Conversation animée avec Noam Chomsky
Titre original : Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy?: An Animated Conversation with Noam Chomsky
NOTE IMDb
7,1/10
3,8 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA series of interviews featuring linguist, philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky done in hand-drawn animation.A series of interviews featuring linguist, philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky done in hand-drawn animation.A series of interviews featuring linguist, philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky done in hand-drawn animation.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 nominations au total
Richard Feynman
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- (non crédité)
Michèle Oshima
- Self
- (voix)
- (non crédité)
Beverly S. Stohl
- Self
- (voix)
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
I mean not to sound sycophantic but any document that has noam chomsky talking for 80 minutes is a valuable one. Gondry is an awkward guy which is fun to listen. They get along well. Noam is, as always, insightful and inspiring.
A series of interviews featuring linguist, philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky done in hand-drawn animation.
Because of Gondry's accent, and at times because of Chomsky's age, the discussion is a bit difficult to understand, and you have to focus. Interestingly, there is a communication breakdown between Gondry and Chomsky, as well, because of translation and pronunciation issues.
The film is part biographical, part about language acquisition. There is no discussion of politics, which is probably good, because it makes this a much more timeless presentation.
There is mention of "irreducible complexity", which seemed odd, and then Gondry mentions astrology? He seems to be a bit out of his league at times. At least he was able to get Chomsky to talk about his wife Carol, which has been a sensitive topic.
Because of Gondry's accent, and at times because of Chomsky's age, the discussion is a bit difficult to understand, and you have to focus. Interestingly, there is a communication breakdown between Gondry and Chomsky, as well, because of translation and pronunciation issues.
The film is part biographical, part about language acquisition. There is no discussion of politics, which is probably good, because it makes this a much more timeless presentation.
There is mention of "irreducible complexity", which seemed odd, and then Gondry mentions astrology? He seems to be a bit out of his league at times. At least he was able to get Chomsky to talk about his wife Carol, which has been a sensitive topic.
Then see this. Otherwise it's just sad to shut down Michel s optimism at every turn. Ugh.
While Mr. Gondry's accent took a little getting used to, the effort was well worth it. I applaud Mr. Gondry's creativity in presenting Chomsky's ideas about science and philosophy and the doggedness he exhibited in certain instances in delving into the meaning of Chomsky's notions about how we learn and think. The use of animation transformed what for some may have been a droll lecture into a lively and interesting narrative about philosophy, religion, and of course linguistics. I also applaud Gondry's decision not to focus on Chomsky's radical and divisive political views, which would have only detracted from his views about philosophy, science, linguistics and religion. I recommend the film to anyone who is interested in learning about the type of mind-set necessary to think clearly and originally and to make sense of how the world works.
One of the other reviews here is very negative. That review's author uses terms like "self- indulgent" to describe this film.
That term is totally accurate. This movie is the definition of self-indulgence. A series of edited interviews is played while hand-drawn animations form and transform on the screen. That's the film. It sounds ridiculous.
But it drew me in and captivated me. The topics range from linguistic theory, Noam Chomsky's views on various things, and musings about his childhood. Gondry's own thoughts and interpretations, also included, seemed to miss the mark fairly often. But I felt like Gondry's voice ended up adding something to the movie. He is someone trying to understand complex concepts: sometimes he gets it, sometimes it doesn't seem like he does. From what I've written so far, this movie may sound like a nightmare to you.
However, the whole concept was so original, and the drawings were engaging and interesting - - like a hand-drawn kaleidoscope with patterns that change depending on the topic being discussed. Gondry's thick french accent might distract some viewers, but I found it intelligible (there are also hand-drawn "subtitles" when he speaks, although I found them harder to read than I did to understand Gondry's accent). Chomsky has always struck me as a compelling speaker. He is soft-spoken but knows his lines (speaking figuratively) and makes his points well.
All in all a unique and surprisingly entertaining experience. 8/10
That term is totally accurate. This movie is the definition of self-indulgence. A series of edited interviews is played while hand-drawn animations form and transform on the screen. That's the film. It sounds ridiculous.
But it drew me in and captivated me. The topics range from linguistic theory, Noam Chomsky's views on various things, and musings about his childhood. Gondry's own thoughts and interpretations, also included, seemed to miss the mark fairly often. But I felt like Gondry's voice ended up adding something to the movie. He is someone trying to understand complex concepts: sometimes he gets it, sometimes it doesn't seem like he does. From what I've written so far, this movie may sound like a nightmare to you.
However, the whole concept was so original, and the drawings were engaging and interesting - - like a hand-drawn kaleidoscope with patterns that change depending on the topic being discussed. Gondry's thick french accent might distract some viewers, but I found it intelligible (there are also hand-drawn "subtitles" when he speaks, although I found them harder to read than I did to understand Gondry's accent). Chomsky has always struck me as a compelling speaker. He is soft-spoken but knows his lines (speaking figuratively) and makes his points well.
All in all a unique and surprisingly entertaining experience. 8/10
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesMost of the film is framed in 4:3. However, some sequences extend beyond this.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 446: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)
- Bandes originalesClarinet Quintet: I ANDANTE
Written by Howard Skempton
Performed by Birmingham Contemporary Music Group
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy??Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Is the Man Who Is Tall Happy?
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 137 042 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 31 800 $US
- 24 nov. 2013
- Montant brut mondial
- 137 042 $US
- Durée1 heure 28 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Conversation animée avec Noam Chomsky (2013) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre