VALUTAZIONE IMDb
7,1/10
81.148
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Il direttore e curatore di un prestigioso museo di Stoccolma vive un momento di crisi sia professionale che personale quando cerca di organizzare una nuova e controversa esposizione.Il direttore e curatore di un prestigioso museo di Stoccolma vive un momento di crisi sia professionale che personale quando cerca di organizzare una nuova e controversa esposizione.Il direttore e curatore di un prestigioso museo di Stoccolma vive un momento di crisi sia professionale che personale quando cerca di organizzare una nuova e controversa esposizione.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Candidato a 1 Oscar
- 33 vittorie e 46 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
American reporter Anne (Elisabeth Moss) interviews Christian (Claes Bang), the curator of an avantgarde modern art museum in Stockholm. His phone and his wallet get stolen by a crew of pickpockets. His assistant Michael helps track the phone and suggests sending threatening letters to all the apartments within the phone's location. Christian does it and faces unexpected consequences.
The scheme is actually quite clever and it works in the movie. Christian is very frustrating in the politically correct way. He is off-putting but that's the point. He could easily fix the problem with the kid but he's too scared of him. It would be more understandable if the kid is a teenager. It's silly and shows his lack of a backbone. There are a couple of amazing scenes and there are quite a few filler scenes in two and a half hours. It definitely could be cut down to two hours. The Tourette's scene is fun. Moss has a couple of great scenes and she's the best actor in the movie. This is not a movie to root for the guy but also not to root against him. It's not really a comedy or that intense as a drama. It's a movie of frustration at all of his fallibilities. It is great at painting a picture of a man trying to be good but lacks the courage to be truly good when backed into a corner.
The scheme is actually quite clever and it works in the movie. Christian is very frustrating in the politically correct way. He is off-putting but that's the point. He could easily fix the problem with the kid but he's too scared of him. It would be more understandable if the kid is a teenager. It's silly and shows his lack of a backbone. There are a couple of amazing scenes and there are quite a few filler scenes in two and a half hours. It definitely could be cut down to two hours. The Tourette's scene is fun. Moss has a couple of great scenes and she's the best actor in the movie. This is not a movie to root for the guy but also not to root against him. It's not really a comedy or that intense as a drama. It's a movie of frustration at all of his fallibilities. It is great at painting a picture of a man trying to be good but lacks the courage to be truly good when backed into a corner.
A clever, and insightful, but somewhat meandering, social satire that, in hindsight, feels more like a series of vignettes loosely connected by the films protagonist, a well-known museum curator. The satirical sections that focus on the Modern Art world are dead on, although with, perhaps too much restraint. For the most part they are so understated you might find yourself wondering if the filmmakers were intentionally being satiric; except for, obviously, the film's high-point "Welcome to the Jungle" - both its most humorous and chilling sequence - which literally has a punchline at the end. It could easily be argued the film is worth watching for this section alone. Primarily concerned with how individuals interact with society and the world around them, scenes often play out with the camera focused on one character's reaction as opposed to the action, or conversation, occurring off-screen. This can be a disorienting choice, and, at times, confusing, yet undoubtedly all that is intentional. But be warned, the film will make no attempt to tie up all its lose ends: some characters just drop out of sight, storylines are left dangling and the movie just comes to a stop as opposed to having a real climax. You can be left feeling poked and prodded by the film for having watched it, as opposed to rewarded. But, hey, it's Art.
Hard to classify this movie, after watching it at the New Zealand International Film Festival just a few hours ago.
Humorous? Certainly. In some moments even hilarious. Yet, this movie has some very u-boat layers to its seemingly light-hearted making-fun-of-arts theme. Even though it is tempting, I am not going to be an artsy-fartsy-smartarse trying to deliver a holistic explanation of this flick (all I'm saying is: "Swedish society" and "human nature").
The acting is superb and sometimes massively ("Oleg-style") impressive.
My only criticism is that the movie is too long. Clipping some minutes here, and some minutes there, would have streamlined the viewing experience.
A complex movie. Recommended to watch whenever you have some spare brain capacity at hands. ;-)
Humorous? Certainly. In some moments even hilarious. Yet, this movie has some very u-boat layers to its seemingly light-hearted making-fun-of-arts theme. Even though it is tempting, I am not going to be an artsy-fartsy-smartarse trying to deliver a holistic explanation of this flick (all I'm saying is: "Swedish society" and "human nature").
The acting is superb and sometimes massively ("Oleg-style") impressive.
My only criticism is that the movie is too long. Clipping some minutes here, and some minutes there, would have streamlined the viewing experience.
A complex movie. Recommended to watch whenever you have some spare brain capacity at hands. ;-)
This is a hard film to describe and an even harder film to review but I'm going to try my best to express how I felt about it.
In an attempt to put it simply, The Square follows a modern art museum curator named Christian (played by Claes Bang), and some increasingly strange experiences which shape his views and understandings of the world he lives in and the people around him.
I had the chance to see this film on opening night at the New Zealand International Film Festival, and I am so glad I did. The Square plays like an increasingly bizarre farce, and while the film is indeed very funny (sometimes in shocking ways) it provides a consistently fascinating look at our behavior as people in society. Now I realize that isn't necessarily innovative for a film in 2017, but that said, The Square dares to pose increasingly uncomfortable questions to its audience.
From the inherent narcissism of even the most ordinary of people, to the shallowness of popular culture, to the complex behaviors and interactions between people of disparate backgrounds. Again, these ideas are not necessarily novel, but the film presents them in a way that is consistently entertaining - even when certain exchanges on- screen are uncomfortable. There is a scene that takes place at a gathering of elite artists and sponsors that is as squirm-inducing as anything I've seen all year. I also must point out the constant use of dead-pan humor with verbal and visual gags throughout as one of the film's secret weapons.
I would warn that this is not a film for everyone. The pacing is uneven, the structure is unusual, and there isn't a whole lot of forward momentum to propel the film forward. But, if you are willing to meet the film halfway, I think you're in for a fascinating, shocking, hilarious and uncomfortable (skewered) mirror into the society we live in.
In an attempt to put it simply, The Square follows a modern art museum curator named Christian (played by Claes Bang), and some increasingly strange experiences which shape his views and understandings of the world he lives in and the people around him.
I had the chance to see this film on opening night at the New Zealand International Film Festival, and I am so glad I did. The Square plays like an increasingly bizarre farce, and while the film is indeed very funny (sometimes in shocking ways) it provides a consistently fascinating look at our behavior as people in society. Now I realize that isn't necessarily innovative for a film in 2017, but that said, The Square dares to pose increasingly uncomfortable questions to its audience.
From the inherent narcissism of even the most ordinary of people, to the shallowness of popular culture, to the complex behaviors and interactions between people of disparate backgrounds. Again, these ideas are not necessarily novel, but the film presents them in a way that is consistently entertaining - even when certain exchanges on- screen are uncomfortable. There is a scene that takes place at a gathering of elite artists and sponsors that is as squirm-inducing as anything I've seen all year. I also must point out the constant use of dead-pan humor with verbal and visual gags throughout as one of the film's secret weapons.
I would warn that this is not a film for everyone. The pacing is uneven, the structure is unusual, and there isn't a whole lot of forward momentum to propel the film forward. But, if you are willing to meet the film halfway, I think you're in for a fascinating, shocking, hilarious and uncomfortable (skewered) mirror into the society we live in.
You have to be astonished that this one collected a Palme. Not least, it evidently lies in the shadow of Haneke, winner of two recent Palmes for much better movies.
The satire on the art world, the rattling of the bourgeoisie, both seem too overdrawn to be effective. Sketches go on too long, as when the museum director videos his apology, or the ape-man detonates the society party. Cutaways that don't happen, or do but are merely irritating, seem like unsuccessful adaptions of Haneke's grating style.
A few folks left my screening up around the 90 minute mark, their patience evidently worn thin. They'd seen the best of it, like the director's fling with the journo.
Now, if you really want to see someone stick it right up the bourgeoisie, you can't go past Haneke's mordant misbehaviour in Benny's Video (1992).
The satire on the art world, the rattling of the bourgeoisie, both seem too overdrawn to be effective. Sketches go on too long, as when the museum director videos his apology, or the ape-man detonates the society party. Cutaways that don't happen, or do but are merely irritating, seem like unsuccessful adaptions of Haneke's grating style.
A few folks left my screening up around the 90 minute mark, their patience evidently worn thin. They'd seen the best of it, like the director's fling with the journo.
Now, if you really want to see someone stick it right up the bourgeoisie, you can't go past Haneke's mordant misbehaviour in Benny's Video (1992).
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe crowd Oleg was taunting in the dinner scene, throwing water over and pushing around, were in fact drawn from the actual ranks of Sweden's 1 percent, including some of the country's wealthiest art patrons ("They were so into it," Terry Notary said).
- BlooperIn the closing titles of "The Girl With A Kitten" clip, the Hebrew version is wrong: the English noun "square" appears in Hebrew as "an open space in a city" rather than "rectangle with all sides equal").
- ConnessioniFeatured in The 75th Annual Golden Globe Awards (2018)
- Colonne sonoreNo Good (Extended Mix)
Performed by Fedde Le Grand, Ossama Al Sarraf and Ned Shepard (as Sultan + Shepard)
Written by Ossama Al Sarraf, James Bratton, Kelly Charles, Robin Morssink, Fedde Le Grand and Ned Shepard
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Square?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- The Square. La farsa del arte
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 1.502.347 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 74.233 USD
- 29 ott 2017
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 8.588.030 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 2h 31min(151 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti