I didn’t quite get the hype for this one either.
Yeah, it’s very… okay. But the hype surrounding it is frankly ridiculous.
I’ve gotta catch up and watch Noe’s new film though, haven’t been paying attention to him or his stuff since his absolutely fuckawful Love from 2015. God, that flick was absolutely fucking abysmal, Climax looks really cool though.
I plan this to watch too.
That is what it deserves. And Spacey’s character became so ridiculous in the end.
I mean it was just nowhere nearly as good as paid shil… I means film critics would make you believe. Even if you accept film’s tongue-in-cheek tone, it’s simply not that good.
Do not read anything about the movie prior to watching it, I mean absolutely nothing. Watching this without knowing absolutely anything about it was one of my best decisions ever, definitely one of the best cinematic rides I’ve ever experienced. I really love the film, one of the best of its kind. Additionally, the TD soundtrack is phenomenal… the chords in If It’s All Over and On the Spur of the Moment, man… soooo gooood. Plus, Running out of Time is wonderfully Reich-esque, what an absolute bliss.
I wasn’t too keen about Baby Driver either, but I know several film fans who really appreciate it. The general ideas were often better than the execution. 6/10
I think both are great, both have this way to suck me into the dark Noe world by the way he directs. I’m sure both will get better with repeated viewings.
Noe is one of the best directors alive.
Climax is as laughable as Reefer Madness but it’s worth watching for visuals and the freaking awesome dance number.
‘Baby Driver’ - Ejected after a gruelling 30 minutes - pish trying to come off as stylish.
Whatever it is, but laughable?
I can totally understand why.
Bill probably means the movie completely misrepresents the effects of using psychedelics and comes across as laughable. I haven’t seen the movie, so I can’t comment.
Regarding Love, I thought it to be just barely watchable, just barely. I considered turning it off at many a point, but I persevered in the end. The film is a fucking disaster, there are so many things awful about it. Horrendously underdeveloped characters, no real character development to speak of, absolutely abhorrent acting. Noe’s style also rings so hollow in this one it almost feels like a parody of his own style on multiple occasions. Gusman’s performance is absolutely fucking atrocious, the articulation of his lines is so over-the-top he occasionally almost come across as slightly mentally handicapped, but on the other hand, his acting seems fine in The Neon Demon, so I’m not sure what exactly went wrong here. On top of that, the film is way too long, so much of it feels protracted and completely superfluous that it becomes irritating after a while. One could argue it is precisely so exasperating by virtue of being so overlong and internally vacuous.
And Noe’s claim about Love being groundbreaking, rebellious or whatever is fucking cringy and obnoxious insofar as it really attests to how far up his own ass he is. In the current day and age, there is absolutely nothing provocative about producing a feature film of this sort. Oshima or Bertolucci might’ve been challenging the censorship of their times, but in the current cultural climate replete with explicit content of this kind, Noe isn’t risking anything by making something like it. But it doesn’t really matter all that much, but it’s so pretentious to make statements like that.
All IMHO of course.
Exactly, you can’t take it seriously.
I can …
Of course it is not provocative, it is just as it is. No problem to make such films today.
Every other thing you say about Love is interesting, but it is also the complete opposite of how I experienced the film.
Here’s a Danish film that was Directed and Written by Isabella Eklöf that i found to be somewhat provocative. So, what we got here is a story about an (abusive) thug who takes his young girlfriend and his entourage on a vacation to a beautiful island.Once there things go off the rails when the thug finds out the girlfriend becomes very friendly with a young stud and in a jealous rage he rapes her in a very real/explicit scene. Now, to be clear the only reason this film made some noise was for this scene–
other than that, there’s not much to like and found the acting very amateurish.
Controversial stuff sure, I’ve watch the film twice, and yes I like it, it’s a 7 out of 10 to me1.The opening scene is fantastic with one of my favourite bands playing (Jon Spencer Blues Explosion), you can’t go wrong with a scene like that.
Ok the films lacks some cohesion, but from my point of view the characters deep or the lack of it, it’s just a way to show that things are fast like the getaways, life is a big getaway to someplace we can reach or not
Liked the music in the film and the chase scenes
- Hitchcock: To Catch a Thief 6/10
- Fellini: City of Women 6/10
- Bergman: Hamnstad 6/10
- Boorman: Deliverance 7/10
- De Sica: Matrimonio all’italiana 7/10
- van Warmerdam: Borgman 7/10
- Scola: La cena 6/10
- Jones: Life of Brian 8/10
- Sirk: All That Heaven Allows 10/10
- Forster: Monster’s Ball 7/10
Ugh, i hate when they drink coffee from those tiny cups, piccolos, fuuuuuck
I was intrigued by @Mickey13’s review and decided to give it a try, premise sounded very interesting. I should know better. Apart from opening scene on the Moon and soundtrack, can’t really say anything good about it. Visually stunning? Muhahaha. More like tedious, repetitive and boring psychological mystery crap. But since it got generally good ratings, it’s probably me, not you, my friends. 2/10.
If someone is interested in this type of movies rather watch The Enemy with Jake Gylenhal or The Ninth Gate by Polanski.
Tricky recommendation, Enemy is one of the best films of the last years, but the other one is Polanski’s worst film (so far) and quite a bore.
Derrida, the movie (2002, Kirby Dick/A.Z. Kofman)
A documentary about the famous (but very controversial) French philosopher Jacques Derrida, the man who developed the theory of deconstruction. The film offers parts of interviews, footage of his lectures at the Ecole Normale Superieure and also shows him at home with family and friends. At various points Derrida is trying to ‘deconstruct’ the documentary itself, by discussing the limitations of capturing a life - or a person’s ideas - with the help of film making techniques. Derrida could be needlessly obscure as well as very funny, often at the same time, and this documentary offers a few examples of his hilarious obscurities (especially when he’s discussing the sex life of philosophers). I never was a real fan of the man’s philosophy, but he was an influential thinker (especially within the field of social studies and linguistics). If you’re interested in the man’s work this is an often stimulating documentary (but notice that it’s not an introduction to the theory of deconstruction)
Het Tweede Gelaat / Double Face (2017, Belgium/JanVerheyen)
The final part of a trilogy based on the works of Belgian thriller-author Jef Geeraerts. The first one, Memory of a Killer, was an international hit, the second one, DossieK., lacked the style of the first but was still an enjoyable action movie. This third is the proverbial one trip too many to the well. It’s the umpteenth serial killer flick and to make things worse they have changed the original story to such a degree that even the title makes no longer sense
Bankier van het Verzet / The Resistance Banker (2018, Dutch/Joram Lürsen)
A very successful war-drama movie in the tradition of Soldier of Orange and Black book, telling the story of two brothers, both bankers, who financed the Dutch Resistance during WWII. They created a charity fund of no less than 50 million guilders (some 25 million euros) by forging bonds. The film is well-made and interesting, but the brothers were bankers, not adventurers, and if you’re looking for a fast-paced action flick, you will be disappointed.
Miss Potter (2006, Chris Noonan)
A biographical film based on the life of Beatrix Potter, the creator of Peter Rabbit (among other animal characters). The film combines stories from the author’s life and animated sequences taken from her books. It’s all very well done and Renée Zellweger is endearing as Beatrix, so I’d say this an ideal family movie. Watch it with the wife and the kids
Tais-Toi (French, 2003, Francis Veber)
The title means ‘shut up!’. It’s a typical french Buddy movie, starring Depardieu and Reno as an unlikely duo of small time crooks. Reno is a silent type and above all a loner, who is brooding on plans to kill the gangster who murdered his girlfriend, Depardieu is the more talkative type and what’s more: he thinks Reno is his friend therefore follows him everywhere, thwarting all of his plans. Not as funny as some of the director’s other films (notably La Chèvre/The Goat), but still moderately entertaining
The Bourne Identity (2002, Doug Liman)
I had forgotten most of this adaptation of the (in)famous Ludlum novel about a man suffering from dissociative memory loss, who discovers - when trying to piece things together - that he could be a professional assassin and one of the most wanted man on the face of this earth. Matt Damon is a good Bourne and there’s a lot of chemistry on-screen between him and Franka Potente as the German woman who falls for him and helps him figuring out who he really is. The film is not as engrossing as the book (no doubt Ludlum’s best), but overall it’s a good adaptation (or re-examination) of the story
Do you even Storaro bruh?
If only you could feel the things I feel.
No, there are plenty of people who dislike it for its ending and being somewhat different, so that’s not that out of the ordinary. It shouldn’t be listed as a giallo film at all. One of the reasons why I watched in the first place was that it had been listed as a giallo, but it’s clearly not one.
ehm, ehm… nah.
That’s the whole point, the film doesn’t feel like a mystery to me. The so-called mystery is just a departure point for an examination of protagonist’s slow descent into madness and paranoia. Its ‘mystery’ part and its story are easily the weakest part of the film, I’ll give you that, but that doesn’t matter to me, I don’t watch the film for its story and it’s not really its main focus. The movie has a lot more in common with such works as Black Moon and really weird shit in general than the flicks you’ve listed. They’re completely different. They might be slightly similar on a purely functional level in terms of how they’re written, but they feel worlds apart, a completely different type of filmmaking. That’s the tricky part about recommending films, experiencing a motion picture is such a subjective deal, there is no way of telling how a person is going to react to it, especially in case of less conventional efforts.
Just bear in mind some of my recommendations may turn out to be shit for you, mkay?
I am interested in what your thoughts are with regard to other Villeneuve’s opuses. I liked Enemy, it didn’t leave much of an impression on me though. Perhaps I should re-watch it.