IMDb रेटिंग
6.3/10
1.6 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंAn adaptation of the classic tale of a wealthy aristocrat with a blue beard.An adaptation of the classic tale of a wealthy aristocrat with a blue beard.An adaptation of the classic tale of a wealthy aristocrat with a blue beard.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
Lola Créton
- Marie-Catherine
- (as Lola Creton)
Daphné Baiwir
- Anne
- (as Daphné Baïwir)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Despite possibly the most charming child performance in a movie ever (no I have not watched all movies ever) by Marilou Lopes-Benites, I didn't allow myself to fall for Bluebeard, though this little girl narrator is so winsome that on occasion her charm has the audience gasping.
The way that Bluebeard is shot is very casual, almost matter-of-fact and Rohmerian, strangely for what is potentially such an atmospheric story. The level of graft going on is very low, more befitting a conversational type film a la Rohmer. I also took badly to a scene of animal slaughter that seemed inhumane.
I think comparisons with Tarsem Singh's wonderful movie The Fall are beneficial. In both movies there have two timelines, the first, the timeline of narration is set in the early Twentieth Century, the second is a period fantasy being narrated. In both movies there is a charming child actress, in The Fall it's Catinca Untaru. Where The Fall succeeds in my view is that the fantastical narrative really feels like a product of the narrators' minds. In Bluebeard, even though the girls are reading from a book, the resultant fantasy doesn't feel like a product of their minds, but distinctly a product of Catherine Breillat's mind, too knowing and sophisticated. Quite clearly for example the children would not have been imagining the squirming of a dying animal. Even though the narration is less ostentatious, and takes up less screen time, as with The Fall you really can make a case for it being the most moving part.
I think Breillat did manage to access the essence of the Bluebeard story which is that if you are a big ugly sensitive oaf, you are condemned to not participate in life, one of my fondest quotes, from Le Quai Des Brumes / Port of Shadows (in French it's more eloquent) is "It's horrible to love like Romeo when you look like Bluebeard!". I think that's what worse is that women often don't acknowledge that it's possible that such a man could have the feelings of Romeo, as if only pretty and graceful men could feel like that. Something that should never be forgotten is that passion is something everyone feels.
Brief summary of the plot is that Bluebeard is a rich man rumoured to have murdered previous wives. He takes new wives without dowry, and persuades Marie-Catherine, a child bride, to marry him. There are some funny post marital scenes, like when Bluebeard is sat eating an ostrich egg, and Marie-Catherine is sat eating a quail egg side by side.
I really am fond of the movie, but I would have liked to see more mise-en-scene, the movie as I say, is far too casual. There is a feeling of great boredom that arises from the last scene of the fantasy strand, in a scene that should perhaps be incredibly stirring.
The way that Bluebeard is shot is very casual, almost matter-of-fact and Rohmerian, strangely for what is potentially such an atmospheric story. The level of graft going on is very low, more befitting a conversational type film a la Rohmer. I also took badly to a scene of animal slaughter that seemed inhumane.
I think comparisons with Tarsem Singh's wonderful movie The Fall are beneficial. In both movies there have two timelines, the first, the timeline of narration is set in the early Twentieth Century, the second is a period fantasy being narrated. In both movies there is a charming child actress, in The Fall it's Catinca Untaru. Where The Fall succeeds in my view is that the fantastical narrative really feels like a product of the narrators' minds. In Bluebeard, even though the girls are reading from a book, the resultant fantasy doesn't feel like a product of their minds, but distinctly a product of Catherine Breillat's mind, too knowing and sophisticated. Quite clearly for example the children would not have been imagining the squirming of a dying animal. Even though the narration is less ostentatious, and takes up less screen time, as with The Fall you really can make a case for it being the most moving part.
I think Breillat did manage to access the essence of the Bluebeard story which is that if you are a big ugly sensitive oaf, you are condemned to not participate in life, one of my fondest quotes, from Le Quai Des Brumes / Port of Shadows (in French it's more eloquent) is "It's horrible to love like Romeo when you look like Bluebeard!". I think that's what worse is that women often don't acknowledge that it's possible that such a man could have the feelings of Romeo, as if only pretty and graceful men could feel like that. Something that should never be forgotten is that passion is something everyone feels.
Brief summary of the plot is that Bluebeard is a rich man rumoured to have murdered previous wives. He takes new wives without dowry, and persuades Marie-Catherine, a child bride, to marry him. There are some funny post marital scenes, like when Bluebeard is sat eating an ostrich egg, and Marie-Catherine is sat eating a quail egg side by side.
I really am fond of the movie, but I would have liked to see more mise-en-scene, the movie as I say, is far too casual. There is a feeling of great boredom that arises from the last scene of the fantasy strand, in a scene that should perhaps be incredibly stirring.
I did not think well of Catherine Breillat's 2010 follow-up 'La belle endormie' with its baffling "interpretation," and on that basis I had poor expectations of this. Why not give her a second chance, though? Everyone deserves one, right? Frankly, to watch 'Barbe bleue,' I'm all the more mystified at the choices Breillat would make for the subsequent feature, for this is at least one thing its successor is not: good. It's still distinctly flawed, mind you, but among this film's discernible faults it at least is internally consistent, with a sensible, solidly written narrative. This may not be a total must-see, but it's modestly enjoyable and fairly worthwhile.
The tale on hand is a simple one, but duly engaging, and made easier with the charm and restrained nuance of chief star Lola Créton. All the while the picture is crafted with tremendous care, with lovely filming locations, and superb production design and art direction to dress them up. The costume design and hair and makeup, not to mention props, are all splendid, helping to cement the period setting. Breillat's direction is excellent in terms of orchestrating shots and scenes - tight and focused, accentuating the small world and limited scope of the fairy tale - and I admire Vilko Fila's mindful cinematography. Though I wish something more were done with it, I rather love the low-key pensiveness of the final shot, what I believe to be a strong finish.
I did say 'Barbe bleue' is flawed, though, and I surely mean it. It struggles with pacing; it feels like stretching this out to 82 minutes was excessive. This is pointedly emphasized by those cutaways to the two children reading a storybook; while possibly worth exploring on their own, here they provide framing that intermittently breaks the flow of the plot instead of meaningfully adding to the movie. The subdued tone I can easily forgive as a matter of stylistic choice, though I can understand how it would be one that's off-putting to other viewers. On the other hand, just as would be seen much more discretely in 'La belle endormie,' some scenes suffer from a weakness of execution (presumably direction) that make them come off as halfhearted, as though the take were only a rehearsal. For that matter, the acting across the board is muted to the point of too often feeling hollow, even from Créton. For as long as Breillat has been making films, such moments are perplexing.
Passably entertaining as this title is, there's nothing remarkable or special about it. Earnest adaptations of other fairy tales have been made that were far richer and more grabbing. This isn't to inherently disparage this rendition, but the disparity is notable, and for lack of any quality that's especially striking it's not something likely to stand as being particularly memorable. I nonetheless appreciate all the work that went into 'Barbe bleue,' and it's suitably satisfying as something to watch on a quiet day. Don't go out of your way for it, but if you're looking for a light feature that doesn't require any form of major investment, this is a decent way to spend 82 minutes.
The tale on hand is a simple one, but duly engaging, and made easier with the charm and restrained nuance of chief star Lola Créton. All the while the picture is crafted with tremendous care, with lovely filming locations, and superb production design and art direction to dress them up. The costume design and hair and makeup, not to mention props, are all splendid, helping to cement the period setting. Breillat's direction is excellent in terms of orchestrating shots and scenes - tight and focused, accentuating the small world and limited scope of the fairy tale - and I admire Vilko Fila's mindful cinematography. Though I wish something more were done with it, I rather love the low-key pensiveness of the final shot, what I believe to be a strong finish.
I did say 'Barbe bleue' is flawed, though, and I surely mean it. It struggles with pacing; it feels like stretching this out to 82 minutes was excessive. This is pointedly emphasized by those cutaways to the two children reading a storybook; while possibly worth exploring on their own, here they provide framing that intermittently breaks the flow of the plot instead of meaningfully adding to the movie. The subdued tone I can easily forgive as a matter of stylistic choice, though I can understand how it would be one that's off-putting to other viewers. On the other hand, just as would be seen much more discretely in 'La belle endormie,' some scenes suffer from a weakness of execution (presumably direction) that make them come off as halfhearted, as though the take were only a rehearsal. For that matter, the acting across the board is muted to the point of too often feeling hollow, even from Créton. For as long as Breillat has been making films, such moments are perplexing.
Passably entertaining as this title is, there's nothing remarkable or special about it. Earnest adaptations of other fairy tales have been made that were far richer and more grabbing. This isn't to inherently disparage this rendition, but the disparity is notable, and for lack of any quality that's especially striking it's not something likely to stand as being particularly memorable. I nonetheless appreciate all the work that went into 'Barbe bleue,' and it's suitably satisfying as something to watch on a quiet day. Don't go out of your way for it, but if you're looking for a light feature that doesn't require any form of major investment, this is a decent way to spend 82 minutes.
I was curious about a new adaptation of this classic story. After all, there is nothing like a good old story to sustain a movie. As i watched, i was more and more surprised. I kept wondering how can a film maker do such a bad job and let it out for the public to see... I tried to give it a chance, hoping that it will improve, but i was too optimistic. I wouldn't want to criticize something to the point of convincing others to avoid it, but in this case it felt like a civic duty. To put it briefly, bad scenario, awful dialogues, unremarkable camera work, unbelievably bad cinema; a pittiful adaptation. I'm sorry to say such bad stuff about other people's work. I'm sure they didn't want to do a bad job, but sometimes that's how things go. Wish them better luck next time. OK now. Time to forget this disappointment. Don't waste time on this one.
Catherine Breillat's canny revision of the Bluebeard myth is rigorous and assured like her other work. This time she keeps her usual provocations at bay, but the movie is no less compelling for it, with human folly bubbling at the surface of every interaction. The casting, acting, camera work and editing are subdued but still expressive, and the director interrupts the plain and direct storytelling at just the right moments in order to get at her points--albeit in curious and elusive ways.
Some remark how this movie feels boring or its commentary is obvious, but for me the approach makes room for as much complexity and humanity as Breillat brings to her other, more notorious work. If you are a fan of the more cerebral classics of world cinema, this one courses with the energy of the old masters: traces of Buñuel's Tristana are here, as are Bresson's The Trial of Joan of Arc and Mizoguchi's Life of Oharu.
Some remark how this movie feels boring or its commentary is obvious, but for me the approach makes room for as much complexity and humanity as Breillat brings to her other, more notorious work. If you are a fan of the more cerebral classics of world cinema, this one courses with the energy of the old masters: traces of Buñuel's Tristana are here, as are Bresson's The Trial of Joan of Arc and Mizoguchi's Life of Oharu.
I can't tell you how disappointed and bored I was while watching this movie.
I kept hoping with all my heart that it will pick up its feet at some point and start delivering some feeling, magic, action or whatever. But alas, that was all in vain.
It keeps the same slooooooow pace from start to end, the actors keep showing the same inexpressive faces and delivering the same emotionless dialogs.
That is when they bother to speak. In the rest of the time they keep staring in some more or less distant point for quite long periods (I suppose it's meant to show us how deep they feel or think).
I don't know how the book ends... but the end of the movie looked pretty fuzzy and stupid to me.
You're never told why Blue Beard did all those horrible things or how did the little girl managed to escape.
The only good things in this movie were the costumes and locations, I guess.
All in all, if you expect some bit of fairy-tale, of magic, of fantasy or anything at all which would glue you to the chair in front of the screen, I think you'll be pretty disappointed.
I kept hoping with all my heart that it will pick up its feet at some point and start delivering some feeling, magic, action or whatever. But alas, that was all in vain.
It keeps the same slooooooow pace from start to end, the actors keep showing the same inexpressive faces and delivering the same emotionless dialogs.
That is when they bother to speak. In the rest of the time they keep staring in some more or less distant point for quite long periods (I suppose it's meant to show us how deep they feel or think).
I don't know how the book ends... but the end of the movie looked pretty fuzzy and stupid to me.
You're never told why Blue Beard did all those horrible things or how did the little girl managed to escape.
The only good things in this movie were the costumes and locations, I guess.
All in all, if you expect some bit of fairy-tale, of magic, of fantasy or anything at all which would glue you to the chair in front of the screen, I think you'll be pretty disappointed.
क्या आपको पता है
- गूफ़When Marie-Catherine is saying her goodbyes to her father's corpse, you can clearly see his chest rising and falling with each breath.
- कनेक्शनVersion of Barbe-bleue (1901)
- साउंडट्रैकKyrié Eleïsson
Performed by the Limousin Youth Choir with the direction of Annette Petit
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Bluebeard?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $24,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $33,490
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $8,370
- 28 मार्च 2010
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $38,696
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें