paul_imseih
sep 1999 se unió
Te damos la bienvenida a nuevo perfil
Nuestras actualizaciones aún están en desarrollo. Si bien la versión anterior de el perfil ya no está disponible, estamos trabajando activamente en mejoras, ¡y algunas de las funciones que faltan regresarán pronto! Mantente al tanto para su regreso. Mientras tanto, el análisis de calificaciones sigue disponible en nuestras aplicaciones para iOS y Android, en la página de perfil. Para ver la distribución de tus calificaciones por año y género, consulta nuestra nueva Guía de ayuda.
Distintivos2
Para saber cómo ganar distintivos, ve a página de ayuda de distintivos.
Reseñas9
Clasificación de paul_imseih
Having just watched this film at the Melbourne Film Festival where Breillat introduced the film, I can say that it is the most approachable and moving film she has made in recent memory.
While the film reduces Breillat's usual focus on sexuality and sexual power, it more than makes up for in its humane but disturbing focus on other power elements in relationships within and across modern bourgeois families and those classes below. I think that too few reviewers miss the class critique presented by Breillat but it is there and adds a whole new layer of significance to this film.
Basing the story on her own real-life experience of being defrauded by a major con, this autobiographical account of sudden disability from stroke and the manipulative strangers who take advantage of her sets up an austere, quietly unsettling premise as a platform for Isabelle Huppert's extraordinary performance as Breillat's alter-ego, Maud.
Whereas Breillat's previous films sometimes fail in her use of non-professional actors lacking range or depth of performance, Huppert fills this role with a technical brilliance and emotional and intellectual depth that allows the viewer to gain some hold on the rationale behind a woman's almost willing complicity in a swindling of which she is the unfortunate target. The word "victim" hardly seems appropriate here. Breillat and Huppert are reaching for something else.
You'll need to see the film to reach your own conclusion of this elusive "something else". It's enough to say that the film remains gripping throughout and thoroughly watchable, not least for the shimmering, alchemical performance by Huppert who is at the height of her powers in this performance.
While the film reduces Breillat's usual focus on sexuality and sexual power, it more than makes up for in its humane but disturbing focus on other power elements in relationships within and across modern bourgeois families and those classes below. I think that too few reviewers miss the class critique presented by Breillat but it is there and adds a whole new layer of significance to this film.
Basing the story on her own real-life experience of being defrauded by a major con, this autobiographical account of sudden disability from stroke and the manipulative strangers who take advantage of her sets up an austere, quietly unsettling premise as a platform for Isabelle Huppert's extraordinary performance as Breillat's alter-ego, Maud.
Whereas Breillat's previous films sometimes fail in her use of non-professional actors lacking range or depth of performance, Huppert fills this role with a technical brilliance and emotional and intellectual depth that allows the viewer to gain some hold on the rationale behind a woman's almost willing complicity in a swindling of which she is the unfortunate target. The word "victim" hardly seems appropriate here. Breillat and Huppert are reaching for something else.
You'll need to see the film to reach your own conclusion of this elusive "something else". It's enough to say that the film remains gripping throughout and thoroughly watchable, not least for the shimmering, alchemical performance by Huppert who is at the height of her powers in this performance.
I had high expectations on entering the cinema to see this film as it had been rated highly by Sight and Sound and I have a genuine interest in the music.
However the film is extremely poorly made, perhaps one of the clumsiest and most amateurishly created films in recent years. And for a film which is almost purely about sound, the quality of sound is, to put it bluntly, horrendous. The audio mix seems to have been sourced via handy-cam so it's impossible to appreciate what Villalobos is trying to explain in terms of sound quality and bass lines (which are almost completely lost in the film's audio).
Combine that with sloppy, long-winded, hand-held footage of various clubs and parties in Europe and the overall effect is very weak. Unfortunately, Villalobos, while an impressive DJ, doesn't make up for the film's technical shortcomings and is by turns excruciatingly fidgety (the drugs no doubt), campy and emotionally distant.
Stick to "24 Hour Party People"...
However the film is extremely poorly made, perhaps one of the clumsiest and most amateurishly created films in recent years. And for a film which is almost purely about sound, the quality of sound is, to put it bluntly, horrendous. The audio mix seems to have been sourced via handy-cam so it's impossible to appreciate what Villalobos is trying to explain in terms of sound quality and bass lines (which are almost completely lost in the film's audio).
Combine that with sloppy, long-winded, hand-held footage of various clubs and parties in Europe and the overall effect is very weak. Unfortunately, Villalobos, while an impressive DJ, doesn't make up for the film's technical shortcomings and is by turns excruciatingly fidgety (the drugs no doubt), campy and emotionally distant.
Stick to "24 Hour Party People"...
One of the above reviewers associated this film with the works of Tarkovsky in the use of imagery. What an outrageous slur against one of the great directors of film.
To give you some idea of what a w--k-fest this film is, the entire credits are shown at the beginning of the film. Most in the audience found this hilarious but only later did I realise why this is done - so we don't find the credits more entertaining than the film. Yet today, 2 days after watching the film, this fact - the credits at the start of the film - were the true highlight of the movie. What innovation! What genius!
Despite the long, drawn out feel of the film, it is neither poetic, dreamlike nor moving. Directed by Lucile Hadzihalilovic (one of Gaspar Noe's gang - he of "Irreversible" and "Seul Contre Tous"), the film aims for strangeness and profundity but veers off course pretty quickly. It isn't even kooky, funny, insightful, shocking or (if you'll excuse my language) entertaining...
And it certainly is not art. So what the hell was I watching??
Noe can get away with irreverent, eccentric or questionable imagery because there is real muscle on the bones of his films. This film is a flabby imitation, with only the trickery left to prop it up.
Don't get me wrong, I love French cinema. My wife is French, I love France, the language, the culture, French literature and history. But this film gives French cinema a bad name.
To the clown who ran the Sydney Film Festival in 2005 (Lynden Barber) - you picked an embarrassingly bad collection of films. To have this as one of the closing films of the festival highlighted what rubbish you served up.
To give you some idea of what a w--k-fest this film is, the entire credits are shown at the beginning of the film. Most in the audience found this hilarious but only later did I realise why this is done - so we don't find the credits more entertaining than the film. Yet today, 2 days after watching the film, this fact - the credits at the start of the film - were the true highlight of the movie. What innovation! What genius!
Despite the long, drawn out feel of the film, it is neither poetic, dreamlike nor moving. Directed by Lucile Hadzihalilovic (one of Gaspar Noe's gang - he of "Irreversible" and "Seul Contre Tous"), the film aims for strangeness and profundity but veers off course pretty quickly. It isn't even kooky, funny, insightful, shocking or (if you'll excuse my language) entertaining...
And it certainly is not art. So what the hell was I watching??
Noe can get away with irreverent, eccentric or questionable imagery because there is real muscle on the bones of his films. This film is a flabby imitation, with only the trickery left to prop it up.
Don't get me wrong, I love French cinema. My wife is French, I love France, the language, the culture, French literature and history. But this film gives French cinema a bad name.
To the clown who ran the Sydney Film Festival in 2005 (Lynden Barber) - you picked an embarrassingly bad collection of films. To have this as one of the closing films of the festival highlighted what rubbish you served up.