tony-mastrogiorgio
Nov. 2002 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.
Abzeichen3
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Bewertungen190
Bewertung von tony-mastrogiorgio
Rezensionen20
Bewertung von tony-mastrogiorgio
In 2010, Hal Hartley made several short films. It's easy to imagine that his initial burst of indie filmmaking and the recognition and opportunities he'd enjoyed had run their course. His expectations about filmmaking were probably smaller, more private.
On a television screen during several shots, Jean-Luc Godard talks about his smaller audience - as he put it later, making films for 100k of his closest friends. The film itself is a perfect distillation of Godard's post 1980s filmmaking: an off screen voice from a phone call setting off a plot; the plot an excuse for imagines, comments, and emotions; the framing of shots, the television showing Godard; even the sound of a tape being rewound abs fast forwarded clearly nodding to (and likely lifted from) Godard's Historie(s) su Cinema. The final nod comes in the end credit which stats Godard "used without permission"
It's a nod to a major influence, but Hartley is clearly making a similar comment about his own filmmaking. He has reached a stage where the filmmaking is no less serious, the art no less focused, but the expectation is changed. He acknowledges making films for a small and smaller circle.
With that context in mind, the effect is moving and honest. It packs more in three minutes than most filmmakers do in hours...
On a television screen during several shots, Jean-Luc Godard talks about his smaller audience - as he put it later, making films for 100k of his closest friends. The film itself is a perfect distillation of Godard's post 1980s filmmaking: an off screen voice from a phone call setting off a plot; the plot an excuse for imagines, comments, and emotions; the framing of shots, the television showing Godard; even the sound of a tape being rewound abs fast forwarded clearly nodding to (and likely lifted from) Godard's Historie(s) su Cinema. The final nod comes in the end credit which stats Godard "used without permission"
It's a nod to a major influence, but Hartley is clearly making a similar comment about his own filmmaking. He has reached a stage where the filmmaking is no less serious, the art no less focused, but the expectation is changed. He acknowledges making films for a small and smaller circle.
With that context in mind, the effect is moving and honest. It packs more in three minutes than most filmmakers do in hours...
Aaron Sorkin has become one of those filmmakers people love to bash. It's a weird phenomenon that requires acting like the given filmmaker's flaws are his or hers alone while simultaneously ignoring any strengths.
Sorkin has his flaws and they occasionally the ones ascribed to him by his detractors. He also has considerable strengths. The biggest flaw in Being the Ricardos is the framing story - contemporary interviews with characters involved in events of the main story. The frame is unnecessary and badly acted. (Except Linda Lavin, at times.) The payoff for the frame is weak and doesn't justify it. Also, the first scene or two with Lucy and Desi is weak. After five minutes you might reasonably think this isn't going to work.
Once Kidman and Bardem find their rhythm, the movie is very, very good and they deliver award caliber performances. Just get beyond the negative hyping and get past the first few minutes. The dynamics between the people making the show (writers, directors, producers, co-stars) are interesting and sharply drawn, and the navigating between network and sponsor higher ups is as well. The emotional climax to Lucy and Ricky's relationship is very good.
Bottom line: what's good in it is very good. And what doesn't work isn't enough to stop you from watching it and enjoying it.
Sorkin has his flaws and they occasionally the ones ascribed to him by his detractors. He also has considerable strengths. The biggest flaw in Being the Ricardos is the framing story - contemporary interviews with characters involved in events of the main story. The frame is unnecessary and badly acted. (Except Linda Lavin, at times.) The payoff for the frame is weak and doesn't justify it. Also, the first scene or two with Lucy and Desi is weak. After five minutes you might reasonably think this isn't going to work.
Once Kidman and Bardem find their rhythm, the movie is very, very good and they deliver award caliber performances. Just get beyond the negative hyping and get past the first few minutes. The dynamics between the people making the show (writers, directors, producers, co-stars) are interesting and sharply drawn, and the navigating between network and sponsor higher ups is as well. The emotional climax to Lucy and Ricky's relationship is very good.
Bottom line: what's good in it is very good. And what doesn't work isn't enough to stop you from watching it and enjoying it.
Kürzlich durchgeführte Umfragen
7 Gesamtzahl der durchgeführten Umfragen