Reviews written by registered user
|33 reviews in total|
I understand that the original title is from a book on which the film is based, but it is one thing to read a book called "12 years a slave", another to watch a movie: you do not enjoy, nor the beginning, because you already know that will be captured, nor the middle, because you already know that will be released, nor the end, because you would expect from the entire movie. In practice, two and half hours of film ruined by a very wrong way. Then it is no true that the film has made me so enthusiastic. It seems built for very captatio benevolentiae, without much skill on the part of the director and screenwriter. The audience becomes attached to the protagonist, but can not forget the thousands of other slaves who were not already "free men" and therefore will never come to be. It has been chosen to tell the story from a heartbreaking point of view, too much personal; if that's okay for an autobiographical book, not the same can be said for a film nominated for an Oscar. The only ten minutes by Oscar are those in which he starred Brad Pitt; I also believe are the ten minutes the most interesting of the whole movie. For the rest, a recommended viewing, sure, but not a masterpiece.
Aurelio Grimaldi is famous for his very personal questionable visions that often end up talking about discomfort. In these films, the discomfort is often depicted in homosexuality. I would say that his vision, shared or not, it is always the result of interest and debate, and the same happens in this film, "inspired by" Pasolini, where the name of the great Bolognese artist is never pronounced. Of course, the references are explicit and obvious, but as the same Grimaldi said, the film can refer to any artist, and the vision that comes out of the poet is which that the director guesses about him; how to say, being the Grimaldi's Pasolini, the poet could not be described except in accordance with what Grimaldi thinks of him, as he imagines, and therefore does not necessarily reflecting some historical truth. On the other hand, the tragedy is still unresolved and not clear. This part, in fact, I would rather it had not been included in the film, because I found it really too personal. Everything else, however, I liked it. I do not think it comes out a distorted picture of the great artist, even the dialogs seem very "Pasolinian". Even Cavicchioli is awfully similar to Pa', and all this creates a really good atmosphere in the viewer. A title that would certainly recommend, even if only for the beautiful words of the "poet" of the film.
One of the saddest movies of the whole Toto's production. You understand since the outset that the great Neapolitan comic has an unusual role: in deed, he usually plays the penniless, the marginalized, and yet in this film he is a man of class, with a lot of money. A scene of a quarter of an hour without Toto allows the viewer to understand unequivocally that it is a very dramatic movie. Good times made by the director Aldo Fabrizi, who is able to characterizes each character perfectly. There are few scenes of comedy, that are very refined and adapted to the drama of the plot. I remember Toto's titles for the beats of genius, usually. This is definitely a movie that you will remember for the plot and for the wonderful dramatic interpretation of one of the greatest comedians of all time. Surely it is the film that I would recommend to those who doesn't know Toto so much or consider him only an "actor who makes you laugh."
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
A sort of testament of the Italian singer Francesco Guccini. Movie is basically a documentary about the recording of his latest album, "L'Ultima Thule." In addition to the pieces that make up the album, you can watch some scenes of everyday life of the singer, as well as some stories about his childhood and his career. Several interviews with his musicians enrich the film, some very poignant and moving, which imply all the hope that Guccini does not shrink from public life: very sad it's the prayer of Ellade Bandini, the drummer, who says: "Francesco, we lose a couple pounds and go back to play, we are not yet so old!". Also there are several meetings with important guests, including the rock star Luciano Ligabue and successful director Leonardo Pieraccioni. The end is the saddest part of the whole movie: Guccini together with his musicians are waiting for a picture: that one of his grandparents, the cover of his most famous album, "Radici". While the others wait softening the atmosphere, he is there looking the camera with no fixed semblance of a smile. A fair documentary, definitely very touching for those who know Guccini and his story but that I consider interesting for everyone, as well as the full streaming of the pieces that make up the album.
Really, watching the trailer, I will not go to watch this title never. It was centered around the appearance of the strip-tease, what I would call very marginal, making it looks a movie for horny people. From the movie, it shines values very important, like to believe always in their own dreams, the contrast to the use of drugs and alcohol to minors (and abuse in general), friendship, family affection, the eternal choice between love and career... Soderbergh maybe does not filming masterpieces but behind his films, even "light", there is always a message, a constructive criticism about customs of the more reprehensible society. Perfect interpretation of the cast, including Alex Pettyfer, every time more convincing.
A real disappointment. The first flaw of this film is the acting. Even after ten minutes I realized it was a cast of amateurs, but really these. An interpretation that it seems that all the actors are reading, with a diction so exaggerated to make even the unnaturally simple dialogues, complete lack of spontaneity. The setting, then, is ridiculous. The directors tries to stage it in the USA but there are Italian writing, Italian landscapes, even the phone booth, in which the actors make up 911 for four times! The only thing "American" is the car plate. It was enough to dial 112 instead of 911, that was the problem? Absolutely a title that I don't recommend: it's a real waste of time.
A masterpiece of Ferzan Ozpetek that finally, after years, departs from his usual production. The plot is developed in a fun and fluid matter, and it is impossible to be bored or get lost along the way. Also perfect character development, very credible thanks to the extraordinary performances, one of all those of Elio Germano; his close-up in the final scene is an apotheosis. Great mastery of the musicians in recreating a magnificent soundtrack of the years Thirty that it falls within the context perfectly. There is not a flaw in the entire movie except, perhaps, that the ending is almost trivial and I would rather different. All in all a great movie to recommend highly!
This movie was very promising in the beginning, but after an half hour the final was too obvious. An horror title which you can understand the final after such a short time and completely without any surprise (less or more), it hardly be called exciting, although there were a lot of potential. Nevertheless, the actors have played very well, especially Caroline Kessler, and I believe the soundtrack is matching: the only flaw was precisely the sequence of events. Too bad not being able to develop a storyline so interesting ... For this reason, I would not recommend watching this title, despite my vote is still positive for the idea and the performance of the cast.
Certainly the movie is well done, it fits perfectly all parts of the first "Planet of the Apes" (1968) to be truly "rise" but I think this is fair to expect ... In general it is well shot, the actors are up to the task even if the monkeys resemble less and less of the Apes (the set, in general, could do better). It tells a story that was possible to develop and exhaust in ten minutes and came out a movie rather than bored: it runs fast and creates a certain suspense. With a few forgivable wrong detail that with a little of attention would have been avoided, mine is still a positive rating! I suggest this title even though you never followed the saga since you can look beyond the vision of this film.
An allegorical movie where the viewer must identify himself to be emotionally involved or it seems almost absurd, and yet one can not remain indifferent to certain aspects of the film: the guys who do not have to "give", nor choose to do so, just it's so, there is no other possibility but not because you have to be spare, but because it is normal, of course. I was very impressed with the history of references to love, it seems obvious that it can not be so trivial function of the "Gallery", and yet gives rise to the response of Madame: "Your drawings were used to show that YOU have a soul". As if to say that those who commissioned the spare parts want that they come from a reliable source of excellent choice, and then from people who live and have a soul, not mere robots ready to use, a kind of first quality, in fact. And what about the absurdity of making "assistance" in its operations that one day will kill you? The unbridled pursuit of allegory, in misunderstanding that leads almost (and it becomes no doubt for those who are not accustomed to follow the works of Garland) makes this title a must-see, and think long ...
|Page 1 of 4:||   |