Sehnsüchtig

I've just come back from seeing what I think is one of the best movies of 2004. I found the story fascinating, the look stylish, and the music haunting.

"Wicker Park" is a tale of obsession on many levels. It is told partly in flashback, so that you have to piece the events together and figure out how far back the action of the film began -- what is now and what was then. The director uses split-screen techniques that enhance the look and feel of the film, lifting it from the realm of the ordinary to the plane of art. A haunting theme weaves its way through this labyrinth of lies, leading to a satisfying (because inevitable) conclusion.

I saw the film with two friends who were of a very different opinion. They found the film "convoluted" and "clichéd". I disagree. It was easy to tell what was flashback and what was here-and-now. But the story is complicated (not convoluted) and does require some sorting out. As for being cliched, I found the film quite the opposite. It could have gone in some trite, hackneyed directions but didn't. And while some people might think the ending is the cliché of all clichés, I thought that, emotionally, it was absolutely right and the only possible way to end the film.

I loved "Wicker Park" so much that I would willingly see it again, to get a better sense of how the story is put together, and just for the sheer pleasure of its look and sound. You might say I too am obsessed.

In Chicago, the former photographer and presently advertising executive Mathew (Josh Hartnett) is closing a business in a fancy restaurant with a Chinese representative, when he sees a woman that looks like his former passion Lisa (Diane Kruger). Two years ago, Lisa and Matthew had a love affair, and Lisa simply vanished when Matthew invited her to move with him to New York, where he had the invitation for a better job, and Matthew is still obsessed for her. Matthew decides to follow Lisa, and when he meets her, he realizes that Lisa is indeed another woman (Rose Byrne) with the same name. Matthew stays in Chicago with his friend Luke (Matthew Lillard) and decides to investigate the mystery.

On 16 October 2005, when I first saw this remake, I wrote the following review:

Although having a confused screenplay and too much coincidences, "Wicker Park" is a reasonable tale of obsessive love. The script, with many flashbacks, has many flaws and coincidences in a huge city like Chicago. The character Daniel is badly developed and disappears from the story, without any explanation whether he killed his wife or not, how he involved with Lisa and their relationship. The two lead actresses (Diane Krueger and Rose Byrne) are extremely gorgeous and together with Josh Hartnett, they show a great chemistry and make the romance work. The music score is great, and in the end, this film is a good entertainment. My vote is six.

Yesterday (08 March 2011) I saw "L'Appartement" (1996) for the first time and now I have a totally different opinion:

"Wicker Park" is a shallow and corny remake of a great French film. The screenplay resolves some points that are not clear in the original movie, but the adaptation of the story is developed in fast pace and loses the mystery and the romance of "L'Appartement", forgetting details and characters.

The worst of this remake is the detail of communication. "L'Appartement" is a 1996 film in Paris, meaning neither cell phones nor e-mails were available at that time. Therefore, communication was based on phone booths or letters. This remake takes place in Chicago and the characters have cellulars. This single premise would be enough to destroy this remake. But the screenplay writer needs to provide explanations and give a happy ending, destroying the puzzle and discussions about the European film.

Comparing the two films, I dare to write that "Wicker Park" is a "fast food" and "L'Appartement" is a refined feast. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Paixão à Flor da Pele"("Passion Near Skin")

"Wicker Park" has the feel of a romantic thriller. The previews make the movie a lot more sensational than it really is. It makes the female protagonist Alex appear like a psycho/stalker/murderer when in effect she is just a more extreme female version of the male protagonist Matt (Josh Hartnett). The plot long story short is about a guy (Matt) who finally catches a glimpse of his lost love Lisa in a restaurant. Two years ago she completely disappears from his life without explanation. She runs out before he has a chance to reunite with her right then and there. Meanwhile Matt is also being chased after by Alex, Lisa's "best friend". The movie parallels how Matt searching around for Lisa is like Alex lying and manipulating in her attempt to steal Matt away from Lisa. Except in the end Lisa returns Matt's affections whereas Matt doesn't not return Alex's feelings. This movie is sweet and nostalgic and that is what covers up all the plot holes. Plothole number one is a shot of Daniel, Lisa's ex standing outside of her apartment watching who he thinks is Lisa (Alex pretending to be Lisa)taking Matt to bed. Someone as jealous as Daniel would later on confront and beat the hell out of Matt but no, this is false foreshadowing as we never ever see Daniel in the film ever again. The second is not so much a plot hole as a criticism. For someone as scheming as Alex how long did she think she could pretend to be Lisa to Matt when she is also seeing Matt's best friend Luke? Obviously eventually they will all meet and Matt will find out the truth. And that is what happens in the film's climatic conclusion. Luke bumps into Matt and finally introduces him to Alex in the same restaurant we started out in the beginning. Everything comes out and Matt sees that Alex screwed her best friend over and pretended to be her in order to steal Matt. The very end is so touching when Matt and the real Lisa finally see each other you could see the pain and longing leaving their eyes as they finally reunite. I would recommend this movie for the touchy-feely emotions it will leave you with but be warned like I said its not perfect with all it plot holes.

It was a lazy Sunday night and the only movies playing were Wicker Park and Super Babies Baby Geniuses 2. Well, I picked the film with a more attractive cast.

After about the first thirty minutes of Wicker Park I was laughing because it seemed like this was the most absurd movie I had ever seen. However, as the film progressed the laughter subsided and intrigue ensued. By the last thirty minutes of the film I was hooked. When it was over, I was surprised that a movie that had started out so poorly ended up being one of the better films I have seen in a while.

If one sees this film, I recommend he/she be patient. I found the overall experience, despite the bad beginning, to be quite good.

4/5 stars

well went to see this movie at it's screen test, where at the end, we had to answer some survey questions about the movie. before going in to see the movie, i thought it would be just another romantic movie but i was soo wrong...

the pace of the movie was just right...with flashbacks and character intro and perspectives on certain situation during the movie was quite interesting to see, plus how the story unravel very much satisfied me as it was totally unexpected...just amazing, plus the camera works/effects just so cool to watch...

i must say this is not your usual love story and it sure will appeal to all movie-lovers and it's just amazing!