Reviews written by registered user
|13 reviews in total|
If you liked «Lain», you will LOVE «Boogiepop phantom» which is, in my view, much more interesting. Every episode has its own story, and can be watch by itself. As the story progresses though, it all fits together to form a larger plot. One last thing; the music is excellent and very well used to create intensity.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
After reading a comment here, on IMDb, I was expecting a film Noir. Now, I don't exactly know why that person thought that this was Noir, but really, I can't find any element in the whole movie that could fit it in that category. I felt like I was like a French, cheap version of Requiem for a dream. Except for the fact that, in Déjà Mort, the main male caracter is a total idiot that seem only capable of doing one thing : ruining other people's life and/or kill them. SPOILER : the worst part of it all is the fact that he is just about the only one who doesn't die at the end, something I had been expecting...
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This movie has no story, but I guess that it was the whole idea ; to show raw violence to shock the audience. The problem (or rather, one of the problems), it really is not shocking. SPOILER ; of course you're a little surprise when you realize that the kid is dead (American producers would never allow that), but then the whole movie is so freaking unbelievable that the loving wife might as well find the remote control and wake up Georgie jr. Movies similar to this have been done so many times (more successfuly) that you really expect more from an old theme. I usually like movies with slow developments, like movies from Tarkovsky, but some of the scenes where so unnecessarily long that after a while you start to wonder if the VCR didn't get on Pause by itself. I give it a 5 for the effort, but I really don't recommend it to anyone.
I saw Il Consiglio d'Egitto at the Montreal Film Festival, where it was in the official competition. The fact that this movie was even in the competition puzzles me (and I'm sure it puzzled many others since a lot of people left before the end). A little over two hours, the movie shifts from one plot to the other. The first plot is actually quite interesting and funny but then it is quickly resolved and we are projected into a second, less interesting plot. There might have been a third plot coming, but I left before falling asleep.
This movie is definitely a must see for every film-lover. Maggie gives her best performance ever in a movie that feels so close to reality you often get the impression you're watching a documentary. Enormously inspired by French cinema style, technique (camera) and references, it manages to observe from a distance French cinema while being a typical French movie. Without any doubt one of the best French movie ever made. 10/10.
The One line Summary says it all. Don't expect too much action, this is a rather slow movie where you have to do your work and think to fully enjoy it. The main actress is incredible; she plays two different roles and you truly believe she is two different people.
In regards to previous comments, a few things need to be said. First, this
movie is not a documentary and it doesn't have the pretension to be one. So
I think you need to keep this in mind, and not expect to hear experts come
to the camera and give «neutral» and «objective» clarification.
Second, the movie is based on a book written by one of the felquiste. So it would be incorrect to jump to the other extreme and say that the story is «fictionalized». The book, as well as the movie, is written in plain honesty, many years after the events that took place in 1970.
Keeping in mind that the movie depicts the events as seen through the eyes of one of the perpertrators, the movie is extremely effective in showing how Ideals can grasp people, how revolutions (often failed) occur, what it means to believe in something with all your heart. It also shows, and you must be blind not to see this, how events like these might as well take a proportion that was not intended, and that playing with the lives of individuals is not as easy as it might seem in the first place.
Octobre shows the real meaning of politics, of a political event, of a revolution. It shows that political events are never totally black or white.
You might say that because Falardeau is a separatist he doesn't give a neutral or objective point of view, and thus, the movie is biased. I'll be ready to accept this critique when somebody shows me a way to depict such an event in a neutral and objective way. A lot of people won't be able to appreciate Octobre for two possible reasons : a) they lack the necessary background to understand the story, or b) they view the movie as another absurd propaganda from separatists.
Other than that, Falardeau renders very well the tension that builds inside the small house where five people are stuck, waiting for the government to negotiate. It is a very emotional movie ; I saw the movie in Montréal when it came out. There weren't many people in the movie theatre. When the movie ended, I stood up to leave and noticed two older people, a man and a woman. Both we're still looking at the blank screen, silent. I thought that they were probably involved in the FLQ, that they were probably arrested also. Watching this movie must have been very difficult for them, at least this is what their eyes told me.
Although I didn't get much of the dialogues, the visual made up for it. Incredible camera, marvellous acting, mostly good music, and what seemed to be a good story plot. I gave a 9, could have been a 10 if I had understood the humour.
This is not a movie or a documentary but a book on DVD. If you've read Zizek's books, you already know everything that is delivered in this filmed lecture. You can guess ahead of time which examples Zizek will provide to illustrate certain points, and you know where every argument is going. But at the same time, you can't really say that this DVD replaces Zizek's books. Zizek has written over 20 books, and this DVD is approx. 70 minutes (if I remember correctly); ideas are simplified, important details are neglected and in the end, you really only touch the surface. As usual, Zizek is highly entertaining. But this has everything to do with Zizek himself, and nothing to do with the filmmaker or the film itself. Poor exercise in 'filmmaking'.
Freeway was a great movie. But this one is a Meaningless, Pointless, Stupid, Clueless movie about a jerk wearing a bow tie and raping and killing many women. Almost all of the women get dealt with within a few seconds, after we've been shown their panties, so it's very difficult to feel anything for those women. Which is both sick and sad. But what is even more sickening is the fact that the movie goes into extreme details when it comes to Bundy's execution. The scene lasts for ever, and for the first time in the movie, you do feel a certain anger on the subject of killing. Now, what the hell was the director trying to say ? Don't try to listen to the Director's commentary on the DVD for answers. We tried. It's the most pointless (and silent) commentary I've ever watched. The commentary is mostly him saying «This is actual real footage», «They really do it like this during executions», «Bundy had steak, eggs, AND hashbrowns for his last meal», «The tall blonde there is my girlfriend», «There she is again». I'm not even kidding. Once in a while he also says «Yep» for no apparent reason. And the fact that the executioner is a woman doesn't save the movie. As a woman, I did not feel a deep sense of satisfaction, as was intended.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |