holden746
dic 2007 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.
Reseñas3
Clasificación de holden746
First of all, I want to say that the film simply blew me away. This film, Sergei Loznitsa's first feature is not only the best film (and discovery) of the year, but one of the biggest and most important works in cinema of this century.
Before, Loznitsa was a documentary film maker and this effect can be seen in his fiction film. It is not only true and violent, but also very unconventional, different (truly ascetic, and here can be seen influence of Loznitsa's mentor, Robert Bresson), Loznitsa's use of long take is truly remarkable, in Russian cinema, long take has been used very ofter, beginning from Tarkovsky, then Shepitko, Sokurov, Zvyagintsv... but Loznitsa's use is different and unique, he absolutely refuses style (there is no disgusting exploitation of manner, that spoils Zvyagintsev's overrated, stupid and pointless "Vozvrascheniye"), he doesn't have style as a director, the film itself creates its style and language (and trust me, it's much difficult and much remarkable).
And Loznitsa does very bold thing: he destroys notion of deep shot. Yes, Kiarostami shot films with digital camera (as Loznitsa does), but his shot is extremely static and Loznitsa makes very long travelings with hand held camera, what's truly new thing and it also creates a feeling of claustrophobia, of closed circle, of No Exit and it's really conceptual use of primitive cinematic method.
It's extremely difficult film, but it's not art house and it's not the proud film, so called "not for everyone". It IS for everyone, but on the other hand, it should be watched very carefully: consider that you'll be shocked and maybe even depressed but I have one very useful advise: if you decide to watch this TRUE masterpiece, be patient and watch it till the end.
It's really worth it.
Before, Loznitsa was a documentary film maker and this effect can be seen in his fiction film. It is not only true and violent, but also very unconventional, different (truly ascetic, and here can be seen influence of Loznitsa's mentor, Robert Bresson), Loznitsa's use of long take is truly remarkable, in Russian cinema, long take has been used very ofter, beginning from Tarkovsky, then Shepitko, Sokurov, Zvyagintsv... but Loznitsa's use is different and unique, he absolutely refuses style (there is no disgusting exploitation of manner, that spoils Zvyagintsev's overrated, stupid and pointless "Vozvrascheniye"), he doesn't have style as a director, the film itself creates its style and language (and trust me, it's much difficult and much remarkable).
And Loznitsa does very bold thing: he destroys notion of deep shot. Yes, Kiarostami shot films with digital camera (as Loznitsa does), but his shot is extremely static and Loznitsa makes very long travelings with hand held camera, what's truly new thing and it also creates a feeling of claustrophobia, of closed circle, of No Exit and it's really conceptual use of primitive cinematic method.
It's extremely difficult film, but it's not art house and it's not the proud film, so called "not for everyone". It IS for everyone, but on the other hand, it should be watched very carefully: consider that you'll be shocked and maybe even depressed but I have one very useful advise: if you decide to watch this TRUE masterpiece, be patient and watch it till the end.
It's really worth it.
This old Georgian film simply blew me away! I was so surprised to see that no one has written review on it before me...
First of all, film should have been revolutionary for its time, bold, original and even idiosyncratic, just like films of Bresson, Miklos Jancso (who achieved worldwide recognition one year earlier with his great The Round-Up) etc. And it's still very different, original and interesting today.
The film is about alienated man who is so close to nature that is cut off the society (even family) and stays alone. All the actors are good but the protagonist is simply outstanding! Photography is also remarkable and different and many themes that film descusses are very boldly and cleverly shown: Love triangle, mans maditation on nature and even father-son relationships!
All in all, it's a stunning (and at times difficult) tale of man's solitude, his fight for individuality and maditation on nature. If you get a chance, watch it! 10/10
First of all, film should have been revolutionary for its time, bold, original and even idiosyncratic, just like films of Bresson, Miklos Jancso (who achieved worldwide recognition one year earlier with his great The Round-Up) etc. And it's still very different, original and interesting today.
The film is about alienated man who is so close to nature that is cut off the society (even family) and stays alone. All the actors are good but the protagonist is simply outstanding! Photography is also remarkable and different and many themes that film descusses are very boldly and cleverly shown: Love triangle, mans maditation on nature and even father-son relationships!
All in all, it's a stunning (and at times difficult) tale of man's solitude, his fight for individuality and maditation on nature. If you get a chance, watch it! 10/10
Encuestas realizadas recientemente
3 en total de las encuestas realizadas