Liverpool

All I have to say is I agree 100% with the first person who "reviewed" this artistic whatever. I didn't even realize when the movie came to an end, literally fade to black. I just have one question and that is why is this called Liverpool??? Ushaia would have been more appropriate. It was evident that none of the people who were "acting" in this were professionals. The central character drives a snow plow in real life. But if the woman who played his disabled daughter isn't then she did well. I also agree as to the mystery of how this project got funded. Besides the endless tedium I felt a chill just watching it.

Liverpool is a painstakingly meticulous study of an inborn loner's journey of solitude, soul-searching and guilt. It is a credible projection of one's decision to isolate and marginalise himself and the price to pay for leaving his everything behind. It is not an easy subject which one may hear about or witness day in day out. The film is rather empirical than critical and is conscious not to press hard for an answer or value judgment.

I can fully understand why some people left the cinema halfway through the screening or even sooner. To some, the mentality and behaviour of the lead character is bound to be a completely alien if not incomprehensible concept. Certainly it is not their fault for not being able to understand, and indeed this may be a bliss for them. On this premise a relatively low "popular" rating is explained. However, to some in the audience, Liverpool can be a long-awaited mind-reader which crosses paths only once in a lifetime and can be a deeply personal movie which speaks loudly for and into their hearts.

It is bound to be a mainstream miss. But it is priceless to some.

It's the story of Farrel, who left who shortly before his daughter was born. He spent long time on a ship. As he returned home, after many years of absence, his mother, by that time old and sick, doesn't recognize him. His daughter, who never knew him, doesn't warm up towards him. After a short while, he disappears again. It's a beautiful, sad movie. Beautiful scenes, lots of silence.

This is one of those films, which gets better in your mind the more you reflect on it.

The director before the showing, spoke to us about what he was trying to create, that is a simple piece about a guy's search for meaning.

I thought he succeeded really well. The cinematics were bold, but worked to make an emotional impact. For example we see a whole four-minute single shot of our man packing his bag to leave the ship. No dialogue but the superb and understated acting by Nieves Cabrera leaves us in no doubt that this is a man in turmoil and on the cusp of facing his demons.

In fact the single shot, no dialogue gambit is deployed a great deal in this film, but it works due to Cabrera and no little contribution from the stunning and unforgiving sub Antarctic scenery.

This is a personal journey, brilliantly done by the director and his lead. Thought provoking and real sums Liverpool up for me.

This "film" has about 5 minutes of material, and even that is pretty uninteresting. Loneliness, bleakness, alienation, alcoholism, all have done before a thousand times better than this. Endless scenes of minimal content, virtually no dialogue, opaque characters, all add up to a movie that can be watched at triple speed with no loss, because, despite claims for it as a bleak masterpiece, there is no THERE there. How many times do we have to watch this man trudge through the snow, put on his coat, take off his coat, eat a meal? How did such a film ever get financed? Perhaps a state grant? Maybe some leftover funds to be distributed before the end of the fiscal year? There is no other explanation. Don't waste your time.