Breaking up - Lasciarsi

I saw this film a few nights ago on TV and had never even heard of it?To see Selma Hayek and Russel Crow together got me more interested because they are not your typical Hollywood pairing. I read some of the reviews on this film posted here after I saw the film and I am really sorry for you people who trash this film, you are either so spolied and programmed by the fantasy of Hollywood films or just don't get it?. Rarely does film in Hollywood dares to go this deep about two people in a relationship and trial and emotional complexities that don't make any logical sense to any of us who have been in relationships that were hard to let go of.I think this film really appeals to more of a European audience than American, because you the US audience always wants to live in some kind of fantasy world, White Boy meets White Girl they fall in love and live happily ever after. Now, if something different comes along that requires your attention and becomes a little too real then you trash it.

What is even more sad that there is a hardly an audience for this kind of film in the US as it is in Europe. This was originally a play and that is pretty obvious from the fact its based on two people without the side kicks of friends in your usual gimmick movies. Some of the conversations may seem tedious and long at times but for those of you who have been involved in relationships that sometimes don't make sense then you can relate at because you can't make any sense out of human emotions then you would understand it and relate to it. I guess what made this film not as appealing to some like "Harry Met Sally" did is because it didn't have all the little cute scenes that like "Sally" pretending to have a orgasm in a restaurant; that's what sells in a Hollywood film but "Breaking Up" is not such a film and never pretended to be either, it was more honest than any film that deals with relationships than most films ever do in Hollywood and it doesn't have a happy ending either and this is where the US audience needs to GROW UP.

Selma Hayek really gave a great performance in this film, I am not even a fan nor did I ever like any of her films but I really thought she did a great job in this film, and so did Russel Crow. This film would not probably a choice for either of them today but trust me if there was a way to remake this film with two huge stars and add a some side kicks and slap a happy ending to it you, then suddenly people will be raving about it. I think this is a film that only appeals to those who can relate to it and appreciate its for the crazy and insane parts of any intense relationship. There is a line in this film where both characters years later say "..they never really understood why they even broke up?" and I think that was what this film was about; what makes any relationship work? and how do you make any logical sense of it when you are so caught up in it emotionally and how do you come out of it and deal with the pain and misery of loosing someone. Now, if you let go of your expectations then you might be able to appreciate this film for its honesty.

I'm conflicted about this film.

The two leads have zero chemistry together, which gives their messed-up relationship no credence whatsoever. In real life these two would have never gotten together in the first place. Someone decided two "on their way up" stars should make a movie, and it wasn't a great decision. They do their best, but it fails to carry the movie.

I liked the script though. Sometimes relationships aren't a clean breakup where people just decide that they want to be out. There's indecision, better the devil you know, maybe it's not so bad after all, the uneasy feelings of breaking it off permanently. This film encapsulates all of that. It does feel a bit repetitive for all the breaking up and getting back together, but it's perfectly captured.

Hated the direction! Inexplicable moves from colour to black-and-white, weird camera angles, lighting changes, jumping from one shot to the next. I suppose it was meant to feel jarring and analogous to the relationship being portrayed, but it was super annoying and discombobulating for the viewer. Ultimately this is the thing that made me give this film such a low rating. It felt like the director was trying to be edgy (in a very 90s way) but it did not work at all.

Not a great movie. I wished I liked it a lot more, but unfortunately the pieces just don't fit.

While someone must have thought this an interesting premise - watch a couple fall apart, rather than come together - its an experiment that didn't work. Without seeing why these 2 people were together in the first place, their constant arguing leaves you wondering what all the fuss is about. However, with that said, for those interested in seeing early films of Russell Crowe, this is a small goldmine. He doesn't get beat up, he doesn't die, and he actually has some love/sex scenes. Crowe also gets to show a little of his comic side, which has been under used since coming to the US to make films. So, while the script would have been better left on the film school floor, or at least left in the computer for more work, this film has definite goodies to recommend it. Any film with Russell in a bathtub can't be all bad....

Steve is a photographer, Monica is a teacher. They don't get along. So it's time for them to break up. Watching two people try to break up for nearly two hours (fortunately, that included lots of commercials) is not my idea of entertainment. Unless they are funny, which these two generally were not.

The film showed promise. At the start, both characters are talking to an unseen interviewer or counselor, or maybe just to the camera (they also talk just to the camera in a later scene). They are giving good performances at that point. Then things go downhill quickly.

The film was not a total waste of time.

The best part of the movie had Steve and Monica doing what appeared to be a documentary, shot in black and white, where they interviewed ordinary people on the street about male-female relationships. These people seemed real and may in fact have been real (they certainly weren't shown in the credits). One little girl said the best thing to do with a man was 'dump him in the garbage'.

Also good: a sequence of fantasies about what the wedding might be like, inside a church, involving a demented minister, an Einstein lookalike, and Steve and Monica both lying on couches with a psychiatrist between them.

Salma Hayek looked good in a swimsuit. Too bad that was only in a fantasy (Steve's, actually) where a Fabio type with Schwarzenegger muscles was bench pressing her.

Several scenes had really good music, most of the good music being real jazz. There was also 40s-style easy listening. And then there was contemporary music that didn't appeal to me at all. (Well, what can you expect when the man in charge of music led Devo?) One scene was spoiled for me when the trumpet and the stand-up bass were cut off prematurely when the couple started bickering again.

I'm not sure what this meant, but several sequences other than the 'documentary' were filmed in black and white with no dialogue from the characters on screen. Two had quick editing and gave the impression of quality. One had Steve and Monica in a restaurant with a series of different dates, in what appeared to be just a few minutes as the camera went back and forth between them.

The only way this could have been a good movie is if it was in fact one of those art films that appeals to the people who go to coffee houses and listen to poetry. I'm not one of those.

What was the point of making this movie. I can't think of one. The movie stars two big name actors but all that happens is they break up get together break up get together.... We get some silly scenes such as Steve in the tub picturing Monica with a guy at the gym. It was obvious the two didn't belong together, so why should the audience care if they break up. That was part of the problem with it besides it just being a stupid idea for a movie.

FINAL VERDICT: Not to good. Don't expect the Russell Crowe from Gladiator in this. I don't recommend it.