NOTE IMDb
8,2/10
25 k
MA NOTE
L'histoire vraie de Hossain Sabzian, un cinéphile qui s'est fait passer pour le réalisateur Mohsen Makhmalbaf pour convaincre une famille de jouer dans son prétendu nouveau film.L'histoire vraie de Hossain Sabzian, un cinéphile qui s'est fait passer pour le réalisateur Mohsen Makhmalbaf pour convaincre une famille de jouer dans son prétendu nouveau film.L'histoire vraie de Hossain Sabzian, un cinéphile qui s'est fait passer pour le réalisateur Mohsen Makhmalbaf pour convaincre une famille de jouer dans son prétendu nouveau film.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires et 2 nominations au total
Avis à la une
Nothing short of a masterpiece. Not for everyone's tastes. Discerning viewers tired of all the Hollywood tripe should definitely check out this low key but highly accomplished work about the amorphous quality of identity and the untrustworthy nature of celebrity. A film that will grow more and more important as the years go by.
The film's limited production values may turn off even the most discerning of viewers. Don't fear. It's just one of the many refreshing aspects about Kiarostami's "Close Up."
One of the best films of the nineties that people have never seen according to the stats here at IMDb.
Ten out of Ten.
The film's limited production values may turn off even the most discerning of viewers. Don't fear. It's just one of the many refreshing aspects about Kiarostami's "Close Up."
One of the best films of the nineties that people have never seen according to the stats here at IMDb.
Ten out of Ten.
You've been in court, for being someone that you're not, under a light that's put you right under the spot, a cinema director, or a fraudulent prospector, against a family who perceived your foolish plot. But events then take a turn, become surreal, as endeavours are inscribed on cine reel, re-enacting your conviction, with the family of victims, you play the lead in your own life and their ordeal.
An imaginative and inspired way to portray the events that the Ahankhah family went through when Hossain Sabzian decided to take on the persona of a well-known Iranian film director, with the cast playing themselves for the most part.
An imaginative and inspired way to portray the events that the Ahankhah family went through when Hossain Sabzian decided to take on the persona of a well-known Iranian film director, with the cast playing themselves for the most part.
I find it amazing that this movie works as well as it does. The people in it are not actors. They are ordinary Iranian citizens who happened to be involved in a curious incident that aroused the interest of a very talented film director. As an American who is aware of the tension between Iran's government and its vibrant film industry, you can't help but to scour this simple story for an ideological message. Is it a protest film? Is it an "all is well with Iran" film? Well, it's not either. It's just a simple and relatively mundane story told by the people who actually lived it.
What I got out of it, and your mileage may vary, is a deep sense that there is something beautiful about seeing a relatively small matter as an event of deep significance, one that requires all your attention. There is no larger story that gives meaning to the small events portrayed in the film, but the people in it, as well as the filmmakers themselves, imbue them all with a great seriousness. All of it is done without a hint of parody or ulterior motive.
And it's not like Iran didn't have "big" issues to confront in 1990, as it was rebuilding its society after the brutal war with Iraq. The cheap and obvious thing to do, which many foreign movies try, is to tell a simple story with a background of an emotionally charged historical time. It's quite beautiful to see this movie avoid that trap. It's not like you'll be moved to tears or something, but that's a part of the point! In a way, the film's ostensible lack of manipulativeness is so fresh to American eyes that you might find yourself moved on a much deeper level. Well, that, or you might be totally confused. After all, there is no background score to instruct you on how you should be feeling at each instant.
What I got out of it, and your mileage may vary, is a deep sense that there is something beautiful about seeing a relatively small matter as an event of deep significance, one that requires all your attention. There is no larger story that gives meaning to the small events portrayed in the film, but the people in it, as well as the filmmakers themselves, imbue them all with a great seriousness. All of it is done without a hint of parody or ulterior motive.
And it's not like Iran didn't have "big" issues to confront in 1990, as it was rebuilding its society after the brutal war with Iraq. The cheap and obvious thing to do, which many foreign movies try, is to tell a simple story with a background of an emotionally charged historical time. It's quite beautiful to see this movie avoid that trap. It's not like you'll be moved to tears or something, but that's a part of the point! In a way, the film's ostensible lack of manipulativeness is so fresh to American eyes that you might find yourself moved on a much deeper level. Well, that, or you might be totally confused. After all, there is no background score to instruct you on how you should be feeling at each instant.
Close-up tells the true story of a man arrested for impersonating Iranian director Mohsen Makhmalbaf. The film is a joy made up of mostly real footage of the trial and interviews with all involved, and also re-enactments of real events by the actual people involved. The film comes across as a portrait of a film-lover, as Hossain Sabzian defends his reasons for his impersonation in court with Kiarostami as the judge (literally) and the audience as jury, praying for a light sentence for Sabzian. Sabzian comes across as a screen legend, his innocence draws us to identify with him, a sweet man with a passion for films and family. Close-up literally bursts with originality, breaking the line between documentary and fiction with fantastic innovation, whilst still remaining light-hearted, humorous and easy viewing for anyone.
10fmoslehi
Not the usual Kiarostami movie, this is a half documentary, half reenactment by the actual people who were involved! That alone makes it a very unique movie.
While the story was unfolding, Kiarostami found out about it through a magazine article and as luck would have it, he was all geared up to make a movie (Pocket Money) but he decided to talk the executive producer into making this movie! It's shot in 40 days and all the events that happen after Kiarostami started to make the movie are a documentary, and all the events that had happened before are reenacted by the original people after the fact.
The movie works much better if one is familiar with Iranian cinema and particularly with Kiarostami and Makhmalbaaf (an equally famous, some would even say "the other" Iranian director who is not just the subject of this film but also appears in it as himself!) The documentary also gives a rare look inside the typical post revolution Iranian court system. Much of what people know about the Iranian judicial system has to do with high profile political cases which are very different than the overwhelming majority of cases that are about everyday legal problems that would typically not make the international news! In fact, when Kiarostami is trying to get the judge's permission to film the court room events, the judge tries to convince him to pick another trial, something more interesting!something having to do with a much bigger crime! Kiarostami has to explain to the judge that it is this particular case (having to do with Makhmalbaaf and cinema) that he's interested in! During the actual court proceedings, Kiarostami, with the judge's approving smiles, occasionally interjects and asks for more details and explanations! And some of the finest parts of the movie are the exchanges that take place during the trial between Kiarostami and the accused. When the accused mentions that he has finally realized that he is the "traveler" (a 1974 Kiarostami movie) Kiarostami is somewhat caught off guard! Many have suggested that the movie is a profound statement about the loss and the subsequent search for identity by an entire nation after a revolution. To his credit, in an interview recorded much later, Kiarostami claimed that although he agrees with that interpretation, he wasn't aware of it while he was making the movie! It is unusual for a director to pass up an interpretation like that as not having been part of his original vision! artistic integrity like that is truly a rarity, but then again, that's what makes Kiarostami the unique director that he is and why Kirosawa considered him the finest at his craft! In short, not your usual Kiarostami movie, yet for my money, an absolute treat. Here's a movie that engages the audience completely without a single car chase, without a single shot being fired, no aliens, no UFOs, no bad guys, no good guys, and it goes without saying that no one falls in love, let alone sex and cheating and the rest of what makes up 95% of the movies today! Yet, without using any of these standard tricks of the trade, Kiarostami keeps his audience glued to the screen from the first to the very last frame! At the end, I tend to agree with the great Kirosawa. Kiarostami has come pretty close to perfecting his craft!
While the story was unfolding, Kiarostami found out about it through a magazine article and as luck would have it, he was all geared up to make a movie (Pocket Money) but he decided to talk the executive producer into making this movie! It's shot in 40 days and all the events that happen after Kiarostami started to make the movie are a documentary, and all the events that had happened before are reenacted by the original people after the fact.
The movie works much better if one is familiar with Iranian cinema and particularly with Kiarostami and Makhmalbaaf (an equally famous, some would even say "the other" Iranian director who is not just the subject of this film but also appears in it as himself!) The documentary also gives a rare look inside the typical post revolution Iranian court system. Much of what people know about the Iranian judicial system has to do with high profile political cases which are very different than the overwhelming majority of cases that are about everyday legal problems that would typically not make the international news! In fact, when Kiarostami is trying to get the judge's permission to film the court room events, the judge tries to convince him to pick another trial, something more interesting!something having to do with a much bigger crime! Kiarostami has to explain to the judge that it is this particular case (having to do with Makhmalbaaf and cinema) that he's interested in! During the actual court proceedings, Kiarostami, with the judge's approving smiles, occasionally interjects and asks for more details and explanations! And some of the finest parts of the movie are the exchanges that take place during the trial between Kiarostami and the accused. When the accused mentions that he has finally realized that he is the "traveler" (a 1974 Kiarostami movie) Kiarostami is somewhat caught off guard! Many have suggested that the movie is a profound statement about the loss and the subsequent search for identity by an entire nation after a revolution. To his credit, in an interview recorded much later, Kiarostami claimed that although he agrees with that interpretation, he wasn't aware of it while he was making the movie! It is unusual for a director to pass up an interpretation like that as not having been part of his original vision! artistic integrity like that is truly a rarity, but then again, that's what makes Kiarostami the unique director that he is and why Kirosawa considered him the finest at his craft! In short, not your usual Kiarostami movie, yet for my money, an absolute treat. Here's a movie that engages the audience completely without a single car chase, without a single shot being fired, no aliens, no UFOs, no bad guys, no good guys, and it goes without saying that no one falls in love, let alone sex and cheating and the rest of what makes up 95% of the movies today! Yet, without using any of these standard tricks of the trade, Kiarostami keeps his audience glued to the screen from the first to the very last frame! At the end, I tend to agree with the great Kirosawa. Kiarostami has come pretty close to perfecting his craft!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn the final scene outside the jail when Sabzian is surprised and touched to meet the real director he had been impersonating, Mohsan Makhmalbaf, we don't hear most of their talk because (we're told) the sound equipment was faulty. In reality, Kiarostami just didn't want to leave the dialogue in, because it didn't come off well: Sabzi was genuinely moved to meet his idol and spoke from his heart, but Makhmalbaf was just repeating scripted lines, so the dialogue didn't work.
- GaffesWhen Sabzian and Makhmalbaf meet, there is a bundle in Sabzian's hand. He gets on the motorbike with the bundle in his hand. Later on, during their ride on the motorbike, the bundle is not there any more.
- Crédits fousThe film's title doesn't appear on screen until almost sixteen minutes into the film.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Stardust Stricken - Mohsen Makhmalbaf: A Portrait (1996)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Close-Up?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 2 670 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 2 670 $US
- 2 janv. 2000
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant