Reviews written by registered user
envergulsen

3 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

300 (2006)
11 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
Movie for dummies ( not only for dummies but also fascists ), 28 March 2007
3/10

300 is a movie for dummies. i have things to support this idea. first of all this movie is based on a very vandal orientalism : defining the eastern people wild, "not civilized" , " ugly" where in contrast western people are " smart, brave, beautiful , civilized" . this is a very very primitive kind of bringing an history phenomenon to cinema. first of all, this movie is not a "cinema film" . its is lollipop for dummies( and western kind of fascists) whom waiting things to their brain with a syringe. not needing to think, not needing to evaluate the given facts, not even thinking the manipulations of history. this movie is a very stupid manipulation of history. showing Persian ( and all eastern - religious - ) people ugly, not smart etc. thanks to Edward Said to show these kind of western type manipulations of history. Spartans are the first fascists of the history of the world. very vandal race and power selection of human being? isn't this a pure racism? isn't this a pure fascism. director ( i don't care his name because his name should be put near Spielberg with more stupidness very near to neo-cons and bush fanaticism) tried to bring this historical thing to this time with a very very fascist approach. special effects make this film for dummies also. pure cinema does not need to use such a big deal of special effects either. i heard that in Berlin film festival, this film is applauded minutes and minutes. this is very frustrating. i expect the festival people should be more smarter, more understanding of cinema. but very frustrating. this movie is such a garbage and people can applause this kind of pure racism and such kind of bad ( very bad ) movie. Susan Sontag very near to her death wrote that cinema is dead after such big directors like Godard, paradjanov,tarkovsky, Bergman, syberberg etc. he has right. cinema nowadays is a very stupid tool of propaganda. and this film is at the highest hills of this stupidness, this heartlessness, this " foreign antagonism ", this " low quality art " etc. nothings to tell more. just i protest the people giving 10 points to such a garbage.

7 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
i am sorry Lucas, 8 June 2005
4/10

This movie and other star wars movies are all cinema industry movies. As a person who looks and searches the real art cinema like Tarkovsky, Bergman,Bresson, Sokurov etc. , for me these Star Wars series are just a kiddie level of cinema. That is ,they are technological achievements, but no human inside, no art inside and no "real cinema" inside. Sorry from all star wars fans, but you are all watching just a technology ,special effect movie for dummies. Not a piece of art. These movies entertains, make people have fun, but nothing else. No thinking, no feeling, no real human, no heart, no brain. Lucas, Spielberg and directors like them killing the cinema itself. Because for those directors, the real cinema artists like Bela Tarr, Alexander Sokurov or for example Terrence Malick have no chance to distribute their movies because of the wild Hollywood hegemony.

Stalker (1979)
248 out of 323 people found the following review useful:
great masterpiece from greatest director, 26 August 2004
10/10

i want to say somethings about the most poetic,philosophical and intuitive director, tarkovsky and his movies ,especially Stalker.

first of all, we must all know that, tarkovsky is not for all. his poetic understanding of life and human and putting this understanding to his movies is unique in the world for my opinion. one of the most poetic and philosophical movies of him, Stalker is that kind of movie. it is like a poem written with objects. we must feel before we try to understand.

opening sequence of film contains some kind of expressionist objects with related the moral and inner conditions of the people living in the town . the "dirty" black and white take gives the viewers ,the mood of people having nothing to live, nothing to believe and nothing to give others.and the aggressive green take in the "zone" gives another vision of the life. the camera moves very slow to make us to go into to film and feel the film. tarkovsky's usage of objects and colours is very different and that is why i think he was a cinema poet. on the other hand, in addition to this "poem written with objects", the film also has very deep philosophical content. what is life,what is human, what is goodness, what is selfishness, what is devotion, what are the bases of our civilizations etc. and people are made to think all these things, not mostly with dialogs but with objects and colours and complete vision.

for example, the three objects shown while the camera goes into the water ,but actually to the heart of human being and we see one cringe, one gun and one religious icon. and these are the metaphors of the human civilizations for my opinion. and all the journey into to the "zone" and finally "room" , actually done into the human being. into our selfishness,into our subconsciousness, our badness,our goodness, our weak and strong parts. actually i can feel that , the things searched in this movie are our lost innocence . the stalker is the only people who believes something and needs to believe .and actually the journey itself is a fake. to go to the truth,faith,justice, goodness are being related with innocence in that movie. the microcosms shown poetically in the water is another metaphor shows human being's selfish behaviour. because human, destroys the things,destroys the innocence, destroys the world living around them.our today's civilization broke our strong cooperation with nature and changed this relationship to a nature disaster. the movie gives the message of the need of mercy to all the living and even non-living things in our nature. because human being's salvation is only related with that.

and the need of hope, need of believe is human being's basic needs. and our modern world destroyed all the hopes and believes. the movie contains metaphors making us to feel and think about those needs.and the most critical thing is felt in the film that self-denial is the basic need in our world.and unfortunately this value is lost and needed to be re-gain.

i can tell about all the metaphors in the movie but no need. because every person understand those things different like kafka's novels. and we just need to watch the movie with no prejudice but with open heart.

i recommend this film to all the cinema-lovers. i recommend also not to try to understand this film. only leave yourself to this great poem and it will give you all you need.