CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.3/10
1.5 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Jim se muda a Londres y comienza a trabajar como gigoló. Un día, Jim se convierte en musa de un artista.Jim se muda a Londres y comienza a trabajar como gigoló. Un día, Jim se convierte en musa de un artista.Jim se muda a Londres y comienza a trabajar como gigoló. Un día, Jim se convierte en musa de un artista.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 nominación en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
I'm a sucker for Caravaggio, so that was enough to draw me in. But there's a lot more to this film. It's not everyone's cup of tea, and I can understand people thinking it's pretentious, but I don't think it is. It's whimsical, imaginative, original, and beautiful to look at. Don't expect Bergman or Almodovar. Just enjoy an odd, sexy bit of story telling.
I found this film very campy and funny. Maybe thats not what was intended? It was sort of like a 70s gay art film. In a good way. Two of the cast stand out: Harris Dickenson in the lead and Jonah Hauer-King. If there really were rent boys like this I might be tempted.
The cinematography is very much like watching a play transposed to cinema, the set (small) scenes and lighting just seems like someone has taken a moderately successful stage-play and done a somewhat lazy transposition to the screen. I appreciate that budgets might have been small, but producing for the stage vs cinema is a very different thing.
don't get me wrong, I like the slightly surreal aspects (the parent's dining table) but the execution didn't quite make it, it's just a too too literal translation of the set-design and the lighting-design onto screen which just doesn't work.
I don't want to be harsh, because there are precious few interesting indie movies out there but its not 'grand budapest hotel' or 'gods own country'
a solid 6, but with a different producer / designer / director then it could have been better. can't really fault the actors at all.
I've continued watching, after the 1st 'chapter', it does move into other directions!
don't get me wrong, I like the slightly surreal aspects (the parent's dining table) but the execution didn't quite make it, it's just a too too literal translation of the set-design and the lighting-design onto screen which just doesn't work.
I don't want to be harsh, because there are precious few interesting indie movies out there but its not 'grand budapest hotel' or 'gods own country'
a solid 6, but with a different producer / designer / director then it could have been better. can't really fault the actors at all.
I've continued watching, after the 1st 'chapter', it does move into other directions!
If you're expecting the gritty, sweaty reality of rent boys in London, you'll find this movie disappointing. While there are some brief, decidedly homoerotic poses struck by the boys that replicate some of Caravaggio's paintings, the rent boys in this fantasy film are more about the cerebral than the physical. As mentioned several times in the film, they do not like the term "rent boys," preferring to be called "raconteurs."
The clients are obviously drawn to the physical beauty of the boys, in particular Harris Dickinson, but (and one must be reminded that this is a fantasy) it is the boys' ability to discuss artists such as Caravaggio in depth that seals the deal, so to speak.
One reviewer referred to this as "pretentious 'dibble'". Not sure what "dibble" is. I didn't notice anyone in the film dribbling, so presumably he meant "drivel." I have to totally disagree with that. I found it all to be fascinating and the actors carried it off with marvelous skill.
If I attempted to explain what it all meant, I would undoubtedly descend into pretentious drivel. It was somewhat amusing and presumably intended to mentally stimulate the viewer by making it all open to different interpretations. It undoubtedly explored the different forms of exploitation, but not in a way that demands all viewers react in a singular, predictable way.
I thoroughly enjoyed Postcards from London and will probably watch it again because, like a painting by Caravaggio, it contains far more than can be absorbed in one glance. I can easily see that it wouldn't appeal to everyone, but it definitely deserves attention as a thought-provoking film.
The clients are obviously drawn to the physical beauty of the boys, in particular Harris Dickinson, but (and one must be reminded that this is a fantasy) it is the boys' ability to discuss artists such as Caravaggio in depth that seals the deal, so to speak.
One reviewer referred to this as "pretentious 'dibble'". Not sure what "dibble" is. I didn't notice anyone in the film dribbling, so presumably he meant "drivel." I have to totally disagree with that. I found it all to be fascinating and the actors carried it off with marvelous skill.
If I attempted to explain what it all meant, I would undoubtedly descend into pretentious drivel. It was somewhat amusing and presumably intended to mentally stimulate the viewer by making it all open to different interpretations. It undoubtedly explored the different forms of exploitation, but not in a way that demands all viewers react in a singular, predictable way.
I thoroughly enjoyed Postcards from London and will probably watch it again because, like a painting by Caravaggio, it contains far more than can be absorbed in one glance. I can easily see that it wouldn't appeal to everyone, but it definitely deserves attention as a thought-provoking film.
This film tells the story of a young man who goes to London to find his artistic dreams.
The film is visually very beautiful. Harris Dickinson is beautiful, and is clearly objectified in the film. The story is interesting. It is pleasing to see that BFI makes a film as alternative and as erotic as this.
The film is visually very beautiful. Harris Dickinson is beautiful, and is clearly objectified in the film. The story is interesting. It is pleasing to see that BFI makes a film as alternative and as erotic as this.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaSteve McLean's first film in 24 years.
- ConexionesReferences Espartaco (1960)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Postcards from London?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Открытки из Лондона
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 5,312
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 2,686
- 11 nov 2018
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 15,548
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 30min(90 min)
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta