IMDb > Long Time Since (1998) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Long Time Since More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 5 reviews in total 

10 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Pure poetry...aesthetically and in its non-linear immediacy

Author: Peegee-3 ( from Santa Monica, CA
18 August 2002

If you prefer movies that are straight narrative, plot and action centered...stay away from this film. This poetic work, by Jay Anania, is for those who can allow the images, the characters to reach them at an inner reality level.

Diane Thwaite, a gorgeous, willowy, intelligent woman (played by Pauline Porizkova) becomes haunted by the inkling of some event she may or may not have experienced over 20 years ago. Her journey to piece out the puzzle, although it involves an actual happening, is largely an inner one of self-discovery. We see her slowly move from a chilly, laconic woman, unable to respond to a man who obviously cares for her, to someone who finally is willing to reach out, touch and be touched emotionally by another person who brings Diane a simple grace, an acceptance of life as it was dealt her.

The images in this movie, thanks to Cinematographer Oliver Bokelberg, are intimate and times reminiscent of an Edward Hopper painting and at others like a Japanese landscape. He brings us up close and personal to the characters so that we can't escape their presence, their actuality.

This is a rare and rewarding treat for anyone interested in cinematic grammar skillfully used, but not spelled out

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

lacking in many ways...but visually STUNNING

Author: KurlyQs ( from Davis, California
29 September 2004

I saw this film sitting in the foreign/art-house section of a local independent video store. I was actually not at all excited about the summary on the back of the cover, but the visuals looked so striking, I had to give it a look.

I found when watching it, the plot was even more unappealing than it was on the cover. The dialogue was unbearable, the acting was dull (accept for maybe the young woman playing phoebe in the end), and the score would appear in awkward snippets. There are long scenes in which you are forced to watch a character, when you have no idea what his relationship is to the rest of the film until the last third. Also, the director seems overly "fade to black" happy.

However (except for one scene in which the characters faces are floating out of frame- which some may call artistic, but I only find aggravating) the movie is visually stunning. The style varies slightly throughout the movie, but only in a a way that is appropriate to the "feel" of each scene.

This film I would not recommend for the average movie fan, or film perfectionists. This movie lacks in many areas- but if you have a passion for cinematography- I believe this is an absolute gem in which your time will be well invested.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

a reminder that film is a visual art

Author: jalawa-2 from United States
5 August 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film is a beautiful and evocative drama about a botanical illustrator, played by Paulina Porizkova in her best screen role, who is haunted by a violent memory she can neither understand nor forget. Julian Sands, a stranger she happens to meet, seems connected with this memory in some way, but she is unable to remember why. The film traces her quest to understand and recover a part of her past that she has lost. It's stunningly photographed, as are all of Anania's films, and becomes a meditation on the act of watching, as much as it is an exploration of how a fugitive memory can haunt one. Porizkova, with her almost supernaturally beautiful face, has never really found a film role she could comfortably inhabit until now. But her perfect face, exquisitely lit and framed, almost always still and unsmiling, suggests depths heretofore unseen. Julianne Nicholson, playing a character who is part of the answer to the heroine's quest, gives a wonderfully simple and moving performance. A film that ravishes the eye and lights unexpected fires in the imagination.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Films should ALWAYS spell it out and resolve everything at the end...

Author: ammediate from United States
24 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Poetry should be cut up and re-pasted into fliers for yard sales. Paintings should always portray historic events accurately or portraits faithfully and everyone should have an American accent just like they do in Queens. Any film that isn't aspiring to be a TV series should just be banned.

I worked on "Long Time Since" as the gaffer with Jay, Oliver and Paulina. The integrity of the script and the restraint in storytelling was central to the film. Jay wasn't intent on letting the audience sit back and ride the plot. Watch some independent films and you'll see filmmakers who are not necessarily auditioning for the Spider Man 10. I suggest you check out "Beautiful Country" by Hans Pedder Moland.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Pretentious - Atrocious - Slow Motion

Author: trpdean from New York, New York
29 October 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It did take days to watch the whole of this, but since I'd rented it (for the pleasure of seeing Paulina Porizkova whom I'd quite enjoyed in other films) I continued to persevere but regret it.

I am amazed at any positive comments - particularly about the visual - which mainly consists of extreme close-ups of parts of people's faces - a nose, an ear, part of someone's neck, a bit of someone's cheek.

We never know very well what's happening - but it doesn't much matter because when one is given finally to understand a story at the end - it is unimportant, contrary to much of what we'd been told ("this dream/memory is far far worse than mere murder ..." - nope), and extremely tedious.

There are so many inexplicable but boring matters throughout. E.g., we never know for example, why all these characters in the U.S. have foreign accents - Julian Sand, Paulina Porizkova, all her assistants.

We never know the reason for anything actually - why did Sand return to try to find Porizkova, who is this extremely annoying "Cyril" character, why does Porizkova care about the happily adjusted adopted woman whom Porizkova seeks to lure to her workplace? Is Porizkova's character's loneliness (she's apparently a childless middle aged spinster - rather hard to believe of Porizkova, but there you are) the cause of her asking a completely unknown woman to come with her to New York?

We know no reasons for most of what happens - but if someone were to ask whether we'd like an explanation, we would just shake our heads - we don't care.

I'm amazed that someone financed this film and released it - it is just awful dreck. Avoid it - you don't know it but this is a favor to you.

Was the above review useful to you?

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history