VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,0/10
7475
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaThe life of Paul Raymond, the controversial entrepreneur who became Britain's richest man.The life of Paul Raymond, the controversial entrepreneur who became Britain's richest man.The life of Paul Raymond, the controversial entrepreneur who became Britain's richest man.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 1 candidatura in totale
Recensioni in evidenza
Finally caught up with this film and felt that it began very strongly, beautifully evoking those early Paul Raymond days as he dragged Soho and indeed Britain out of the drab post war 50s and into what would become known as the 'swing sixties'. Steve Coogan is excellent but after abut twenty or thirty minutes and we have seen the early shows recreated and the neon light red light district come alive we are drawn further into the private life of the man. This is interesting enough, at first, but the real story here is what Raymond did in terms of liberating us inhibited Brits and in building his property and sex empire. In the end this degenerates into simply one more line of coke. We are also asked to become involved in the tragedy of the life of his daughter but we don't care. The weak script has not allowed for the necessary empathy to develop and we are left to watch despairingly as all comes depressingly undone.
3 of my favourite films have been directed by Michael Winterbottom and starred Steve Coogan. A Cock And Bull Story, 24 Hour Party People and The Trip (in the UK we were lucky enough to see the full TV series, but the movie version was great as well).
This isn't as good, but still entertaining. When I was pubescent, Paul Raymond's Men Only magazine was a must-read if you could get an adult to buy it for you, and Fiona Richmond was someone you thought you might just have a chance with if you got to meet her. In short, this film meant a lot to me.
My problem with this is that it's all far too glossy. Soho in the 60/70/80's and there isn't a villain in sight and everything going on is fairly innocuous? And I really liked Paul Raymond, but to survive in that environment there must have been more to him.
Anyway, an enjoyable film overall. And I went away with that final close-up on Imogen Poots as Debbie singing the title song almost breaking my heart.
This isn't as good, but still entertaining. When I was pubescent, Paul Raymond's Men Only magazine was a must-read if you could get an adult to buy it for you, and Fiona Richmond was someone you thought you might just have a chance with if you got to meet her. In short, this film meant a lot to me.
My problem with this is that it's all far too glossy. Soho in the 60/70/80's and there isn't a villain in sight and everything going on is fairly innocuous? And I really liked Paul Raymond, but to survive in that environment there must have been more to him.
Anyway, an enjoyable film overall. And I went away with that final close-up on Imogen Poots as Debbie singing the title song almost breaking my heart.
Paul Raymond was fascinating figure, being the richest man in Britain, making his fortune from exclusive men's clubs, publishing softcore pornography and having a massive property portfolio. He based his reputation on controversy, using notoriety to get more attention which results with him getting more sells. But he had a troubled relationship with the women of his life, his wife, his lover and his daughter.
Steve Coogan plays Raymond, a Liverpoolian lad who starred out as entertainer but quickly moved to working behind the scenes and starring to run exclusive men's clubs with his wife Jean (Anna Friel). During his rise he makes a fortune, stretching the bounds of public decency when he moves to theatre and publishing. During his rise he forms a relationship with Amber (Tamsin Egerton) who becomes Fiona Richmond, a famous British sex symbol, leading to him having the largest divorce settlement in British legal history and stay close with his daughter Debbie (Imogen Poots) who he sees has his heir apparent but has a massive drug addiction.
As the subject for a bio-pic Paul Raymond for both his business achievements and his personal life: but The Look of Love stretches itself too thin, not knowing where to focus and therefore making for a shallow experience. The Look of Love was a film that tried to fit too much and we end up getting scenes and elements of Raymond's live going by too fast or come out of nowhere, such as Raymond meeting his illegitimate son. It felt like the film was gutted in the editing room with how it only briefly on many different aspects such as the controversies, his rise in business and a sex scandal just to name a few.
The Look of Love was written by Matt Greenhalgh who has written two excellent bio-pics, Control and Nowhere Boy. The strength of those films are they were both were very focused on a specific area of their character's lives, John Lennon and his relationship with his mother and Ian Curtis' epilepsy and depression. The Look of Love has a different approach of looking at a much larger time period and look at many different aspects of Raymond's life. It can be argued that the films main focus is on his relationships with women and by the end the main focus is his relationship with his daughter.
Despite The Look of Love has a comedy cast the film is a very serious tone and performances. Coogan does give a very good dramatic performance and it good to see him taking different roles. He does have some witty lines but on the whole it was a serious role. It was actually surprising that the audience laughed during a scene which was very serious when Raymond ends up having to make a line of cocaine for his daughter when she was giving birth. Egerton, Poots , Friel and Chris Addison too were solid in their roles, but Davad Williams' role was extremely minor that it felt pointless to the point where his role seemed like it was mostly cut and people like Stephen Fry and Dara O Briain were camoes.
Director Michael Winterbottom does inject a lot of period detail to the film and there are some stylist moments when he does montages. There is a different look to each period, the 50/60s being shot in the black and white, his rise in the 70s being quite bright and need the end having more gritty cinematography. But like his previous film that I saw, Trinsha, it has a paradox of feeling both too short and too long for both skipping over elements and yet having a slow pace. One moment I enjoyed was a quick 30 second scene done in one take as Jean confronts Amber/Fiona with the camera following her.
On the whole The Look of Look is a very well acted film which is its greatest strength, but does not know where to turn which part of its subject matter it should examine.
Steve Coogan plays Raymond, a Liverpoolian lad who starred out as entertainer but quickly moved to working behind the scenes and starring to run exclusive men's clubs with his wife Jean (Anna Friel). During his rise he makes a fortune, stretching the bounds of public decency when he moves to theatre and publishing. During his rise he forms a relationship with Amber (Tamsin Egerton) who becomes Fiona Richmond, a famous British sex symbol, leading to him having the largest divorce settlement in British legal history and stay close with his daughter Debbie (Imogen Poots) who he sees has his heir apparent but has a massive drug addiction.
As the subject for a bio-pic Paul Raymond for both his business achievements and his personal life: but The Look of Love stretches itself too thin, not knowing where to focus and therefore making for a shallow experience. The Look of Love was a film that tried to fit too much and we end up getting scenes and elements of Raymond's live going by too fast or come out of nowhere, such as Raymond meeting his illegitimate son. It felt like the film was gutted in the editing room with how it only briefly on many different aspects such as the controversies, his rise in business and a sex scandal just to name a few.
The Look of Love was written by Matt Greenhalgh who has written two excellent bio-pics, Control and Nowhere Boy. The strength of those films are they were both were very focused on a specific area of their character's lives, John Lennon and his relationship with his mother and Ian Curtis' epilepsy and depression. The Look of Love has a different approach of looking at a much larger time period and look at many different aspects of Raymond's life. It can be argued that the films main focus is on his relationships with women and by the end the main focus is his relationship with his daughter.
Despite The Look of Love has a comedy cast the film is a very serious tone and performances. Coogan does give a very good dramatic performance and it good to see him taking different roles. He does have some witty lines but on the whole it was a serious role. It was actually surprising that the audience laughed during a scene which was very serious when Raymond ends up having to make a line of cocaine for his daughter when she was giving birth. Egerton, Poots , Friel and Chris Addison too were solid in their roles, but Davad Williams' role was extremely minor that it felt pointless to the point where his role seemed like it was mostly cut and people like Stephen Fry and Dara O Briain were camoes.
Director Michael Winterbottom does inject a lot of period detail to the film and there are some stylist moments when he does montages. There is a different look to each period, the 50/60s being shot in the black and white, his rise in the 70s being quite bright and need the end having more gritty cinematography. But like his previous film that I saw, Trinsha, it has a paradox of feeling both too short and too long for both skipping over elements and yet having a slow pace. One moment I enjoyed was a quick 30 second scene done in one take as Jean confronts Amber/Fiona with the camera following her.
On the whole The Look of Look is a very well acted film which is its greatest strength, but does not know where to turn which part of its subject matter it should examine.
this is a movie filled up with event and facts but no characters, no detail on characters' world, they are acting on the surface, the script is the problem, it should be worked into textures and layers of these colourful characters rather than just covered them with events and what's happen,
they could edit some scenes out which director just show what's happen but not take them further to a better storytelling; stories happened to build the characters so we viewers can sympathize with them. You don't feel for any of the characters here. it's such a shame. this movie has no angle to this special group of people.....
All the emotion is not quite there, never gets to the point and ends at the surfaces. the film wasted these casting since they can do more than what's in the film. We all know how well they can act for such a colourful Raymond's world.
they could edit some scenes out which director just show what's happen but not take them further to a better storytelling; stories happened to build the characters so we viewers can sympathize with them. You don't feel for any of the characters here. it's such a shame. this movie has no angle to this special group of people.....
All the emotion is not quite there, never gets to the point and ends at the surfaces. the film wasted these casting since they can do more than what's in the film. We all know how well they can act for such a colourful Raymond's world.
Charming, witty, intelligent. Had to have it all, but at what cost?
One is almost tempted to pronounce Paul Raymond's story as predictable. Rags to riches story, got corrupted and suffered the consequences. Yet there is something different about Paul Raymond, who came to London from Liverpool with nothing and reached the very top.
By different I don't mean just the fact that he was probably the first entrepreneur to acquire wealth almost exclusively from the "adult entertainment" industry but he founded it since his peak coincided with the beginning of secularisation of Britain and he introduced a very daring sort of entertainment in a highly puritanical society. Being spirited as he were, neither the criticisms or the bad press affected his stamina; he just marched on conquering bigger heights.
With the above in mind, it does not become too challenging to picture an audacious, notorious individual. Or so Steve Cogan aimed to have us believe. I could not envisage an actor better suited for the part. Ultra cool and a charmer, Steve Coogan was Paul Raymond. Mr Raymond was apparently so charming that his shared his extramarital bravados with his wife and for the 1950's (or so) this is spectacular.
The movie places us inside his life and we follow his ups and downs, although we soon become aware that he is a man in mourning. Perhaps a side effect of the poverty he came from, his no limits lifestyle and the way he indulged it to his beloved daughter obviously must have played a part.
It might go down as just another bio of a sale made man, but this film had an added dose of personality that undoubtedly mirrored its central character and the flamboyance he exhumed.
One of the better recent British films.
One is almost tempted to pronounce Paul Raymond's story as predictable. Rags to riches story, got corrupted and suffered the consequences. Yet there is something different about Paul Raymond, who came to London from Liverpool with nothing and reached the very top.
By different I don't mean just the fact that he was probably the first entrepreneur to acquire wealth almost exclusively from the "adult entertainment" industry but he founded it since his peak coincided with the beginning of secularisation of Britain and he introduced a very daring sort of entertainment in a highly puritanical society. Being spirited as he were, neither the criticisms or the bad press affected his stamina; he just marched on conquering bigger heights.
With the above in mind, it does not become too challenging to picture an audacious, notorious individual. Or so Steve Cogan aimed to have us believe. I could not envisage an actor better suited for the part. Ultra cool and a charmer, Steve Coogan was Paul Raymond. Mr Raymond was apparently so charming that his shared his extramarital bravados with his wife and for the 1950's (or so) this is spectacular.
The movie places us inside his life and we follow his ups and downs, although we soon become aware that he is a man in mourning. Perhaps a side effect of the poverty he came from, his no limits lifestyle and the way he indulged it to his beloved daughter obviously must have played a part.
It might go down as just another bio of a sale made man, but this film had an added dose of personality that undoubtedly mirrored its central character and the flamboyance he exhumed.
One of the better recent British films.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe film's working title, The King of Soho, had to be dropped after the threat of legal action by Paul Raymond's son, Howard, who was already developing a project of the same name about his father's life.
- BlooperWhile discussing the role of a reporter for 'Men Only' magazine the Fiona Richmond character (Tamsin Egerton) refers to female genitalia as "pussy". This term would not have been in use in the 1960s when the film is set. Later in the film the correct English term "fanny" is used.
- ConnessioniReferences Billy il bugiardo (1963)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Look of Love?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Giá Trị Của Tình Yêu
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 21.252 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 5105 USD
- 7 lug 2013
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 1.318.468 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 41 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti