george-napper
A rejoint le sept. 2010
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges3
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis4
Note de george-napper
Art happens when humans communicate some part of the human condition to other humans. Whether it's futility, love, loss, humor, or tragedy, true art has a lasting impact rooted in genuine emotion.
Such is the case with Makoto Nagahisa's 'And So We Put Goldfish in the Pool.' A distinctive debut short film with a signature voice, 'Goldfish' follows four fifteen-year-old girls who we come to understand profoundly within the 27-minute running time. Nagahisa has a brilliantly light touch, straining the girls' monologues through a series of kinetic montages not unlike 'Run Lola Run.'
The group deals primarily with the doldrums of small-town life, but Nagahisa wisely doesn't patronize. Even the off-the-wall moments of comedy and magical realism he employs don't feel as much like a cinematic construction as they do a whimsical illustration of the onset of angst.
There is a period in all of our lives when we haven't grown up yet, and we'd like to, but we're still deciding whether or not it's a cool thing to do. Many films have explored this highway of early pubescence, but 'Goldfish' is so fresh and original in its take that it threatens to leap off the screen and take you on an adventure.
Maybe, as the ending suggests, suburban frustration is part of the adventure of life. After all, the rest of the film tells us it can be just as vibrant as what we dream will come next.
Such is the case with Makoto Nagahisa's 'And So We Put Goldfish in the Pool.' A distinctive debut short film with a signature voice, 'Goldfish' follows four fifteen-year-old girls who we come to understand profoundly within the 27-minute running time. Nagahisa has a brilliantly light touch, straining the girls' monologues through a series of kinetic montages not unlike 'Run Lola Run.'
The group deals primarily with the doldrums of small-town life, but Nagahisa wisely doesn't patronize. Even the off-the-wall moments of comedy and magical realism he employs don't feel as much like a cinematic construction as they do a whimsical illustration of the onset of angst.
There is a period in all of our lives when we haven't grown up yet, and we'd like to, but we're still deciding whether or not it's a cool thing to do. Many films have explored this highway of early pubescence, but 'Goldfish' is so fresh and original in its take that it threatens to leap off the screen and take you on an adventure.
Maybe, as the ending suggests, suburban frustration is part of the adventure of life. After all, the rest of the film tells us it can be just as vibrant as what we dream will come next.
First off, the reason so many people hate this movie isn't because it doesn't end with a neat little bow, whatever that means.
It's because nobody in this movie acts like a real person.
Claire, the main character leaves her middle school or late-elementary school aged son by himself 80% of the time after her husband, his father has disappeared. Did she ever once think that he might just run away? I mean, that'd be pretty emotionally distressing, right? But thank God the script dictates that he doesn't run away, so it's fine.
The girl who can laughingly be called the antagonist is a complete cliché. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the young mistress type in a movie or television show. They always have one distinguishing characteristic, but she's got two - and both are stupid. One is that she's an art student. Her "art" is literally light fixtures that look like they were bought at Pottery Barn, and piles of sticks. Her other distinguishing characteristic is that she thinks she knows what's best for Claire and her husband - yet another motivational cliché typical of awful writing.
I saw "Rings" the other day, and I have to say, the only thing "Claire in Motion" has over "Rings" is that its lead actress gives a slightly better performance. Slightly.
When you're worse than "Rings," you're one of the worst films ever made. I think that's my new bar. There's "Rings," and then there's "Claire in Motion," and then... I'm not sure how you can get worse than that. Maybe "After Last Season" is technically worse, but not by much.
It's because nobody in this movie acts like a real person.
Claire, the main character leaves her middle school or late-elementary school aged son by himself 80% of the time after her husband, his father has disappeared. Did she ever once think that he might just run away? I mean, that'd be pretty emotionally distressing, right? But thank God the script dictates that he doesn't run away, so it's fine.
The girl who can laughingly be called the antagonist is a complete cliché. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the young mistress type in a movie or television show. They always have one distinguishing characteristic, but she's got two - and both are stupid. One is that she's an art student. Her "art" is literally light fixtures that look like they were bought at Pottery Barn, and piles of sticks. Her other distinguishing characteristic is that she thinks she knows what's best for Claire and her husband - yet another motivational cliché typical of awful writing.
I saw "Rings" the other day, and I have to say, the only thing "Claire in Motion" has over "Rings" is that its lead actress gives a slightly better performance. Slightly.
When you're worse than "Rings," you're one of the worst films ever made. I think that's my new bar. There's "Rings," and then there's "Claire in Motion," and then... I'm not sure how you can get worse than that. Maybe "After Last Season" is technically worse, but not by much.
A film like 'Blue Valentine' could learn a lot from a film like 'Lake Tahoe.' Whereas that film tries to give us a sympathetic side to its characters through dialog, this film gives us that same emotional investment through pure and simple film making. The film has no pretensions. The teenage Juan (Diego Catano) is depressed. Why? At first, we don't know. The watchful eye pieces together clues throughout the excellent 81-minute run time, and by the end, a careful viewer knows Juan's plight down to a T and completely falls in love with his character and the relationship between him and his brother (Yemil Sefami).
Juan's day is only made worse when he crashes his car into a telephone pole and has to spend most of the day looking for the distributor. Along the way, he meets a kung fu devotee (Juan Carlos Lara II), a beautiful teen mother (Daniela Valentine), and a crotchety old mechanic with a wonderful soft spot for animals (Hector Herrera). These characters are not just quirk for quirk's sake. They are quirk for Juan's sake.
If you are a person who enjoys watching three-dimensional characters interacting in a beautiful place, then director Fernando Eimbcke ('Duck Season') has made the perfect film for you. The perfect balance of comedy, tragedy, and character study is 'Lake Tahoe'. Eimbcke also inserts a kind of treatise on film making in this movie in a strange and thrilling way. This movie will be remembered because it is minimalist without being mini-brained.
I would recommend this film to everyone I know.
Juan's day is only made worse when he crashes his car into a telephone pole and has to spend most of the day looking for the distributor. Along the way, he meets a kung fu devotee (Juan Carlos Lara II), a beautiful teen mother (Daniela Valentine), and a crotchety old mechanic with a wonderful soft spot for animals (Hector Herrera). These characters are not just quirk for quirk's sake. They are quirk for Juan's sake.
If you are a person who enjoys watching three-dimensional characters interacting in a beautiful place, then director Fernando Eimbcke ('Duck Season') has made the perfect film for you. The perfect balance of comedy, tragedy, and character study is 'Lake Tahoe'. Eimbcke also inserts a kind of treatise on film making in this movie in a strange and thrilling way. This movie will be remembered because it is minimalist without being mini-brained.
I would recommend this film to everyone I know.