IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,9/10
1355
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuThree immature guys drive around a remote region of Germany, fooling around and taking photographs.Three immature guys drive around a remote region of Germany, fooling around and taking photographs.Three immature guys drive around a remote region of Germany, fooling around and taking photographs.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Empfohlene Bewertungen
This may be the stupidest movie I have ever seen. Its only reason for existing seems to be (1) to show men running around totally naked and acting like monkeys--for no plot-required reason--as often as possible, and (2) to show men urinating on camera as often as possible. There are at least five instances of the latter in a barely-over-one-hour movie. It's not even water-sports porn--it's about as erotic (and realistic) as a Bugs Bunny cartoon.
The plot is extraordinarily flimsy: best friends (straight German and gay Briton, both affluent enough not to have real jobs; the German is a "photographer", the Brit nothing discernible) go on a pointless road trip through obscure northeastern Germany and pick up a Polish hitchhiker. Nothing happens, except for the previously-mentioned naked romping and urinating.
All three characters are either (take your pick) completely unbelievable, even as movie characters, much less as actual human beings, OR (or AND, if you insist) the three most obnoxious characters the writer/director could think up.
The two "best friends" act like they can't stand each other, and if that's supposed to be some sort of erotic tension it misfires completely. The Pole adds nothing but a different body type (short/chunky vs the friends' buttless "swimmer's builds"); a third obnoxious, unbelievable character; and a third language for the subtitle writers to screw up (they completely ignore all English, regardless of how unintelligibly it's being mumbled by non-English speakers).
Three obnoxious characters running around like monkeys and urinating every few minutes--and annoying each other and the audience for 78 minutes. That's this movie.
The plot is extraordinarily flimsy: best friends (straight German and gay Briton, both affluent enough not to have real jobs; the German is a "photographer", the Brit nothing discernible) go on a pointless road trip through obscure northeastern Germany and pick up a Polish hitchhiker. Nothing happens, except for the previously-mentioned naked romping and urinating.
All three characters are either (take your pick) completely unbelievable, even as movie characters, much less as actual human beings, OR (or AND, if you insist) the three most obnoxious characters the writer/director could think up.
The two "best friends" act like they can't stand each other, and if that's supposed to be some sort of erotic tension it misfires completely. The Pole adds nothing but a different body type (short/chunky vs the friends' buttless "swimmer's builds"); a third obnoxious, unbelievable character; and a third language for the subtitle writers to screw up (they completely ignore all English, regardless of how unintelligibly it's being mumbled by non-English speakers).
Three obnoxious characters running around like monkeys and urinating every few minutes--and annoying each other and the audience for 78 minutes. That's this movie.
If you watch this movie with certain expectations, you are going to be disappointed. Which, I think, is why so many of the reviews here are so polarized. You won't find the meaning of life in this movie. You won't find gay themed cliches or tropes. You won't find pretty boys strutting around. You won't find Hollywood-style "spell everything out for the dumb audience" directing. You won't find "the big steamy sex scene". But nor will you find the movie being coy about (European) attitudes to nudity and sex (something which clearly confuses several of the other reviewers here).
Instead, you will find, essentially, a movie about the way people muddle through the conflicting chemistry of friendships and relationships. These are not titanic conflicts, causing huge explosions or overly-dramatic scenes. They are the inner puzzles we have to solve as we grope through life. What DO I feel about someone? What DO they really feel about me?
The reactions of the three principal (well, only) characters are played out against a road trip background -- not a particularly new idea, but the director lets things unfold in a paced manner, just as they do in real life. Things are NOT spelled out here; the clues are all there, but the director (wisely) leaves the viewer to fill in the holes. This leaves us to puzzle out things from these imprecise clues in the same way the characters are puzzling out their lives.
The actors mostly do a good job, the Jonas character for me being the most filled out and well acted. Jonas (a photographer) is clearly using his camera as both a shield and a way to probe the feelings of his companions, but the director wisely refrains from over-doing this (to the point, I suspect, where some reviewers didn't even notice this). Philip is more direct, and apparently more shallow. Boris is in many ways the most ambiguous.
The movie is of course not perfect, and a few scenes didn't quite click for me, but overall the development was perfectly believable, and gently touching, though ultimately sad for at least one of the trio.
I said that this movie is about chemistry, and ultimately I think the movie is best understood in terms of a catalyst .. an apt term (check on Google if you're not sure of the precise definition), though what that catalyst is I shall leave you to find as you watch it.
Instead, you will find, essentially, a movie about the way people muddle through the conflicting chemistry of friendships and relationships. These are not titanic conflicts, causing huge explosions or overly-dramatic scenes. They are the inner puzzles we have to solve as we grope through life. What DO I feel about someone? What DO they really feel about me?
The reactions of the three principal (well, only) characters are played out against a road trip background -- not a particularly new idea, but the director lets things unfold in a paced manner, just as they do in real life. Things are NOT spelled out here; the clues are all there, but the director (wisely) leaves the viewer to fill in the holes. This leaves us to puzzle out things from these imprecise clues in the same way the characters are puzzling out their lives.
The actors mostly do a good job, the Jonas character for me being the most filled out and well acted. Jonas (a photographer) is clearly using his camera as both a shield and a way to probe the feelings of his companions, but the director wisely refrains from over-doing this (to the point, I suspect, where some reviewers didn't even notice this). Philip is more direct, and apparently more shallow. Boris is in many ways the most ambiguous.
The movie is of course not perfect, and a few scenes didn't quite click for me, but overall the development was perfectly believable, and gently touching, though ultimately sad for at least one of the trio.
I said that this movie is about chemistry, and ultimately I think the movie is best understood in terms of a catalyst .. an apt term (check on Google if you're not sure of the precise definition), though what that catalyst is I shall leave you to find as you watch it.
The first virtue of it is simplicity. Familiar pieces - friendship becoming love, a road trip , relations and their structure, slow rhytm and the character changing, step by step, the equilibrium, an open end and a film without the desire to demonstrate anything. I love it for the courage and art to be different, to propose, in natural manner, a simple and precise in details story, good acting and the fair development of facts. My favorit - the image of the window at the end of hall.
In trying to be subtle and leave open ended questions for the viewer, the film ends up lacking a lot of depth into the emotions of the main characters. It is true that it leaves a certain vagueness that is akin to semi platonic relationships between straight and lgbtq persons.
Not great ...but quite good. This film is a bit slow at times and not much happens for good part of the movie. But it is very well produced/structured; the scenery is beautiful and acting is top-notch!!
This film rings "true" on many levels and things develop naturally. Sadly, with three people; one will ultimately be left out! Life is hash.
I started this months ago and could not finish it. Re-watched it again and was pleasantly surprised how it developed in the end. I enjoyed this quite a bit.
This film rings "true" on many levels and things develop naturally. Sadly, with three people; one will ultimately be left out! Life is hash.
I started this months ago and could not finish it. Re-watched it again and was pleasantly surprised how it developed in the end. I enjoyed this quite a bit.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is You & I?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 6.950 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 19 Min.(79 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.78 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen