El amor es más fuerte que las bombas

Trier's English-languaged debut has been praised by many, but NOT by me. This is the essence of mediocrity: forgettable, not moving, not interesting, not dramatic. There is really no point to this. The cinematography is beautiful, the editing is quite inspired and interesting, but the script is awfully bland and the otherwise fantastic actors and actresses are wasted and utilized in a horrid way. Eisenberg is just plain old Eisenberg; Byrne can't save his character; and worst of all: Huppert is reduced to a boring character with no real depth or energy. It's all so incredibly lame. There are a few subplots in it, but it doesn't feel like it has a real plot or story that can drive the additions. Besides, the entire thing with the youngest son is that he likes to play Skyrim and he writes bad poetry that brings him success with a girl (realistic much??). This entire premise is horrible and made me sad for whoever wrote this uninspired crap: it's a big bowl of nothing. It's worse than nothing, it's boring, a void, a complete waste of time and Huppert. I hated it and almost couldn't finish it. Besides, a bunch of morals to the story did bother me: none of the characters are likable, but I feel like they were meant to be. The journey is not a journey, but a stagnant and static group of characters in a dull setup. It's not bad. It's just mediocre. Incredibly mediocre. Normally, the quite impressive productive forces behind a movie like this can make it count, but this one will be forgotten completely in five years - only remembered by the handful of people that could relate to one of the characters. I couldn't... Five out of ten. And maybe four on a bad day.

Not as smart as it thinks it is. It's not deep but acts like it is.

A multi-nationally produced film, especially you can call it a European product, but an English language film that takes place in the New York. The story of a husband and two sons of the famed war photographer who recently died in a car crash. So the film is focused to tell how they are going to cope with their loss, especially the little brother who has differences with his father. They all kind of drifted away from each other, but without an alternate they have to come together to go through it.

This is not a usual mourning theme, but sometimes I felt they forgot they're in mourning. Because the narration quickly shifts to various topics like the birth of a child, a new affair and trying to impress the girl whom the boy has a crush. So with all this, I completely witnessed a different type of film than what it had said. That's not bad, just a refreshing and with constant moving back and forth in in time to disclose some key events.

Mainly the portrayal splits into three to cover those three family members and each has its own specialty. Something like a film for older people, middle-aged and teens, all the these contents smartly joined together. Apart from the good show from the cast, the director did his best as usual, but this is not up to the par with his other works. For a watch this film definitely would do good. Since it's not a Hollywood, you won't have to worry about American film clichés, because it was developed much better and ends better.

6/10

Greetings again from the darkness. Sometimes we just can't "get over it". Three years after a war photographer dies in a suspicious car accident, her husband and two sons find themselves in various states of emotional distress. Everyone deals with guilt in their own way, but these three seem to be doing anything and everything to avoid actually dealing with the emotional fallout.

Writer/director Joachim Trier (Oslo, August 31) delivers his first English-speaking film with an assist from co-writer Eskil Vogt and a terrific cast. As we would expect from Mr. Trier, it's a visually stylish film with some stunning images … and the timeline is anything but simple as we bounce from past to present, and from the perspective of different characters (sometimes with the same scene).

The creativity involved with the story telling and technical aspects have no impact whatsoever on the pacing. To say that the film is meticulously paced would be a kind way of saying many viewers may actually get restless/bored with how slowly things move at times. Trier uses this pacing to help us experience some of the frustration and discomfort that each of the characters feel.

Isabelle Huppert plays the mother/wife in some wonderful flashback and dream-like sequences, while Gabriel Byrne plays her surviving husband. Jesse Eisenberg as Jonah, and Devin Druid as Conrad are the sons, and as brothers they struggle to connect with each other … just as the father struggles to connect with each of them. In fact, it's a film filled with characters who lie to each other, lie to themselves, and lie to others. It's no mystery why they are each miserable in their own way. The suppressed emotions are at times overwhelming, and it's especially difficult to see the youngest son struggle with social aspects of high school … it's a spellbinding performance from Devin Druid ("Olive Kitteridge").

Jesse Eisenberg manages to tone down his usual hyper-obnoxious mannerisms, yet still create the most unlikable character in the film … and that's saying a lot. Mr. Byrne delivers a solid performance as the Dad who is quite flawed, and other supporting work is provided by David Strathairn and Amy Ryan. The shadow cast by this woman is enormous and deep … and for nearly two hours we watch the family she left behind come to grips with her death and each other. It's a film done well, but only you can decide if it sounds like a good way to spend two hours.

This film tells the story of a father and his two teenage sons, who core cope with the untimely death of their wife / mother due to a traffic accident. Their grief is further complicated by a breakdown on communication.

I tried very hard to understand the story, but honestly I didn't understand a thing. "Louder Than Bombs" tries to tell a story of a dysfunctional family, but it ends up being an aimless drivel. I have no idea what the story is trying to convey. It jumps between the past and present inexplicably, and there is little continuity and connection between the past and present. And what's the fascination with decomposition of bodies? Those scenes are just plain gross. Perhaps the scenes are there to be provocative, but they simply alienate viewers from the film. Furthermore, it is not interesting to see teenagers sulk all the time. I regret having wasted my time watching this indecipherable collage of scenes.