Lost_In_Translation_
A rejoint le déc. 2015
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.
Badges8
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Évaluations1,4 k
Note de Lost_In_Translation_
Avis71
Note de Lost_In_Translation_
As a fan of Jeff Goldblum and his wackyness, I was excited when this show was announced for Disney+. Don't expect a deep dive into the topics. Generally each episode takes 3-4 segments shown, sometimes with not every one fully involving the topic, but maybe a concept of it.
The series is more about Jeff's exploration of his own personality in these little segments. It usually ends with a thesis where Jeff rambles on about what the topic means in the grander scheme of life.
I enjoy them, but I realize they're just some breezy, simple entertainment. Just some insight into Jeff Goldblums mind about some cultural topics. He does have a unique view of the world, so a bulk of the fun of watching the show is just seeing him experience these many places and interact with people from all over the country.
I was excited that it got renewed despite the coronavirus situation that happened after the show's first season, so I do hope we get at least a handful more. It seems like Jeff loves experiencing this all, so here's hoping he will push for more a seasons!
The series is more about Jeff's exploration of his own personality in these little segments. It usually ends with a thesis where Jeff rambles on about what the topic means in the grander scheme of life.
I enjoy them, but I realize they're just some breezy, simple entertainment. Just some insight into Jeff Goldblums mind about some cultural topics. He does have a unique view of the world, so a bulk of the fun of watching the show is just seeing him experience these many places and interact with people from all over the country.
I was excited that it got renewed despite the coronavirus situation that happened after the show's first season, so I do hope we get at least a handful more. It seems like Jeff loves experiencing this all, so here's hoping he will push for more a seasons!
I've been a fan of Wes Anderson's ever since I saw Tenenbaums in high school over almost 20 years ago. He created his own unique, almost magical style of filmmaking. Despite being a huge fan, there are a couple I do realize aren't up to his highest quality. So my love for his movies don't blind me from the fact that not every auteur is flawless and even Wes has some plotting or story issues despite perfect visuals.
The French Dispatch consists of 3 main short stories based on articles written for The French Dispatch, a fictionalized take on "The New Yorker" magazine in it's mid-20th century form. Bill Murray is the Editor-In-Chief and a sort of through line for the movie. Though despite his appearance in each story, not enough of him is present to make the whole movie feel like one fully formed collection. Each story has it's writer who ends up becoming part of the story in some way or another and acts as the narrator to us.
In the start Owen Wilson is a writer giving a 5 min tour of the fictional French city it is based in. It then cuts to the first story which is told through Tilda Swinton as she gives a sort of presentation about her subject to an auditorium full of people. The story she tells is of a prisoner who becomes one of the most important artists of his time and his muse, one of the guards in the prison. Entertaining as their story was, the cutting between the auditorium presentation by Swinton's character and the story itself were jarring. She doesn't appear in the actual story events until the end, so it is unclear who she is during most of the telling.
The second story follows Francis McDormand as she follows the de-facto leaders of a student rebellion against drafting for the war. She is much more involved in her story than Swinton in the previous one and it all stays in her present as it does not cut to her presenting the story elsewhere. While that improves the storytelling, this one just isn't as interesting or entertaining as the first was. It's an odd story about students protesting being drafted for a war, so they barricade themselves in the town square and play a real game of chess against the police. It was the weaker of the three stories as it is the nature of it is a bit convoluted and all over the place.
Third follows Jeffrey Wright as he visits the police HQ to write about their in-house chef who is prolific in his craft. This one, like the first story, cuts to him being interviewed on a TV show, although it works much better than the beginning story. As it wasn't just him giving a presentation, it worked better as well as not occurring as much. His article takes a turn once the chief of police's son is kidnapped and it becomes the main plot. This story was just more fun and easier to follow than the rest. Wright is easily the best character out of the journalists as he is the most eloquent in his speaking and the most fun to see interacting with his wild story.
As mentioned in the beginning, these stories exist under the umbrella of the magazine itself folding after it's EIC passes away. It is an aspect of the movie which should have connected all three of these stories, but it barely comes back in each. Bill Murray is most prominent in the final story, but even then it's just a moment at the end of it. He does appear briefly in the other two, though not enough to really point out why he and his magazine were special. Rather than having the stories cut back and forth to the writers somehow presenting the story, it would have added more if it was them discussing it with Murray as he helps edit the story. It would have been so much more cohesive if he was more involved and showing how all of his writers' relationships with him were formed. This through line would have given it more of the heart that makes Anderson's movies so special.
From a film making standpoint, it's typical Anderson, but in his case typical is the spectacular. Each vignette sort of has its own style and tone. He transitions between black & white to color for little moments to enhance their emotion. Even switches between 4:3 and 16:9 screen size for certain scenes to enhance the scope of them.
This was an interesting change of format for Anderson and for the most part it works. Its lack of cohesion leaves it a bit disconnected and could have benefited from more of Murray's character. It's a lesser of his movies, but when most of his movies are in my top favorites, it only ends towards the bottom because of how great all of his work has been.
The French Dispatch consists of 3 main short stories based on articles written for The French Dispatch, a fictionalized take on "The New Yorker" magazine in it's mid-20th century form. Bill Murray is the Editor-In-Chief and a sort of through line for the movie. Though despite his appearance in each story, not enough of him is present to make the whole movie feel like one fully formed collection. Each story has it's writer who ends up becoming part of the story in some way or another and acts as the narrator to us.
In the start Owen Wilson is a writer giving a 5 min tour of the fictional French city it is based in. It then cuts to the first story which is told through Tilda Swinton as she gives a sort of presentation about her subject to an auditorium full of people. The story she tells is of a prisoner who becomes one of the most important artists of his time and his muse, one of the guards in the prison. Entertaining as their story was, the cutting between the auditorium presentation by Swinton's character and the story itself were jarring. She doesn't appear in the actual story events until the end, so it is unclear who she is during most of the telling.
The second story follows Francis McDormand as she follows the de-facto leaders of a student rebellion against drafting for the war. She is much more involved in her story than Swinton in the previous one and it all stays in her present as it does not cut to her presenting the story elsewhere. While that improves the storytelling, this one just isn't as interesting or entertaining as the first was. It's an odd story about students protesting being drafted for a war, so they barricade themselves in the town square and play a real game of chess against the police. It was the weaker of the three stories as it is the nature of it is a bit convoluted and all over the place.
Third follows Jeffrey Wright as he visits the police HQ to write about their in-house chef who is prolific in his craft. This one, like the first story, cuts to him being interviewed on a TV show, although it works much better than the beginning story. As it wasn't just him giving a presentation, it worked better as well as not occurring as much. His article takes a turn once the chief of police's son is kidnapped and it becomes the main plot. This story was just more fun and easier to follow than the rest. Wright is easily the best character out of the journalists as he is the most eloquent in his speaking and the most fun to see interacting with his wild story.
As mentioned in the beginning, these stories exist under the umbrella of the magazine itself folding after it's EIC passes away. It is an aspect of the movie which should have connected all three of these stories, but it barely comes back in each. Bill Murray is most prominent in the final story, but even then it's just a moment at the end of it. He does appear briefly in the other two, though not enough to really point out why he and his magazine were special. Rather than having the stories cut back and forth to the writers somehow presenting the story, it would have added more if it was them discussing it with Murray as he helps edit the story. It would have been so much more cohesive if he was more involved and showing how all of his writers' relationships with him were formed. This through line would have given it more of the heart that makes Anderson's movies so special.
From a film making standpoint, it's typical Anderson, but in his case typical is the spectacular. Each vignette sort of has its own style and tone. He transitions between black & white to color for little moments to enhance their emotion. Even switches between 4:3 and 16:9 screen size for certain scenes to enhance the scope of them.
This was an interesting change of format for Anderson and for the most part it works. Its lack of cohesion leaves it a bit disconnected and could have benefited from more of Murray's character. It's a lesser of his movies, but when most of his movies are in my top favorites, it only ends towards the bottom because of how great all of his work has been.
Generally the Rom Com genre is full of crap. Cheesy, shallow, predictable they usually end up being.
Crazy, Stupid, Love is a whole different evolution of the genre.
Typically I wouldn't have even been that into seeing it in the first place. At a glance it just looked like the usual romantic crap. Though my main reasons for seeing it were Gosling and Carrell. I'd been a fan of the first 4 or so seasons of The Office, but dropped off it at this point. Gosling was hot off one of my favorite movies of all time "Lars and the Real Girl" and I was already hyped for Drive which was to come out 2 months after this. So the two of them were the main reason I saw this on a whim.
Gosling is just so goddamn charming in this. Sure, he's got a player/womanizer aspect, but he's never a creep or forcing women to do anything they don't want to. He's just has figured out the formula that will get most women to bed with him. His character uses his talents to pass along his wooing skills to recently separated Carrell. They are the focus of the movie, but each side character get their own fully fleshed out story.
From his wife's struggle of missing the man she separated from while possibly moving to another lover, to their babysitter who holds a secret crush on Carrell, to their son who has a crush on the babysitter. They encompass many versions of love through each character. Separation of love, young naive love, stuck in a relationship where you're partner isn't all in, someone who has never been in love finding it. It really does a fantastic job covering all sorts of relationships and what love is to each person.
The twist at the end is completely unexpected as there are no hints to it at all and you wouldn't expect there to be a twist at all. It leads to the culmination of a really funny scene at the end, though it's really only effective the first time you see it.
It's just a well put together story of all types of love that life has. Gosling's performance is a strong suit of the movie and really helps improve an already great cast. He really shows that he's got the comedy chops as well as the serious stuff like Blade Runner 2049 and Lars & The Real Girl. It's also a really good looking movie. The bar the two guys frequent has a somber atmosphere.
Crazy, Stupid, Love is a solid romantic movie that anyone from any walk of live can enjoy.
Crazy, Stupid, Love is a whole different evolution of the genre.
Typically I wouldn't have even been that into seeing it in the first place. At a glance it just looked like the usual romantic crap. Though my main reasons for seeing it were Gosling and Carrell. I'd been a fan of the first 4 or so seasons of The Office, but dropped off it at this point. Gosling was hot off one of my favorite movies of all time "Lars and the Real Girl" and I was already hyped for Drive which was to come out 2 months after this. So the two of them were the main reason I saw this on a whim.
Gosling is just so goddamn charming in this. Sure, he's got a player/womanizer aspect, but he's never a creep or forcing women to do anything they don't want to. He's just has figured out the formula that will get most women to bed with him. His character uses his talents to pass along his wooing skills to recently separated Carrell. They are the focus of the movie, but each side character get their own fully fleshed out story.
From his wife's struggle of missing the man she separated from while possibly moving to another lover, to their babysitter who holds a secret crush on Carrell, to their son who has a crush on the babysitter. They encompass many versions of love through each character. Separation of love, young naive love, stuck in a relationship where you're partner isn't all in, someone who has never been in love finding it. It really does a fantastic job covering all sorts of relationships and what love is to each person.
The twist at the end is completely unexpected as there are no hints to it at all and you wouldn't expect there to be a twist at all. It leads to the culmination of a really funny scene at the end, though it's really only effective the first time you see it.
It's just a well put together story of all types of love that life has. Gosling's performance is a strong suit of the movie and really helps improve an already great cast. He really shows that he's got the comedy chops as well as the serious stuff like Blade Runner 2049 and Lars & The Real Girl. It's also a really good looking movie. The bar the two guys frequent has a somber atmosphere.
Crazy, Stupid, Love is a solid romantic movie that anyone from any walk of live can enjoy.
Sondages effectués récemment
Total de 56 sondages effectués