In 1671, with war brewing with Holland, a penniless prince invites Louis XIV to three days of festivities at a chateau in Chantilly. The prince wants a commission as a general, so the ... See full summary »
In New York's storied Chelsea Hotel, a novelist, a dancer, a painter, a poet, an aged jazz singer, and a young troubadour sort out their personal and artistic lives within walls haunted by the likes of Dylan Thomas, O. Henry, and Sarah Bernhardt. A boozy novelist balances wife, mistress, and stories. A dancer who's a waitress in the basement club chooses between a Hollywood jerk and a local painter. A youth from Minnesota who composes and sings may be the next Bob Dylan. A poet decides to give her feckless boyfriend another chance, even as her eyes tell us she knows what's ahead. An old jazz artist wants to place a bet and share his love for Lady Day. These walls do seem to talk. Written by
All these characters have problems. But i think that is the point. Because the movie is mostly supposed to be about the hotel itself. The people in it are just passing through. The film is showing how the people change, but ideals stay the same. The ideals that the hotel was built on and for the first place. Is it creativity? Or madness? Or apathy? I like all the open spaces in this story. You can fill in whatever you want. It's the sort of spirit of the Chelsea Hotel of old. But most people these days probably won't get it. Or don't want to. Or can't. Nobody dreams about art anymore. Everybody wants a million bucks. Who's life is richer?
14 of 16 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?