Le dîner

Clearly it is an adaptation of Plato's The Symposium in which the Greek philosopher discusses about Love. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symposium_%28Plato_dialogue%29 Ettore Scola was great by transposing the Greeks' feasts to an Italian restaurant, simply great! Some people may be offended by gay directions, but it is Plato's position: the greatest love possible is between the master and his pupil. That explains the sweet erotic scene of the two guys at the end of the film. "The purpose of this was so that, when a man embraced a woman, he would cast his seed and they would have children; but when male embraced male, they would at least have the satisfaction of intercourse, after which they could stop embracing, return to their jobs, and look after their other needs in life." Symposium, 191c-d The film also shows other forms of Love like: mom and son, friends, man and woman... and all of them some problem shows up. And what really matters is to love rather than being loved.

Once again Scola manages to produce high quality cinema, needing for it no more than a good cast of actors and his magistral talent. Rather than the usual Hollywood menu of vulgarity, violence and sex, "La Cena" manages to present in its less that 2 hours, a wide array of dramas in the course of a single dinner evening in a common restaurant. At each table the guests will be immersed in a particular drama (mother vs. daughter, old professor with young student lover, etc.) which are autonomous in themselves but that seem to be part of a larger script. That is achieved thanks to the masterful camera movement that weaves itself among the tables and connects all the independent dramas offering us an orchestrated picture of the restaurant's whole microcosm. Well worth seeing.

The current score of this film (6.7) certainly does no justice to it and is indicative of what years of Hollywood-made movies does to what one expects from a movie.

This film does not have a coherent story, it does not take the viewer from point A to point B and thus does not offer any real "character advancement" or real "scenario". I believe the lack of those things causes the condemnation of most viewers since to most a "film" is a "story".

Well, Scola shows that it ain't necessarily so. This film could best be described as a series of "pictures" of characters and their situations. By taking us from table to table and shifting our attention from one to the next, he manages to portray the great deal of diversity of possible human positions/conditions/situations. The hall of the restaurant becomes a mosaic of people from all corners of the social structure and they have all kinds of fears, aspirations, hopes, sexual interests, political or financial anxieties, doubts or troubles.

Scola uses maestrically the twists of his characters moods and their dialogue in order to occasionally insert his own social or political comments, thus giving more substance to the film. He does so without showing that he wants to do so however, and the remarks might easily be passed by the uninterested or the uninitiated totally unnoticed.

The human conditions depicted in the film although presented in a light manner are no joke: The increasing distancing of a mother from her adolescent daughter, the illegitimate love between a professor and his student, the anxiety and lack of self assessment of a bank clerk, the anger of a grown-up daughter towards her supposedly un-loving father (and many more) are all deeply touching human conditions which Scola presents with a soft, warm, and at the same time lively manner.

The "gist" of the film is that by constantly moving from table to table and from situation to situation he slowly takes us through the collective proceeding of the "solution" or every case -either positive, negative or neutral- and when the film ends, you feel an undeniable sense of closure, of communication, of warmth, of collectiveness, of life. Scola makes us feel like we were sitting together with his characters, on their tables, and makes us understand what is the true meaning of sitting around a table with other people. It is the explanation of the "symposium" as one of the characters explains, too, in the film and Scola explains it in the most humane, warm and caring manner.

This film is nothing less than a masterpiece.

It's one of the best movies I have ever seen! Impressive! What can someone do with a small budget but with great imagination. The hole action is flowing naturally.

Only 12 votes before mine? How could it be? Well, the movie is really one of the best I've ever seen. Scola directs his actors just like a great orchestra, keeping the action always in the same place, and following it almost in real time (I mean, 2 hours of movie to describe 2 hours in the life of the characters). So the film make you see an evening in the life of different people (with their stories, their problems, their loves), that have nothing in common one with each other but the place they're in, a restaurant. And all this is shown with a look that's funny and sad at the same time. A great construction of the director, supported by a gorgeous cast!