourous it just happens and could happen to anyone. What's the harm in knowing that? Guess where going to agree to disagree then hey!
Your suicide stats. which country are you basing that on?
K8Video 3 years ago
The harm is the medical literature shows instances of suicide in the media can trigger copycat deaths in high-risk teens, especially if the location and method are shown.
The Mindframe media initiative in Australia came in 10 years ago to depict suicide in responsible manner.
Teen suicides have since gone down. True, correlation isn't always causation, but it hasn't done any harm.
Those stats were for Australia, but I understand the trend has been similar for most of the developed world.
Demlocke 3 years ago
Yes.... but again there are no suicide connections with this film and I'm sure alot of teenagers have probably watched it. If a teens at risk of suicide I don't think watching this film is going to be the catalyst... If someone wants to check out a how to guide we've got the internet which seems to be what most teens turn to... Are we going to blame Myspace, YT, Google? Think about all the copycat suicides in the UK.
K8Video 3 years ago
I believe that the suicide scene in the movie was done responsibly in a way... You can't tell me that that scene looked like fun? In the end she's pleading for help wishing she hadn't slit her wrists.... she's in pain. They made it look like what suicide is they didn't glamourise it(like in most movies) it just was... You can't tell me that a person would watch that even a high-risk person and want to do that?....
K8Video 3 years ago
You had essentially paraphrased the director's marketing spiel, which made me think you might have heard it before.
For an anti-suicide film, 2:37 misses some important things, like showing the terrible extended impact of suicide on the family. It also doesn't show any strategies for coping with stressful situations or what warning signs others should look for.
As far as I can see, telling people to just "be aware", even if well-meaning, is pretty useless if they don't know what to look for.
Demlocke 3 years ago
Okay so I'm like replying section by section and have written a whole lot.lol...
I know this movie misses alot but again it's only a movie it can only go on for so long and maybe next time someone else will make a movie on the after affects of suicide... but again this is just a movie it's not a self help guide... the director's just telling a story that he needed to tell.... And I guess when watching the movie I just got it... it all just clicked.
K8Video 3 years ago
The movie got it's point across. Suicide can happen to anyone! And maybe by watching this film people will become more aware of this.. the suicide rate may be down but it still happens all around us.. ofcourse were not gonna know about it they don't broadcast it on the news now do they.. unless it's a cluster like in the UK.
K8Video 3 years ago
Last Comment I PROMISE.lol:))
Guess we're gonna have to agree to disagee:)) Everyone has there own opinions that's what's makes us who we are. As long as you don't say State's Evidence was a better more realistic film I'll be happy.lol:))
K8Video 3 years ago
It sounds like you've never seen an after school special or a series like Degrassi. There's actually quite a few works out there that explore teenage issues in a naturalistic manner.
I found the characters in 2:37 to be rather cliche and one-dimensional. This might make them easier to understand them, but I don't think it adds anything to the empathy or realism. Let's agree to disagree.
Demlocke 3 years ago
No I've seen Degrassi..... before they cancelled it.... and I don't think you can compare this movie to a show like that. They are totally different. This movie is here to make people aware of an issue. SUICIDE an act no one talks about... You must know one person (if not you yourself) that has gone through at least one of the issues the kids in this movie went through..... and what are we doing now.... talking about this film so I guess it's had to have some effect even on you.
K8Video 3 years ago
Degrassi is actually still going strong, and has been going, on and off, in some form since 1980.
Both it and 2:37 are vehicles for examining extreme cases of teen issues. Degrassi has at some point looked at the same issues as 2:37: suicide, sexual orientation, drugs, rape etc. so they're not completely different.
My interest in the film lies in its abundant similarities to Elephant and the dodgy way it was promoted. But the potential irony of its anti-suicide message is also interesting.
Demlocke 3 years ago
Yeah...but they don't show it in Australia anymore only The N I think.... and yes I know there the same thing but 2:37 is a movie goes for about an hour and a half and Degrassi:Next Generation has been going on for what is it now 7 Seasons... which is what I meant the movie is not going to be able to look into this issue as thoroughly as a t.v. show cause there isn't major character build up... it can't be as indepth... it's trying to get everyones point of view in a limited amount of time....
K8Video 3 years ago
And as for how it was promoted I guess I can't really argue with that cause I never saw the advertisements just the movie.
And I'm not saying Elephant isn't a great film and techniques weren't copied cause obviously they were. But I guess what I'm trying to say is how many suicide films are there that are just about suicide not shootings or anything else just suicide with no other implications.... does that make sense. The most obvious person is never the one that kills themself...
K8Video 3 years ago
there's no problem with being inspired by another film, GVS's Elephant was inspired by Alan Clarke's Elephant but 2:37 is just uninspired
rodolphefleury 4 years ago
I think both of them are great movies, who cares if they're similar? they're both awesome
PyrokineticPunker 4 years ago 3
I saw Elephant before 2:37 and even as the opening sequence of 2:37 came on I thought 'Damn, I remember this style from somewhere'. Then I looked up to my movie shelf and saw the DVD of Elephant and thought 'oh yeah, that.'
When I was done with 2:37 I watched Elephant again and I thought, 'shit that 2:37 flick was a plain copy' Its just ones a teen shooting, and ones a teen suicide. Both of which happen pretty often.
nukemachine503 4 years ago
Good observation. I liked 2:37 but now that I've seen this I wanna see Elephant.
RiceTactics 4 years ago 2
you really should, its a much better movie than 2:37 and not just for the shooting aspect
nukemachine503 4 years ago 2
I always thought that 2:37 was 'Elephant with more stuff happening'...
I prefer the first video; it shows that there's a homage thing going on. This one just shows that Leslie Shatz really likes chimes.
shutter87 4 years ago
Agreed, this video doesn't work nearly as well as the first. It's made of leftover bits that didn't fit.
YouTube garbled the sound, the audio comparisons can be better heard on DailyMotion.
I always thought that 2:37 was 'a one-dimensional after school special that absurdly apes Elephant', but to each their own!
Demlocke 4 years ago
I heard almost all of these similarities while watching 2:37. I mean, it doesn't make me hate the movie or anything; I still really enjoyed it. It was just funny to listen and hear the sounds and think back to where they were in Elephant.
Naserrot 4 years ago
i think the similarities were coinciding. the more you hate 2:37 the more it'll be popular.
jauby143 4 years ago
i'm not quite sure i understand your point in these videos. yes, the movies have very similar music/sound, and they were done by the same person.
but the movies are about two completely different things- suicide and school shootings.
while i'll give you that some scenes do seem very similar, i think a few of these were quite a stretch. you were matching them up as though they went together, when really they looked nothing alike.
couture2438 4 years ago
I think that 2h37 gets more close to reality than elephant you can see shotting on a school once or twice but suicide it's a big problem on all students I really enjoy the movie, I'm 16 and , i think that it's a reality in all countries
vichy823 4 years ago
The reality, according to the WHO, is that in most countries children and teenagers are actually the demographics with the lowest suicide rates compared to the rest of the population.
Suicide in general is a problem, teenage suicide is a small fraction of that problem.
Demlocke 4 years ago
Elephant didn't try to be realistic. It's an art film, plain and simple. I don't think Gus Van Sant intended for teenagers be able to sympathize with the events of Elephant.
evanraufbold 4 years ago
could someone please post the full 2:37 movie up on youtube?
skaterbabee 4 years ago
Hmm, why bother with 2:37 if Elephant is a great film anyway? I was quite interested in it but now I don't care. I love Elephant, and I dont want to see this obvious rip off.
EmilyWoop 4 years ago
they aren't about the same thing though
they have similarities, but one's about a shooting, and one's about a suicide...
hissybitch 4 years ago
what did you expect. the sound of both films is mady by the same person. and that is ok.
both films are great in their own way. even if they are very similar to each other.
girlnamedmel 4 years ago 2
It's no accident they have the same sound designer - the makers of 2:37 specifically sought Leslie Shatz to come up with something like Elephant.
But Shatz has quite a varied repertoire, he's definitely capable of coming up with something different, but he didn't.
Demlocke 4 years ago
I totally agree
kunox 4 years ago
what is the name of the song playing?
gimple2133 4 years ago
Angel by Massive Attack
Demlocke 4 years ago
thank you
gimple2133 4 years ago
thank you for this intriguing insight
it looks to me like 2:37 take every subtle aspect and theme from Elephant and thrusts it into your face to make it all more obvious thus, taking the thought provoking element away. Basically, is 2:37 just Elephant for dumb people? Meh I shouldnt be judging when I havent even seen 2:37. and dont plan to. haha
bedroomscene 4 years ago
Yes, I agree.
From the sheer number of similarities, I think 2:37 tries to copy as many elements of Elephant as it can get away with, probably to trying to emulate its credibility.
But 2:37 fails to capture the subtle, reflective atmosphere of Elephant, supplanting it with dreary, overblown melodrama. It's like a soulless clone that feels more like an exercise in manipulation rather than giving any actual insight.
Demlocke 4 years ago
If you could please point me towards another movie that rips another movie off in such a meticulous way, I might be inspired to make a video about it.
Elephant isn't mainstream American schmaltz, so how is a non-American "remake" better?
Demlocke 4 years ago
film makers rip off eachother.....2:37 is better cause it isnt american.
possiblebulletwound 4 years ago
I do enjoy Elephant a bit more, but 2:37 has it's merits.
And to be fair, many filmmakers have ripped off Gus Van Sant, just as he has ripped many filmmakers off.
evanraufbold 4 years ago
Gus Van Sant did that shot for shot rip off of Hitchcock's Psycho, but that was the whole point. And yeah, maybe he ripped himself off when he remade Good Will Hunting as Finding Forrester.
Could you please point me towards some movies that rip off Gus Van Sant in the same way as 2:37?
Demlocke 4 years ago
Not in the same way, exactly.
And the remake of Psycho, well, he knew that would fail, just like I'm pretty sure he knew Gerry and the other films of the death trilogy wouldn't do well.
Though I can't think of anything right now, there's a film called Heart of America by Uwe Boll. It's about a school shooting and uses many (all) of the techniques used in Elephant.
evanraufbold 4 years ago
Unfortunately Heart of America actually premiered a few months before Elephant. Both were shown at Cannes in 2003.
Demlocke 4 years ago
Did it? Oh well. Elephant was better anyway.
evanraufbold 4 years ago
Wow! Great work! Thanks for paying such careful attention.
Leslie54 4 years ago
2:37 os possibly the worst rip off of a great film ever. This director whould be lynched.
lycrahoofie 4 years ago
who cares if its a ripoff, 2:37 is still a great movie
ekleshon 4 years ago