L'amico di famiglia

Didn't manage to make it to the end of the film and was left with a feeling of disgust. There is no real plot line, it is essentially just a sequence of scenes picturing this squalid man behaving inappropriately towards different women. Additionally this is pieced together in a try-hard way to try making the film artsy which the film does not accomplish.

Even if the character of the protagonist is chiseled good enough to make you feel awkward, ot is too much effort put to into doing that and too little time spent on making a working plot. It's obvious that the film lack all evidence of any intention to provide a logic to the audience even if there could have bern, cutting some 30 minutes of the build-up, and adding something instead that builds the story and the characters...the end is stressed and lack all the necessary emotional and logical build-up that could have changed this turkey into a sustainable film...in the end the only feeling remaining is that someone stole your time leaving you with nothing...

L'amico di famiglia / Paolo Sorrentino (2006) A repulsive loan shark, as greedy and unpleasant as one can get, faces the consequences of love. Visually extremely beautiful, with a very cool soundtrack, great performances (Bentivoglio with a Venetian accent???) and a plot that grows minute after minute. I liked this film very much and I was so sad to read the other reviews on IMDb because it's obvious nobody understood it. You can say Sorrentino is Brothers Coen with a heart, to make it very simple: but to read people who still unearth poor old Fellini every time they watch an Italian film it's gut wrenching. Filmed in real location (Latina, Sabaudia and the so-called Agro Pontino were mostly built during Mussolini's dictatorship with the peculiar "fascist" style that make them so unpleasant and cinematic at the same time) and with mostly unknown actors Sorrentino takes his risk in the last part of the movie and doesn't really make it right, but it's a minor flaw that only the "Murder she wrote" fans can be disappointed by. There are some things in common with former Sorrentino's film "Le conseguenze dell'amore": a man who gave up his life (and his dignity) for the sake of money has to come to terms with the unwanted feelings of love (not simply love for a woman but love for a different life, a friend, beauty, freedom, himself). I recommend this film strongly as long as you're an open-minded person and you can get a good translation, if you're not Italian.

Sorrentino never hides his true fatherhood from which he inspired his films. Fellini. In this film, the main character Geremia states that he starred in two of the films of the great Italian director. In "The Family Friend" you can already guess Sorrentino's future masterpieces. Films touched by a well-balanced dose of surrealism, very well-studied baroque scenography, but especially the drama of the characters, which does not lack the permanent note of vague Mediterranean humor. Even Geremia, a hateful character, has some glimpses of humanity and manages to become acceptable in some scenes. A very good movie, very well played, which does not lack the thriller. A film about pathological greed, ugliness, lack of empathy but especially the inability to understand love.

This film is not the great piece of cinema many critics/ viewers seem to think it is or want it to be. It has the occasional effective moment/ sequence, and the use of sub-bass was quite original and evocative in the sound mix. However, it's essentially trying to be an art-house film with enough mainstream/generic or light-hearted moments to appeal to your average non-art-house-watching, can't-handle-it-too-grim-or-arty cinema goer. Therefore, it's hugely flawed. It's not really that dark, for instance, despite a bit of dark posturing, and the more likable/ morally "okay" characters win out in the film's irritatingly moral conclusion. The bonding between the bingo-playing old bat and the cowboy sidekick was almost sickening, and was completely unnecessary if the film wanted to maintain a vaguely black/amoral tone (which it did initially appear to be striving for). I personally find the Coen brother's work to combine humour and a an enjoyably surreal darkness far more effectively, and to maintain a more amoral tone. It does not bare comparison to Fellini at all, for one thing there's none of that crazy visual bravura in the mis-en-scene here, and most of time and there's a deeply middle-brow quality to narrative proceedings. Unlike the great Italian films of 60s/ 70s (Visconti, Antonioni etc) the film is quite uninterestingly shot most of the time, with an overuse of extreme close-ups and close-ups, and with a very standard sense of pace in the editing. To be honest, even Dario Argento is far more visually exciting.

The inclusion of the thriller plot towards the end of film simply does not work that well, and feels contrived and somewhat unengaging: the film suddenly decides it no longer wishes to be a slightly arty character-study of a despicable old money lender and tries to be David Mamet to get the audience "on the edge of their seats" - it had the opposite effect for me ultimately. The supporting characters are rubbish - the cowboy friend is like something out of a bad "quirky" short film and the super model girl has no *beep* personality at all... The old woman who's addicted to bingo? God, it's almost Father Ted territory and without the madcap humour or silliness to make such stereotypes genuinely funny.

Some of the music was quite well-used however, and it is still better than another moving/ funny film about the Holocaust or films about small boys and their relationships with wise old men who work in cinemas.