360

I ran across 360 by chance and really enjoyed it. Yet, when searching for more information in internet the generic title proved difficult to google. After some clicking things started to unfold: the same author directed City of God and the movie is a loose adaptation of one Arthur Schnitzler's play. Although i can't say much about the latter, the former impressed me even more since i've enjoyed that movie, as well.

The cast is brilliant with famous actors popping in and out of view and blending discreetly with otherwise great performance of less known colleagues. We effortlessly move with them across cities, countries and continents as it otherwise is the case in globally interconnected world at the start of the 21st century.

The more i think about 360 the more interesting details i discover in retrospect. Probably the strongest message is that there is a good seed even in the worst of us. The other is that we all eventually get what we want but some of us also get what they deserve.

What i particularly enjoyed is that a lot of things are either foreshadowed or left unsaid. This gives room for viewer's imagination to kick in, which, in turn, is rather uncommon in the era of realism and boredom in movies with artistic tendencies.

To sum it up, the only reason my vote is two stars shy of the best note is that i understand how this kind of movie might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Taking as its, admittedly uncredited, source Arthur Schnitzler's play "Reigen", screen-writer Peter Morgan and director Fernando Meirelles' 360 combines several stories in something of the disjointed manner of Inarritu's "Amores Perros" or "Babel". It's very skillfully made and yes, it holds our attention but that's all it does. On an emotional level it never really engages us and the 'stories', which are naturally related, aren't particularly interesting. The film is clever, well-written, often beautifully directed and the large, international cast are all fine but there's a distinct lack of substance; this isn't a memorable film. Still, there is at least one thing about this film that is great and it occurs whenever Anthony Hopkins is on screen. It isn't a big part and there isn't a great deal of character development in the writing but Hopkins is such a great actor that he makes the part great. You get the impression he's making it up as he goes along; in other words, you feel you are seeing a real person rather than the actor playing him. He's only on screen for much too short a time but he's magnificent. As can he guessed from the title, the film is called 360 because the stories go full circle; if only they had been better this film might have been as great as something like "Amores Perros" or "Pulp Fiction" which were constructed in much the same way. It's certainly not a bad film but it could have been so much better while the closing story seems both melodramatic and really rather tagged on for effect. On hindsight this would probably have made a good six-part television series rather than a two hour movie.

This film is about a married couple, and the people linked to them through their respective infidelity.

"360" is an artistic film that tells the live stories of may different individuals, loosely linked with Jude Law and Rachel Weisz. Despite the plethora of characters, the story is easy to follow. However, the story itself is not that interesting. Basically, it's A meets B, B meets C, C meets D, D meets E, then A sees F walking past and then F does the same thing B was doing earlier. It is a nice circle, but I am unsure if it is entertaining or interesting to watch. One thing I would like the film to expand on is Blanca's fate after she found the suitcase. That would have been interesting. Overall, "360" is an OK film to watch, but don't expect much from it.

The idea of narrating different linked stories of characters is certainly not new and the material in this picture is quite abundant: a lot of complex characters, a lot of deep and tense backgrounds. The limit was that the director probably wanted to explore too many characters and too many situations, and the result is that no single story or character is sufficiently developed and seem to be more kept separate than interconnected. The idea that people's lives are connected comes out as banal and evident, as part of any person not living secluded at home, and the fact that in the picture the links go from Europe to the US to Brasil is simply because it deals with dynamic people who move across the world. Some story lines, such as Hopkins' search for his lost daughter could have been explored more deeply, on the contrary it remains faded like the other stories.

Nothing to say against shooting, the use of split scenes is effective and tries to underline the idea of interconnections, and the subtle use of camera tries to make the characters' personalities come out, but in the end do not make up for a general underdevelopment. Nothing to say against the talented, but a little wasted cast, who give depth to the characters, although in the end we cannot but miss some more insight and deepening of both characters and stories.

"A wise man once said if there's a fork in the road take it." This is a movie that deals with many different characters from different parts of the world from different social classes and how they deal with day to day problems from doing anything to earn money to getting stranded while traveling. The cast in this, which includes: Rachel Weisz, Jude Law, Anthony Hopkins and Ben Foster is great and honestly the cast is the best part of the movie. I used to think that a great cast automatically means that it will be a great movie, but after the last 4 or 5 movies I have seen based off the cast I am beginning to rethink my opinion. The acting is great in this and the story lines basically end up being tied together I guess but the movie is just so slow moving that it makes it really hard to stay interested in. The movie is pretty OK but for me this is another example of a great cast in a sub-par movie. Overall, very slow moving drama that is really only worth seeing because of the cast. I give it a C+.