russell_jw
Mai 2001 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen2
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Bewertungen586
Bewertung von russell_jw
Rezensionen1
Bewertung von russell_jw
Bobby Deerfield is not your average romantic drama especially when compared to the recent phase of Rom-Com's sweeping the screens at the cinemas.
Firstly, Al Pacino is at his best, highly intense and more importantly convincing as a character to accept. This is not surprising as his two other significant films of that decade were the masterful The Godfather and Godfather Part II. There seems to be something compelling in his role in this film which i cannot grasp to identify to you. Maybe because his co-star heightens our interest by their exchange of witty dialogue although i would point towards his stern expressions and calm voice which can explode in his characters few moments of glory.
Secondly, this film is not for the mass popcorn audience, the direction is obtuse and could be compared to the 'Art film' style that we struggle to view at all in popular culture. This is were the 'original' element of my comment of Bobby Deerfield spurs from. It is the fact that the mass audience wouldn't know what to do with the arbitrary meanings revealed. It is usually clear cut in 'Hollywood'.
To finish up, the romance and the character sparring is worth the time of a person who wants to be inspired or possibly take something away from a film that will last longer than the time it takes to see it.
Firstly, Al Pacino is at his best, highly intense and more importantly convincing as a character to accept. This is not surprising as his two other significant films of that decade were the masterful The Godfather and Godfather Part II. There seems to be something compelling in his role in this film which i cannot grasp to identify to you. Maybe because his co-star heightens our interest by their exchange of witty dialogue although i would point towards his stern expressions and calm voice which can explode in his characters few moments of glory.
Secondly, this film is not for the mass popcorn audience, the direction is obtuse and could be compared to the 'Art film' style that we struggle to view at all in popular culture. This is were the 'original' element of my comment of Bobby Deerfield spurs from. It is the fact that the mass audience wouldn't know what to do with the arbitrary meanings revealed. It is usually clear cut in 'Hollywood'.
To finish up, the romance and the character sparring is worth the time of a person who wants to be inspired or possibly take something away from a film that will last longer than the time it takes to see it.