Innocents: The Dreamers

My rating: 6/10

There are two types of dreamers in `The Dreamers': the three main characters, who create their own interior world and prefer to view the outside world by watching classic 1930s cinema; and the socialist street revolutionaries of riot-torn 1968 Paris, who attempt to overthrow the political and economic power structure. `The Dreamers' focuses more on the former than the latter, and Bernardo Bertolucci is careful to leave his film open to interpretation, but ultimately the dream world of the three main characters is shattered by the realities of life. The film ends before resolving the outcome of the second set of dreamers, but we all know our history. Some may think it a shame that the dreamers fail, but others like myself will view it as something that has to happen, if the dream is unrealistic and unsustainable.

The relationship between the three main characters is unlike anything that I've ever seen portrayed on film. The twins, Isabelle and Theo, are almost as close to each other in young adulthood as they were during the nine months they spent together in their mother's womb. Matthew, a U.S. student studying abroad in Paris, inserts himself into the middle, and when he receives early indications that portend the depth of the relationship between the twins, he does not run away. To me, this required too much suspension of disbelief, but I'm certainly aware that others have different proclivities. If Bertolucci's intent was to show a high degree of separation between his three dreamers and the rest of society, he certainly succeeded.

The three dreamers have some, but ultimately too little, awareness of their separation from reality and the unsustainable nature of the world they create. While sympathizing with the revolutionaries in the street, they actually are the ultimate materialistic consumers: they produce nothing that they consume (neither food nor art), and when the money their parents provide runs out, and they've drained most of the wine cellar, the harsh realities of life set in. Rooting through trash heaps isn't the answer, and the choices that they leave themselves in the end (self-annihilation or nihilism), I believe, show just how flawed their ideal world is. My interpretation is that this lesson also applies to the other set of dreamers, the street revolutionaries, but those who even today sympathize with the views of those revolutionaries will reject this interpretation.

`The Dreamers' is very voyeuristic, and Bertolucci puts his three leads through some incredibly intimate moments. All three leads are quite good, with Eva Green in particular deserving special notice for a completely uninhibited performance (at least the two male leads had each other's example to follow). It's hard to come up with an accurate overall rating for this film, because I think there will be a widespread variance in how different people react to both the storyline and the images. Read the reviews carefully, and if it sounds like something that interests and won't shock you, then give it a try. My middle-of-the-road rating is mainly due to my not being terribly interested in the type of relationship formed by the three main characters.

THE DREAMERS (3 outta 5 stars) Interesting project by the renowned director Bernardo Bertolucci... dealing with the events of 1968 in France... a time of great social upheaval, as rioting students took to the streets to shut down the French government. The main characters are a young American student who has come to France to study film... and a very unconventional brother and sister who recruit him to their offbeat lifestyle. All three are obsessed by film (as many young people were in 1968... the glory days of the avant garde)... and also with the concept of breaking rules and societal taboos. With their parents away for the month and the flat to themselves, bets are made on film trivia and the penalties for not identifying a particular moment from a particular film become more and more shocking. Only leaving their home to watch films, the trio are basically oblivious to the growing trouble in the streets... until finally they can sit passively no more. Very intriguing concept and the acting is fine... but ultimately I thought the conclusion fell a little flat... the transition from sexual hedonism to political activism didn't really work for me... it all seemed a little abrupt and could have been explored a little deeper. Worth watching and discussing though.

"The Dreamers" is one of Bernardo Bertolucci's most underrated films. A mesmerizing love declaration for The Cinema, this unforgettable film must be discovered.

In 1968, 19-year-old American Matthew (Michael Pitt), while settling in Paris for studying French, meets two equally young, beautiful and liberal film buffs: the twins Isabelle (Eva Green, another Bertolucci's luminous discovery, like he did with Liv Tyler in "Stealing Beauty") and Theo (Louis Garrel, son of French director Philippe Garrel and the best of the cast). The twins' parents travel, and Matthew is invited to join the attractive duo in their apartment. He accepts the invitation, of course, and the threesome starts a bizarre game of seduction with a charming leitmotiv: riddles about classic films. Who doesn't know the right answer, has to do what he/she is asked to. In the background, student riots in defense of Henri Langlois and his merit on the Cinémathèque Française are breaking out on the streets.

The film is superb, artistically and technically. Bertolucci is top-notch, the soundtrack is overwhelming (with songs by Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix and Édith Piaf, among others), and the cinematography (by Fabio Cianchetti) is one of the best, if not the best, I've seen recently. Gilbert Adair, we can't forget, did an excellent job adapting his novel, "The Holy Innocents", to the big screens. The sex/full frontal scenes and amorality can shock some people, this is definitely not a film for all tastes (as almost all masterpieces), but those who are open-minded and admire good cinema, will be entranced. The ending is one of the most surprising, original and brilliant I've ever seen, but, unfortunately, not everyone will get it. That's a crying shame, but original films tend to be misunderstood. "The Dreamers" is no exception.

A must-see to all film lovers. My vote is 10.

Paris, May 1968. Revolution breaks out and the world seems to be in a critical turning point, but inside the four walls of an apartment, three youngsters experience their very own revolution.

Yes, it's true. In the year 2004, one of the best cinematic experiences is offered by Bertolucci. Many are those who'd thought that he had nothing more to give, but with THE DREAMERS, the creator is reborn and next to his heroes he witnesses again the passage from adolescence and innocence to the age of responsibilities. A great fan of cinema himself, he doesn't hesitate to pay a number of tributes, just like Godard used to do in the past and Tarantino very recently. As he puts his view into the eyes of his protagonists, the girl and the boys seem to live inside the movies they adore. They're playing with lines from known films, they imitate characters, they put themselves into the sequences they love.

Despite their young age, all three actors not only do they show that they're worth of starring in a Bertolucci film, but they also go even further giving in every scene the necessary vividness and realistic tension. Ignoring the cosmogony taking place in the streets, they surrender to their own cosmogonic changes, to the wild sexual awakening, to the game between friendship and love, pleasure and pain. Eventually they commit themselves to the struggle between the game itself and real life. And that's where the heroes violently return in the thrilling final sequences in order to face their duty towards history.

THE DREAMERS is by far one the best motion pictures of the year, so daring but at the same time so energetic that seems able to touch anyone as a pure and romantic confession of a great filmmaker.

And, trust me, it was nothing like this! Sure, I would have dreamed to have met(and more!) someone like Isabelle when i was 20. This movie is pure garbage and anyone who thinks to the contrary ought to get a reality check. It has 3 beautiful young actors who have nothing better to do than have sex, sleep and drink very expensive wine. Nice. Those of us who were actually teenagers in the 60s do not have this experience at all. It is fantasy. Don't get me wrong: If the purpose of this artsy film was to titillate and show off the gorgeous, voluptuous bodies of these 3 young persons, then it succeeded in every measure. But all three of them (as portrayed in the movie) are self-obsessed, self-centred, rude, spoiled rotten kids. Parents were total idiots too. Thank goodness, the 60s were not dominated by these amoral teenagers; otherwise we may not have succeeded as a Western Society into the new millennium. Take this movie for what it is: nice camera-work, good Parisian scenery and 3 gorgeous nude teenagers screwing like rabbits. If you are reading more into it than that, then you are a true idiot. It is artsy pornography. Nothing more.