Reviews written by registered user
|2232 reviews in total|
a great film. for Marlene Dietrich's performance, for the music, for the atmosphere who translate the fears of the period. a parable more than an historical film, brilliant example of Expresionism, mark of an unique director. in same measure, an eccentric work. for the sacrifice of historical truth. for the sculptures and fake icons, pieces from Dracula's universe from an exotic land, for the isles of blasphemy, not easy to accept by an Greek Orthodox Christian. sure, the purpose first. sure, an admirable movie who remains not only a hill for cinema art but a precious experience for the viewer. so, see it ! for understand not a character but admire the high art of a brilliant director and a genius actress.
an useful film. for understand the roots of modern Romania. a beautiful one. for archaic language's flavor, for the nuances of emotions, for the powerful clichés who defines the Walachian society not only in the year 1835. a seductive film. for the good performances, for the crumbs from great films, for the art to broke the limits between artistic film and documentary. an interesting film. for the science to reflect a period's deep lines of life. for humanity and for the grace of details. for the art not to remand but recreate not only a portrait but a state . for dialogs and for the values. for something who reflects the profound Romania behind the definitions or verdicts. Teodor Corban does an admirable job and Radu Jude becomes more than a promise for Romanian cinema. because, for the foreign public Aferim ! could be a slice of exotic world from Balkans in the XIX century. for the Romanians it represents chain of answers for a lot of questions. and, maybe, an exercise of honesty.
as many comedies from same period, it is a nice film. not perfect,not real convincing, using a lot of clichés but nice. and that fact saves it. a film about tension between a woman and a man, few amusing scenes and few good performances, Rosalind Russell in a role who use the experience about same type of character, Lee Bowman in a seductive role who has the fundamental problem to have a great ignored potential , Adele Jergens as the perfect choice for a lovely character. it is easy to criticize it. but it has the virtue to propose not only a story who seems be more a sketch but to use interesting cast. and that fact remains useful. for remember a form of cinema with special flavor.
part from a trend. fascinating show. wise manner to explore mythologies, fears, myths , questions and fantastic. adventures. and fight for survive. a series who has a great virtue - its special voice. visual and not only. two brothers in search of truth, justice and revenge. a lot of characters, moral doubts and challenges. and a splendid use of vulnerability who gives new type of heroes. a film about darkness and about the courage to transform it. nothing pathetic. only a travel to yourself for the lead characters. it seems be another horror/mystery series. but it has the science to not be another Millennium or X Files. and the result is real interesting. and almost fascinating.
but seductive. for landscapes more than performances. for the noble idea and for the homage to Omar Khayam. for the presence of few good actors. for a different image about Orient , useful in period of crisis and confusion. more than a film, it is a sketch. not impressive, fake in many scenes, unrealistic and very simple. but interesting as sign for discover more about culture, civilization,poetry and Persian circles of knowledge . and each meeting with Vanessa Redgrave is a happy moment. this film is not an exception. short, a naive film. about a lost world, piece of contemporary way to discover and understand the essence of European civilization.naive. seductive. and useful. not exactly as entertainment. but for remember.
not good, great or memorable. only an useful film. for self define. because the themes are delicate. because the performances are at high level. because it is a film about a meeting, second chance, friendship and the public image as way to define the other. a teacher. and a boy. a story who becomes more and more complex, large and profound. because Nick Stahl does a splendid performance who surprise again and again. because Mel Gibson propose a character who seems be reflection for a lot of questions, because the gestures of community's members are the gestures, words and verdicts of the large part from public. because it is not exactly an artistic work but an useful exercise for discover the social connections in different light. an exercise of honesty. and, maybe, useful self definition.
it is easy to criticize it. it is not difficult to enjoy it. because it is not only a romantic movie but a deep honest declaration about force of details who defines life. a film about hope, dreams and love. with a seductive Mel Gibson who use exactly the note for define the story more than chronicle of a new life and sweet emotions. like many romantic films, it is predictable. like many romantic films , it is far to be out from the clichés circle. but it is honest and beautiful and fresh. it has good actors, a not bad script and interesting performances. and a theme who has not end. so, Forever Young. old fashion romanticism, Mel Gibson and his good job, the music and the crumbs from Romeo and Juliet are enough to seduce. and to remand the flavor and the grace of stories full with old fashion romanticism.
like a clock. precision, strange beauty, delicate mechanism. the acting, the landscape, the script. as pillars of an admirable work who remains the novel by Kleist but it has the gift to be more than an inspired adaptation. a film about justice and sin. and a splendid role for Mads Mikkelsen who gives to his character not only the traits of the novel but something special, powerful, entire convincing. the grace to use the nuances of Michael Kohlhaas, the wise manner to use the silences, the force of gestures, the beautiful measure who discover the essence of tragedy, the presence of Roxane Duran who reminds, in same measure, Elisabeth I and the young Elisabeth II, the performance of Melusine Mayance, the speech of Denis Levant who remains the perfect definition of the root of tragedy are the details who transforms an adaptation in useful support for reflection about great themes.
or little more. Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt. a smart script. an old problem and seductive answer. romanticism from old fashion recipes but presented in new and not uninspired manner. an accident and slices from romantic comedies from 1940's years.Mel Gibson does a great job and he seems be the best choice for the metamorphose of Nick Marshall. Helen Hunt is herself. vulnerable and powerful in right proportions. a lovely presence - Alan Alda. sure, it is not perfect. but it looking for be different. and the result is OK. the mixture of comedy and nuances of emotions, Marisa Tomei in an almost special role - far to be a surprise- does the film a classic. and a nice entertainment.
for the Duras's atmosphere. for the lead actors. for the story, landscapes, dialogs, the piano lesson or for its end. for the illustration of a state of soul as result of a mixture of sin, fear, high expectations and fall. a film about a woman and a man. all in simple manner presented. a town. and few meetings. and level of dark revelation. a film of silhouettes and silence. and it is enough for discover an universe who could be part from yourself. a film about choices. and about a strange form of music. Jeanne Moreau is not a surprise. Belmondo is the perfect choice despite the expectations about other actor if you read the novel. the result - not comfortable but good occasion for reflection. about love. and about versions of Madame Bovary.
|Page 1 of 224:||          |