AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,7/10
2,2 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaIt's Friday night--she's moving in with her boyfriend tomorrow--so she goes out, but gets stuck in traffic--where she meets a handsome stranger.It's Friday night--she's moving in with her boyfriend tomorrow--so she goes out, but gets stuck in traffic--where she meets a handsome stranger.It's Friday night--she's moving in with her boyfriend tomorrow--so she goes out, but gets stuck in traffic--where she meets a handsome stranger.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 3 indicações no total
Florence Loiret Caille
- La jeune fille du flipper
- (as Florence Loiret-Caille)
Avaliações em destaque
This was a damn good movie. Very different, the closest movie that comes to the feel and over all effect is The Loss of Sexual Innocence. Movies such as this catch many off guard because they don't follow the de facto movie format. Meaning, an event happens, people react to said event, drama, conclusion, resolution.
This movie takes a totally different approach, and that's what makes it shine. This movie defies being labeled as a movie altogether. People say this movie is boring, that nothing happens, there are almost no words. They'd be right, there is no real drama, conclusion, resolution. I don't believe that's what this movie is even about.
From the opening moments of the Paris rooftops I knew I was in for something special. The long shots, the turning off of lights, the gazes at the Paris skyline. This was a visual feast with poetic credentials, and I expected as much.
Folks, this movie was not about Jean and Laure. I believe thats where all the critical flack stems from. This movie isn't about a brief encounter that is over by sunrise. The plot that you all speak of, that's secondary.
The movie tends to focus on their surroundings more so then them. A cluttered car, a heater, traffic, boxes. A best example of this is their skin, during the sex scenes there are close ups of their skin rather then showing them making love. As if the plot, in this case, making love, is secondary to the poetic element of the story.
In any given event, the surroundings are just as important as the story itself. This movie displays that perfectly. That is the purpose of this movie, that is it's beauty, that is what it is about.
If this movie is about the surroundings rather then a plot or story, then what would be the purpose of showing rooftops, skin, lamps, boxes? Because is it life, and it is poetic and beautiful. What is the purpose of a rose? Why take a picture of it, or give it to someone? A rose simply is, this movie simply is. The nuances of life deserve appreciation and this movie pays homage to that fact. That is what this movie is about.
It is life, it is the beauty of everything around you.
This movie takes a totally different approach, and that's what makes it shine. This movie defies being labeled as a movie altogether. People say this movie is boring, that nothing happens, there are almost no words. They'd be right, there is no real drama, conclusion, resolution. I don't believe that's what this movie is even about.
From the opening moments of the Paris rooftops I knew I was in for something special. The long shots, the turning off of lights, the gazes at the Paris skyline. This was a visual feast with poetic credentials, and I expected as much.
Folks, this movie was not about Jean and Laure. I believe thats where all the critical flack stems from. This movie isn't about a brief encounter that is over by sunrise. The plot that you all speak of, that's secondary.
The movie tends to focus on their surroundings more so then them. A cluttered car, a heater, traffic, boxes. A best example of this is their skin, during the sex scenes there are close ups of their skin rather then showing them making love. As if the plot, in this case, making love, is secondary to the poetic element of the story.
In any given event, the surroundings are just as important as the story itself. This movie displays that perfectly. That is the purpose of this movie, that is it's beauty, that is what it is about.
If this movie is about the surroundings rather then a plot or story, then what would be the purpose of showing rooftops, skin, lamps, boxes? Because is it life, and it is poetic and beautiful. What is the purpose of a rose? Why take a picture of it, or give it to someone? A rose simply is, this movie simply is. The nuances of life deserve appreciation and this movie pays homage to that fact. That is what this movie is about.
It is life, it is the beauty of everything around you.
This film resists all that is wrong with blockbuster cinema, totally refusing to offer straight-forward, passivity-inducing narrative structures. It is one of the most book-like films you are likely to see, taking its time to develop the central characters in manner that leaves them open to determination by the audience's imagination. It is an erotic film that has no climax. It is a film that engages in life rather than distracts us from it.
This is an immensely subtle film that uses a broad range of cinematic techniques so you should definitely see it on a big screen. In fact, I wouldn't even bother seeing it on TV, so diminished would its impact be.
This is an immensely subtle film that uses a broad range of cinematic techniques so you should definitely see it on a big screen. In fact, I wouldn't even bother seeing it on TV, so diminished would its impact be.
7amzo
I very much like how this film begins, and it is a creative aspect to have a story line start out of being stuck in traffic. Yet, about 1/3 of the way into the film, it begins to become a bit bizarre, when the man enters her car. Everything seems a bit surreal and things do not always follow logically. My explanation, and what I think makes the film better in retrospect, is that everything that follows may not have actually happened. It seemed to be all too perfect, and she did everything without a single qualm. We were already shown that she was a bit apprehensive about leaving her current comfortable, and the fact that she entered a fantasy seems quite normal under that sort of stress. Nonetheless, whether you believe it was a fantasy or it really happened, it is poetically shot and deserves to be seen, to make ones own decision about the film.
Claire Denis' films may look slick to the jaundiced American audiences, since many fashion and advertising makers employ devices that create Denis-esque effects. Beau Travail was unfortunately evocative of Bruce Webers' damp pretty man ad campaigns and books, yet the power of the film remained when the memory of the packaging had faded.
This film was beautiful to my innocent eye, as it wistfully, abstractly spreads out night-time Paris as a diorama into which drivers and passengers are thrown during a harrowing transit strike. The intimacy that occurs in the film between strangers is intensely depicted - close close close and the camera - as with Beau Travail - is genius. The film made me sad to consider the sense of loneliness inside of that city and my own during the night, yet I am pleased to have seen such a lovely rendering of that idea. I saw the film last night and the pictures are still downloading inside today, my mark of great films.
Finally, THANK YOU Claire Denis for never being ponderously intellectual during appearances and for not feeling that you need 3 hour films to make art. This film - in less than 90 minutes - is more profound than any of the 3 hour French films made.
This film was beautiful to my innocent eye, as it wistfully, abstractly spreads out night-time Paris as a diorama into which drivers and passengers are thrown during a harrowing transit strike. The intimacy that occurs in the film between strangers is intensely depicted - close close close and the camera - as with Beau Travail - is genius. The film made me sad to consider the sense of loneliness inside of that city and my own during the night, yet I am pleased to have seen such a lovely rendering of that idea. I saw the film last night and the pictures are still downloading inside today, my mark of great films.
Finally, THANK YOU Claire Denis for never being ponderously intellectual during appearances and for not feeling that you need 3 hour films to make art. This film - in less than 90 minutes - is more profound than any of the 3 hour French films made.
Vendredi Soir (2002), directed by Claire Denis, is a film about two
residents of Paris who come together because of a horrendous,
citywide traffic jam. The movie is slow and deliberate, but not
boring. The film's power derives from the interaction of two
attractive strangers who are temporarily trapped--and yet
liberated--by the fact that mass transit is shut down, and auto
traffic has come to a standstill.
Valérie Lemercier portrays Laure, a young woman who has left her
apartment to move in with her lover. Ms. Lemercier owes a great
debt to Ms. Denis, who could have cast the part with a more
traditionally beautiful woman. (In the U.S., the role would probably
have gone to Demi Moore.) Instead, the director chose an actor
who is undeniably beautiful, but in an interesting, complex way.
Lemercier is an outstanding actor, and she is given enough time
on screen to demonstrate her professional skills.
Don't see this film if you're looking for excitement, graphic sex,
violence, or a strong narrative story line. See this film if you want to
view Paris--and human relationships--portrayed in a serious, but
almost dreamlike, lyrical, fashion.
residents of Paris who come together because of a horrendous,
citywide traffic jam. The movie is slow and deliberate, but not
boring. The film's power derives from the interaction of two
attractive strangers who are temporarily trapped--and yet
liberated--by the fact that mass transit is shut down, and auto
traffic has come to a standstill.
Valérie Lemercier portrays Laure, a young woman who has left her
apartment to move in with her lover. Ms. Lemercier owes a great
debt to Ms. Denis, who could have cast the part with a more
traditionally beautiful woman. (In the U.S., the role would probably
have gone to Demi Moore.) Instead, the director chose an actor
who is undeniably beautiful, but in an interesting, complex way.
Lemercier is an outstanding actor, and she is given enough time
on screen to demonstrate her professional skills.
Don't see this film if you're looking for excitement, graphic sex,
violence, or a strong narrative story line. See this film if you want to
view Paris--and human relationships--portrayed in a serious, but
almost dreamlike, lyrical, fashion.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Friday Night?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Friday Night
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 156.918
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 9.381
- 25 de mai. de 2003
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 609.542
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 30 min(90 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente