Mr_Hulot
ago 2002 se unió
Distintivos2
Para saber cómo ganar distintivos, ve a página de ayuda de distintivos.
Reseñas11
Clasificación de Mr_Hulot
Was Amadeus a hippie, a hedonist, a proto rock-star, a rebel, or is Forman just portraying him as such to fit the patterns of his continuing cinematic exegesis of historical figures? Forman was raised under two dire dictatorships, the Nazi and then later the Stalinist. No doubt that such a background fostered in his heart a dislike for all formal authority, for legalistic structures, and inspired in his mind a love for that archetypical rebel figure, the one who does not so much fight authority, because he despises it, but through virtue of higher alligence, to his own personal vision or inspiration, simply comports his life as though authority did not exist.
Mozart as presented by Forman fits this mold, and is a spiritual brother to Andy Kaufman, Larry Flint, and Randle Mc Murphy in Man on the Moon, the People vs. Larry Flint, and One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest respectively. He is giving us the same character over and over again, and telling us the same story at different times and places throughout the ages. This is fair enough if Forman sees this as the essential struggle occurring within the confines of the cosmos, but does his vision also encompass the masses or is he giving us the anti- Tolstoy an view that history is driven only by the actions of a few isolated great men, visionaries and revolutionaries? Yes, I like this movie, but it does not give us the sweep and grandeur that would properly reflect the music of it's subject. Ultimately it tells us more about it's author then it does about its main character. Is this a case of the cannibalism of history in order to support a director's personal vision, or simple appropriation of powerful `symbolic' personalities in order to present a Manichean view of the universe? I cannot pretend to know.
I know this, the film is energetic and amusing, like all of Forman's work that I have seen, and leaves the audience with a stronger feeling of connection with the misunderstood individualist visionary then it does with the gray world which is bent on crushing him, here represented by rival composer Salieri. The best thing it can do is inspire an audience member to take the first few tottering steps out of hypnotic TV created reality and try to create a world of his own. Why Forman hasn't gotten around to filming the life of Vincent Van Gogh is a mystery that remains unsolved.
8/10
Mozart as presented by Forman fits this mold, and is a spiritual brother to Andy Kaufman, Larry Flint, and Randle Mc Murphy in Man on the Moon, the People vs. Larry Flint, and One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest respectively. He is giving us the same character over and over again, and telling us the same story at different times and places throughout the ages. This is fair enough if Forman sees this as the essential struggle occurring within the confines of the cosmos, but does his vision also encompass the masses or is he giving us the anti- Tolstoy an view that history is driven only by the actions of a few isolated great men, visionaries and revolutionaries? Yes, I like this movie, but it does not give us the sweep and grandeur that would properly reflect the music of it's subject. Ultimately it tells us more about it's author then it does about its main character. Is this a case of the cannibalism of history in order to support a director's personal vision, or simple appropriation of powerful `symbolic' personalities in order to present a Manichean view of the universe? I cannot pretend to know.
I know this, the film is energetic and amusing, like all of Forman's work that I have seen, and leaves the audience with a stronger feeling of connection with the misunderstood individualist visionary then it does with the gray world which is bent on crushing him, here represented by rival composer Salieri. The best thing it can do is inspire an audience member to take the first few tottering steps out of hypnotic TV created reality and try to create a world of his own. Why Forman hasn't gotten around to filming the life of Vincent Van Gogh is a mystery that remains unsolved.
8/10
All Quiet on the Western Front is the finest film ever made about war. Germany during World War 2 suppressed it, so powerful a statement it is against the inhumanity of war it is no wonder our leaders fear it.
The film focuses on the process by which young men are turned into killers for the state. We see naive boys deceived by a nationalistic sermon on the virtues of self sacrifice and the glory of combat delivered by a loathsome schoolteacher. They are thoroughly indoctrinated, and the lot of them signs up to fight in the Great War. Only after basic training begins do they begin to realize the magnitude of what they have set themselves up for.
There are some of the most stunning and grisly combat scenes ever filmed. One remembers a soldier hit by a bomb near a barb wire fence, when the smoke clears we see nothing left of him but his hands desperately clutching the barb wire. Another scene involves a soldier forced to spend the night in a crater with the corpse of a man that he has just killed. In a fever of madness, he engages the body in an imaginary dialogue, first attempting to justify his action then finally begging the inert object for forgiveness. The scene is lurid, nearly surrealistic and terrifying.
The main character of the film is death, and the soldiers slowly getting used to his presence until they are hollowed out and numb. They come to realize not only the brutality of but also, more importantly, the pointlessness of war. In one discussion they wonder what they are doing trying to kill the English and the French, considering that none of them have ever known an Englishman or Frenchman.
Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket was modeled on this film in both structure and theme, but despite that film's undeniable value, this one remains superior. At the time of my writing this review George Dumbya Bush is planning to push America into yet another pointless war with Iraq, I wish I could get every American to watch this film, it might just turn popular sentiment against the war and save tens of thousands of lives.
The film focuses on the process by which young men are turned into killers for the state. We see naive boys deceived by a nationalistic sermon on the virtues of self sacrifice and the glory of combat delivered by a loathsome schoolteacher. They are thoroughly indoctrinated, and the lot of them signs up to fight in the Great War. Only after basic training begins do they begin to realize the magnitude of what they have set themselves up for.
There are some of the most stunning and grisly combat scenes ever filmed. One remembers a soldier hit by a bomb near a barb wire fence, when the smoke clears we see nothing left of him but his hands desperately clutching the barb wire. Another scene involves a soldier forced to spend the night in a crater with the corpse of a man that he has just killed. In a fever of madness, he engages the body in an imaginary dialogue, first attempting to justify his action then finally begging the inert object for forgiveness. The scene is lurid, nearly surrealistic and terrifying.
The main character of the film is death, and the soldiers slowly getting used to his presence until they are hollowed out and numb. They come to realize not only the brutality of but also, more importantly, the pointlessness of war. In one discussion they wonder what they are doing trying to kill the English and the French, considering that none of them have ever known an Englishman or Frenchman.
Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket was modeled on this film in both structure and theme, but despite that film's undeniable value, this one remains superior. At the time of my writing this review George Dumbya Bush is planning to push America into yet another pointless war with Iraq, I wish I could get every American to watch this film, it might just turn popular sentiment against the war and save tens of thousands of lives.
