smijatov89
Entrou em set. de 2002
Bem-vindo(a) ao novo perfil
Nossas atualizações ainda estão em desenvolvimento. Embora a versão anterior do perfil não esteja mais acessível, estamos trabalhando ativamente em melhorias, e alguns dos recursos ausentes retornarão em breve! Fique atento ao retorno deles. Enquanto isso, Análise de Classificação ainda está disponível em nossos aplicativos iOS e Android, encontrados na página de perfil. Para visualizar suas Distribuições de Classificação por ano e gênero, consulte nossa nova Guia de ajuda.
Selos7
Para saber como ganhar selos, acesse página de ajuda de selos.
Avaliações976
Classificação de smijatov89
Avaliações12
Classificação de smijatov89
This is one of those films where you will end up confused. Why, you ask. Well, for one you will not be certain of what is going on, or rather why things are going on. And secondly, you will not be certain whether you are supposed to feel uncomfortable throughout the film, or it is just a possible result of your own interpretation. It bodes that age-old question: what did the author want to say? Or in this case, the director.
I am not sure. Truly, not. Of course, there are traces of feminism here, socio-cultural critique, reclaiming Africanism rather than the post-colonial structures in place in Africa. That is all great. The story, however, is too rigid yet too vague. It doesn't make sense, does it? That's my point.
Acting is excellent, especially the young Maggie Mulubwa, who says more with her eyes than many actors can in any monologue or dialogue. Cinematography is beautiful, especially in relation to the ribbons that are allocated to the witches. Otherwise, the film's story is quite disturbing and disjointed. I felt uncomfortable throughout but was not quite sure if that was the feeling intended or just a mixture of discomfort and confusion as to what is going on.
Definitely worth a watch, but it is not something that would be easily understood or easily appreciated for its vagueness. Considering it is Rungano Nyoni's debut feature, I am sure she will easily build further on the fundaments she has established through I Am Not a Witch.
I am not sure. Truly, not. Of course, there are traces of feminism here, socio-cultural critique, reclaiming Africanism rather than the post-colonial structures in place in Africa. That is all great. The story, however, is too rigid yet too vague. It doesn't make sense, does it? That's my point.
Acting is excellent, especially the young Maggie Mulubwa, who says more with her eyes than many actors can in any monologue or dialogue. Cinematography is beautiful, especially in relation to the ribbons that are allocated to the witches. Otherwise, the film's story is quite disturbing and disjointed. I felt uncomfortable throughout but was not quite sure if that was the feeling intended or just a mixture of discomfort and confusion as to what is going on.
Definitely worth a watch, but it is not something that would be easily understood or easily appreciated for its vagueness. Considering it is Rungano Nyoni's debut feature, I am sure she will easily build further on the fundaments she has established through I Am Not a Witch.
Going into an 'Oscar baity' film during the Oscars winter season is always an experiment: is this going to be one that will allow you to fully immerse yourself into the fibre of the story or will you be severely frustrated by all the teary closeups followed by the string score? Lion, for better of for worse, does both. The first half of the film is absolutely splendid. Raw, poignant, emotional. It has it all. A fabulous lead actor in the young Sunny Pawar and a heart-wrenching story to go with him. Things go a bit wonky once the film shifts time and place to Australia.
While Dev Patel is splendid here, after Sunny's performance, it is difficult for him to live up to what has been presented. Rooney Mara is excellent, albeit rather tangential (potentially, actually unnecessary as a character). And that is where the problems lie. That strained relationship they have is just not meshing well. It does not progress the story anywhere. There are glimmers of hope in that Australian section, though. The dinner scene when Patel's character has a fit and Nicole Kidman, playing his adoptive mother, has one of the most expressive 30 second performances seen in a long time. Her "big scene" is also quite good but was too much of a tear-jerker moment for my taste.
From the technical side - the cinematography is excellent (again, especially in the first part of the film), and the original score is mesmerising and gives a wholly new dimension to the film. The bottom line is that this film is all well-intentioned, and that is the problem probably with it. It veers on the edge of being fully committed to the story and characters, but then kind of drifts away to be "a film". Basically, it is overly obvious and cliché at times. And I bet that the real-life story was not a cliché at all. The film just does not fully realise itself as an excellent one. A good film, definitely. A very good film, surely. But not an excellent one.
While Dev Patel is splendid here, after Sunny's performance, it is difficult for him to live up to what has been presented. Rooney Mara is excellent, albeit rather tangential (potentially, actually unnecessary as a character). And that is where the problems lie. That strained relationship they have is just not meshing well. It does not progress the story anywhere. There are glimmers of hope in that Australian section, though. The dinner scene when Patel's character has a fit and Nicole Kidman, playing his adoptive mother, has one of the most expressive 30 second performances seen in a long time. Her "big scene" is also quite good but was too much of a tear-jerker moment for my taste.
From the technical side - the cinematography is excellent (again, especially in the first part of the film), and the original score is mesmerising and gives a wholly new dimension to the film. The bottom line is that this film is all well-intentioned, and that is the problem probably with it. It veers on the edge of being fully committed to the story and characters, but then kind of drifts away to be "a film". Basically, it is overly obvious and cliché at times. And I bet that the real-life story was not a cliché at all. The film just does not fully realise itself as an excellent one. A good film, definitely. A very good film, surely. But not an excellent one.
There is very little in this film that would warrant the word "fabulous" in its title, aside from the fact that it is the name of the 90's British sitcom. It is an utter mess from start to finish and I am frankly quite surprised that the critics gave this average reviews. Granted, the basic plot line is not too bad: Edie and Patsy are old and slowly losing their fabulous lifestyle they used to enjoy. There is quite a few important issues here: aging, careers, sexism, materialism, etc. However, that is where the ingenuity ends. The execution of the film is utterly ridiculous. While the show used to be very sarcastic and basically make fun of people like Edie and Patsy, now that aspect of the story is lost. Their characters are shallow. There was no *real* character development from when the show ended in the 90's up until this moment - something that was supposed to happen. Otherwise, the acting is a bit too slap-sticky from everyone, as well as the entire production just seemed somehow as fake as the CGI background behind Kate Moss. And where does this ridiculous premise of Kate Moss come from any way?! Anyhow, aside from a chuckle here and there, and some fabulous outfits, there was little to take home from this. Which is a pity, as this could really have been fabulous...
Enquetes respondidas recentemente
7 pesquisas respondidas no total