This year we are looking forward triad Italian fashion show at the Venice Film Festival and came home without the approval of a bill (actors separately). And do not expect much because the film I had seemed very bright through the media channels in which I lived through the previews (trailers, articles, lively discussions among television critics), the elements on which it relied were leaving my hopes strong signals from the past year "Gomorra" and "Il Divo," which seemed to have launched a pebble into the lake from which tin of Italian cinema, do not say were to develop a tidal wave and unstoppable, but at least he went a modest current towards an inexorable recovery (albeit slow) of the whole environment. Instead I feel disillusioned now as ever, and I start to think that the phenomena Garrone and Sorrentino (whose last film are not beautiful and not even their best work) are an isolated case rather than a sign of recovery. If I am under the illusion that something was going to happen, well, I know I messed bad.
The great dream: the film Placido and adolescent, as if wanting to give a compliment. The direction is good, as it was in "Romanzo Criminale", what is lacking compared to that film is a script of some consistency (and here it is time for manufacturers by requiring directors to rely on professional writers for the text, instead leave them at the mercy of their crazy inspiration often comes down to arrange stuff with felt here and there). The story unfolds like this: one day there is a normal life, another day a child is rejected in a test and ... 68! But the most annoying thing is that the characters are absolutely stereotyped, and thus the dialogues are banal and predictable, coming to elicit in the viewer a sense of tenderness toward the actors, tenderness that turns into anger, pity or even in the event of proven relationship with a member of the company. The film takes a bit 'last half hour, after a couple of plot twists, but it's too late. I swear that after the first ten minutes I wanted to get up and go home, feeling that I had tried before, only with "The Hand of God" Risi son. Placido
passed after the festival to scream (correctly) against attacks coming from members of government, and not dwarves, not knowing that the controversy is just a public success otherwise inexplicable, because I doubt that word of mouth has helped.
I read an article that spoke ill of the film, but which explained the extenuating circumstances in the title How difficult it is to tell the 68 '. I beg to differ. Without reference to the masterpieces of neo-realism able to concentrate in the history of an individual suffering of a whole historical period, I will tell you: beware of "Milk." The themes are similar: the mass movement and political revolution, in an environment steeped in bigotry and skepticism, the boarding only with gays instead of the Marxists. The film is a moving masterpiece, which has the merit of never take for granted the knowledge of the events.
Baarìa : the speech Tornatore is different. If that Placido is a bad film failed, this is a film that could get better. During the first hour and a half I have witnessed Tornatore already seen and appreciated, master of a poetic style that becomes a brand, a key capable of dragging the audience at the treasure chest in which lies the secret past of the director. At the break I thought it impossible that the film might lose the Oscar, and yet after watching the second hour and a half I'm sure you will lose. In practice Tornatore, who at the first break has almost exhausted the story of generational change, has the bad idea even reach the third generation. The movie is accelerated abrupt and unnatural, which leads him to touch all of smear the events of Italian history up to the present day ... and then come back! At that point the public is really tired. I felt lucky to live in 2010, because if the Italian history had lasted another 30 years, the film would go on for another hour.
The second part of the story is boring, and especially unnecessary since it is used by the director to pull too many hooks launched earlier (lost magic items, etc..) To which the viewer does not feel the need to take the bait because it was absolutely forgotten, or at least, he had already seemed poetic and perfect in their imperfection. Once again the range of the manufacturer would be appreciated.
Making a comparison with "Cinema Paradiso", then there is the weakness of the objective of the protagonist, who seems not to drag the audience. If in fact the dream of becoming a director succeeds in involving the audience for its universal character, to become political only at the beginning is seen as a pure dream, while the second part is fouled by the impact with reality, and then becomes almost wanted to get more than willing to be, to do, and this happens without the protagonist suffers a conscious change. As we feel our bond with the film, our involvement has ceased, until fails. Only now do I explain
the uncertainty with which many critics commented on the film, probably buffeted between the show's first half and that of the second. It is impossible to recommend for or against. Go see it and get an idea.
The third film "Cosmonaut" (telling me to be more successful) I refused to see him, because it focuses on the same historical period of the other two, and there is a limit to the monotony.
The great dream: the film Placido and adolescent, as if wanting to give a compliment. The direction is good, as it was in "Romanzo Criminale", what is lacking compared to that film is a script of some consistency (and here it is time for manufacturers by requiring directors to rely on professional writers for the text, instead leave them at the mercy of their crazy inspiration often comes down to arrange stuff with felt here and there). The story unfolds like this: one day there is a normal life, another day a child is rejected in a test and ... 68! But the most annoying thing is that the characters are absolutely stereotyped, and thus the dialogues are banal and predictable, coming to elicit in the viewer a sense of tenderness toward the actors, tenderness that turns into anger, pity or even in the event of proven relationship with a member of the company. The film takes a bit 'last half hour, after a couple of plot twists, but it's too late. I swear that after the first ten minutes I wanted to get up and go home, feeling that I had tried before, only with "The Hand of God" Risi son. Placido
passed after the festival to scream (correctly) against attacks coming from members of government, and not dwarves, not knowing that the controversy is just a public success otherwise inexplicable, because I doubt that word of mouth has helped.
I read an article that spoke ill of the film, but which explained the extenuating circumstances in the title How difficult it is to tell the 68 '. I beg to differ. Without reference to the masterpieces of neo-realism able to concentrate in the history of an individual suffering of a whole historical period, I will tell you: beware of "Milk." The themes are similar: the mass movement and political revolution, in an environment steeped in bigotry and skepticism, the boarding only with gays instead of the Marxists. The film is a moving masterpiece, which has the merit of never take for granted the knowledge of the events.
Baarìa : the speech Tornatore is different. If that Placido is a bad film failed, this is a film that could get better. During the first hour and a half I have witnessed Tornatore already seen and appreciated, master of a poetic style that becomes a brand, a key capable of dragging the audience at the treasure chest in which lies the secret past of the director. At the break I thought it impossible that the film might lose the Oscar, and yet after watching the second hour and a half I'm sure you will lose. In practice Tornatore, who at the first break has almost exhausted the story of generational change, has the bad idea even reach the third generation. The movie is accelerated abrupt and unnatural, which leads him to touch all of smear the events of Italian history up to the present day ... and then come back! At that point the public is really tired. I felt lucky to live in 2010, because if the Italian history had lasted another 30 years, the film would go on for another hour.
The second part of the story is boring, and especially unnecessary since it is used by the director to pull too many hooks launched earlier (lost magic items, etc..) To which the viewer does not feel the need to take the bait because it was absolutely forgotten, or at least, he had already seemed poetic and perfect in their imperfection. Once again the range of the manufacturer would be appreciated.
Making a comparison with "Cinema Paradiso", then there is the weakness of the objective of the protagonist, who seems not to drag the audience. If in fact the dream of becoming a director succeeds in involving the audience for its universal character, to become political only at the beginning is seen as a pure dream, while the second part is fouled by the impact with reality, and then becomes almost wanted to get more than willing to be, to do, and this happens without the protagonist suffers a conscious change. As we feel our bond with the film, our involvement has ceased, until fails. Only now do I explain
the uncertainty with which many critics commented on the film, probably buffeted between the show's first half and that of the second. It is impossible to recommend for or against. Go see it and get an idea.
The third film "Cosmonaut" (telling me to be more successful) I refused to see him, because it focuses on the same historical period of the other two, and there is a limit to the monotony.
0 comments:
Post a Comment