Los soñadores

"The Dreamers" is all about three young adult upscale hippy types who languish in a flat in Paris in the late 60's and talk about cinema, politics, sex, and other stuff while sharing some first experiences. Two are brother (Garrel) and sister (Green) identical twins (or so we're told) who have an almost metaphysical bond and the third is an interloper (Pitt) who falls in lust with the sister. There's little plot to this slice of young adult life flick which seems to be more of a Bertolucci pet project than a commercial product for the masses. Less than engaging and much less than compelling, "The Dreamers" immerses itself in the esoterics of the place and time to the exclusion of anyone who wasn't there then. Beautifully filmed and masterfully crafted with some young actors doing superb work under difficult circumstances with plenty of graphic nudity and sex, "The Dreamers" will play best with aficionados of French cinema, Bertolucci fans, etc. Those who are squeamish about sex/nudity should pass. All others, be prepared for a marginally interesting watch. (B)

This is a fantastic movie for cinephiles, and if you didn't know it was directed by Bertolucci you would think it was the work of some young turk eager to impress. The references to movies of the past are many, and it is to Bertolucci's credit that he gives a nod to some of the great directors of the French Nouvelle Vague, Truffaut and Godard in particular. The movie begins with the protests over the sacking of the head of the Cinemateque, and there is Jean-Pierre Leaud playing himself but 35 years later. You are introduced to the eternal love triangle Truffaut was so fond of in movies like Jules et Jim and Silken Skin. The three main characters - Matthew, the American, is De Caprio, Theo is Belmondo and Isabelle is Anna Karina. The story revolves around the inability of Theo and Isabelle to break away from their incestuous relationship, excused by, they say, the fact that they were conjoined twins. You are left asking whether they are, Bertolucci continuously alludes to the matching marks on their upper arms, or to the fact that they do not appear to be. Theo and Isabelle are truelly dislikable, vain and self-obsessed, and as Matthew is increasingly drawn into their world you pity him for his inability to stand up against their pompous self-importance instilled in them by their parents liberal intellectualism. Including the clips of movies is as much for the name-that-movie parlour game addicts as is including the sixties sound track, but they do strengthen the direction the movie follows as all three characters main point of reference is movie history. Excellent little vignettes concerning such things as who is the greatest clown? Chaplin or Keaton, are included. And Theo's assertion that the Chinese revolution is just like a movie is shot down in flames by Matthew - these soldiers have but one book and seem to be nothing more than extras on a film set. The sex, although fairly strong, is never gratuitous, and is seen more as a way for Isabelle to break free from the relationship she has with her brother. The ersatz revolutionary Theo plays out the revolution in his head while drinking red wine and talking movies. In the end Matthew begins to see him and Isabelle for what they really are, vainglorious do-nothings. When Matthew argues with them that violence is not the way forward as they man the baracades, Isabelle has to choose between the two of them, and chooses her brother, yet you are still left with the feeling that this is merely a badge of honour for the pseudo communists.

Whiffs of Band a Part, Les Enfants Terrible, even Repulsion are there. This is a fantastic movie, and all credit to Bertolucci for giving us an insight into the movies and time that made him the director he was and is.

Matthew is a young american student in france, his passion for movies leads him into Theo and Isabelle, two twins that shares his passion, they quickly build a deep friendship and Matthew gets invited to stay with them while their parents are gone. However once he gets settled with them he discovers sides of both that he had not expected. While they spend their time talking and playing, the riots of Paris 1968 goes on in the "real world".

This is a very brave film in the way it has been build, but it is also a complicated movie that will leave you both confused and thinking, it's beautiful and it can almost be described as cinematic poetry, however this poetry also makes it a difficult one to relate too.

After seeing this film i am confused in what i feel about it, the movie feels very divided, and some times it is an extraordinary brave and experimental film, other times it is confuing, and at some times boring too. It's really a hard movie to understand because of the poetic feeling it gives, it's like reading a poem where some of the lines doesn't make sense, but i guess that could be an advantage as it can be seen more than once. I feel the strength of the movie is the way it challenges and explores like no american or typical mainstream movie would do, the often use of nudity and raw sex scenes would never be seen elsewhere, and even though it may annoy many people, Bertolucci portrays the scenes very beautiful and they never seem like dirty scenes, the most impressive scene is the one where Matthew and Isabelle have sex, never have a full sex scene been portrayed in such a beautiful and realistic way on screen. And there are many examples of this.

What brings the movie is first of all the very slow storyline, it barely moves at all, the whole 2 hours are pretty much circulating around one thing, which is the way these 3 youngsters spend their sparetime, it's an mysterious movie that really brings up interesting situations a lot of times, but other times it simply gets too slow and gets a little boring. Another partly negative thing is the understanding of the movie, as I earlier mentioned the movie is like a poem, if you have problems with a few lines the whole deeper meaning may fall apart. I wouldn't say i did not understand the fully deeper meaning of the movie, but i think each individual will understand this movie differently, due to the complex way it has been made. But i honestly think Bertolucci wanted it to be like that, a movie that will leave you thinking about many things, but i think what it really is about is finding yourself in a world where there are 6 billion people looking like you on the outside.

The movie is very well directed, a solid directing and you can clearly see the trademarks of the director, one thing i noticed was the floating camera. The floating camera gives a feeling of being there, it is mostly used in the first part of the movie where Matthew learns more about his mysterious new friends, it gives us a feeling of curiousity towards these two new persons. Two persons whom we soon discover have more to them than showing on the outside.

The acting in the movie is solid. I usually don't expect much from new and coming actors and actresses that i have not heard about before, this was also the case for this movie. But the acting is really good, Michael Pitt and Louis Garrel really gives an above average performance, great to see that there are still new actors who can take over when the old ones will be gone. But the star of this movie is Eva Green, what a mysteriously and unique performance, and what a brilliant casting, she is unique, beautiful and most importantly interesting, erotic and challenging. Also i give props to all the three main characters for their brave and realistic portray of nudity and the complications of sex among unexperienced youngsters.

As i said earlier this movie is very complex, it's hard to understand, and i could probably talk about it forever, but i got to stop somewhere. I think the movie is definetely worth watching, it's very artistic and does indeed stand on its own feet, it takes chances you don't see many movies take, and it's all done very well. On the negative side i think the movie sometimes get too complex and slow, but overall i don't regret seeing it, and i think that i will be seeing it again due to the complex story, it will probably bring me new thoughts when i see it next time.

6/10

My rating: 6/10

There are two types of dreamers in `The Dreamers': the three main characters, who create their own interior world and prefer to view the outside world by watching classic 1930s cinema; and the socialist street revolutionaries of riot-torn 1968 Paris, who attempt to overthrow the political and economic power structure. `The Dreamers' focuses more on the former than the latter, and Bernardo Bertolucci is careful to leave his film open to interpretation, but ultimately the dream world of the three main characters is shattered by the realities of life. The film ends before resolving the outcome of the second set of dreamers, but we all know our history. Some may think it a shame that the dreamers fail, but others like myself will view it as something that has to happen, if the dream is unrealistic and unsustainable.

The relationship between the three main characters is unlike anything that I've ever seen portrayed on film. The twins, Isabelle and Theo, are almost as close to each other in young adulthood as they were during the nine months they spent together in their mother's womb. Matthew, a U.S. student studying abroad in Paris, inserts himself into the middle, and when he receives early indications that portend the depth of the relationship between the twins, he does not run away. To me, this required too much suspension of disbelief, but I'm certainly aware that others have different proclivities. If Bertolucci's intent was to show a high degree of separation between his three dreamers and the rest of society, he certainly succeeded.

The three dreamers have some, but ultimately too little, awareness of their separation from reality and the unsustainable nature of the world they create. While sympathizing with the revolutionaries in the street, they actually are the ultimate materialistic consumers: they produce nothing that they consume (neither food nor art), and when the money their parents provide runs out, and they've drained most of the wine cellar, the harsh realities of life set in. Rooting through trash heaps isn't the answer, and the choices that they leave themselves in the end (self-annihilation or nihilism), I believe, show just how flawed their ideal world is. My interpretation is that this lesson also applies to the other set of dreamers, the street revolutionaries, but those who even today sympathize with the views of those revolutionaries will reject this interpretation.

`The Dreamers' is very voyeuristic, and Bertolucci puts his three leads through some incredibly intimate moments. All three leads are quite good, with Eva Green in particular deserving special notice for a completely uninhibited performance (at least the two male leads had each other's example to follow). It's hard to come up with an accurate overall rating for this film, because I think there will be a widespread variance in how different people react to both the storyline and the images. Read the reviews carefully, and if it sounds like something that interests and won't shock you, then give it a try. My middle-of-the-road rating is mainly due to my not being terribly interested in the type of relationship formed by the three main characters.

Paris, May 1968. Revolution breaks out and the world seems to be in a critical turning point, but inside the four walls of an apartment, three youngsters experience their very own revolution.

Yes, it's true. In the year 2004, one of the best cinematic experiences is offered by Bertolucci. Many are those who'd thought that he had nothing more to give, but with THE DREAMERS, the creator is reborn and next to his heroes he witnesses again the passage from adolescence and innocence to the age of responsibilities. A great fan of cinema himself, he doesn't hesitate to pay a number of tributes, just like Godard used to do in the past and Tarantino very recently. As he puts his view into the eyes of his protagonists, the girl and the boys seem to live inside the movies they adore. They're playing with lines from known films, they imitate characters, they put themselves into the sequences they love.

Despite their young age, all three actors not only do they show that they're worth of starring in a Bertolucci film, but they also go even further giving in every scene the necessary vividness and realistic tension. Ignoring the cosmogony taking place in the streets, they surrender to their own cosmogonic changes, to the wild sexual awakening, to the game between friendship and love, pleasure and pain. Eventually they commit themselves to the struggle between the game itself and real life. And that's where the heroes violently return in the thrilling final sequences in order to face their duty towards history.

THE DREAMERS is by far one the best motion pictures of the year, so daring but at the same time so energetic that seems able to touch anyone as a pure and romantic confession of a great filmmaker.