Postcards from London

This film tells the story of a young man who goes to London to find his artistic dreams.

The film is visually very beautiful. Harris Dickinson is beautiful, and is clearly objectified in the film. The story is interesting. It is pleasing to see that BFI makes a film as alternative and as erotic as this.

The film will not get widespread acclaim as it is a classic, non-classic, arty film in the same way that Betty Blue, Withnail & I, Donnie Darko, Jonny Suede and Cool World were. It's a showcase for the undoubted talents of Harris Dickinson, a man who exudes charm and emotion - also in real life, which will get him far in a transition from indie to mainstream. Keep an eye out for him.

I'm a sucker for Caravaggio, so that was enough to draw me in. But there's a lot more to this film. It's not everyone's cup of tea, and I can understand people thinking it's pretentious, but I don't think it is. It's whimsical, imaginative, original, and beautiful to look at. Don't expect Bergman or Almodovar. Just enjoy an odd, sexy bit of story telling.

If you're expecting the gritty, sweaty reality of rent boys in London, you'll find this movie disappointing. While there are some brief, decidedly homoerotic poses struck by the boys that replicate some of Caravaggio's paintings, the rent boys in this fantasy film are more about the cerebral than the physical. As mentioned several times in the film, they do not like the term "rent boys," preferring to be called "raconteurs."

The clients are obviously drawn to the physical beauty of the boys, in particular Harris Dickinson, but (and one must be reminded that this is a fantasy) it is the boys' ability to discuss artists such as Caravaggio in depth that seals the deal, so to speak.

One reviewer referred to this as "pretentious 'dibble'". Not sure what "dibble" is. I didn't notice anyone in the film dribbling, so presumably he meant "drivel." I have to totally disagree with that. I found it all to be fascinating and the actors carried it off with marvelous skill.

If I attempted to explain what it all meant, I would undoubtedly descend into pretentious drivel. It was somewhat amusing and presumably intended to mentally stimulate the viewer by making it all open to different interpretations. It undoubtedly explored the different forms of exploitation, but not in a way that demands all viewers react in a singular, predictable way.

I thoroughly enjoyed Postcards from London and will probably watch it again because, like a painting by Caravaggio, it contains far more than can be absorbed in one glance. I can easily see that it wouldn't appeal to everyone, but it definitely deserves attention as a thought-provoking film.

Tjhis movie is a pretentious and self-serving pile of manure. It has absolutely no redeeming features, other than some of the actors, who are at least very easy on the eyes. In fact, the most attractive of those actors is not the main character.