luca-settembre
Joined Jul 2007
Welcome to the new profile
We're making some updates, and some features will be temporarily unavailable while we enhance your experience. The previous version will not be accessible after 7/14. Stay tuned for the upcoming relaunch.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings7
luca-settembre's rating
Reviews7
luca-settembre's rating
A Man Called Otto is a 2023 movie directed by Marc Foster and with Tom Hanks as leading actor. This movie is based on the book A Man Called Ove by Fredrik Backman. My wife read, enjoyed and was very touched by the book, so we were really curious and excited to watch this movie. The movie surely didn't disappoint us at all.
The movie tells the story of Otto. By following him in his daily duties in the first part of the movie, we get to know him more and more. Otto is an old and grumpy man, who has lost his wife, and with that, any hope for happiness and purpose in his life. He is retired and lives in Pittsburgh. In his neighborhood, he is the self-appointed responsible one for a series of maintenance tasks and, most importantly, for checking that rules are followed, without any room for flexibility. He acts like a sociopath and is extremely annoyed by the people around him. Through a series of flashbacks, we also learn about his past and about the love story with his beloved wife.
The first thing I want to say is that Otto is a very believable character with a very realistic human path, and all of that is portrayed very well in the movie. Following his wife's death, Otto finds himself locked in a bubble, including only himself and his pain, preventing him from moving on, and rejecting people around him. We can see that he is a good man, but one who doesn't allow himself to show that side to other people. We can see that he is an unhappy man, who doesn't allow himself to enjoy even little things. Whenever he even smells some of the "outside world", he immediately goes back to his bubble. In one of his outbursts, he perfectly summarizes his human condition: "I don't want to clear Sonya from my life. There was nothing before her, and there's nothing after!"
The movie brings the viewer into Otto's world, and does it with a very light touch, which provides for fun moments and for touching moments, and fully preserves the complexity of Otto's character and of his drama.
Needless to say, Tom Hanks does an amazing job in the role of Otto and that brings so much added value to the movie. Mariana Treviño, who portrays Marisol, a young woman, mum of three kids, moving to Otto's neighborhood with her family, is also excellent in this movie.
Having this new family in the neighborhood brings changes and a lot of fresh air in Otto's life. While I want to keep this a spoiler-free review, I want to highlight that A Man Called Otto does not only make us reflect on lost love and its consequences, but also on the inestimable value that can be brought to our life by unexpected people in unexpected circumstances at unexpected times. "Can a man be born again, once he is old?" (John 3:4).
Regarding the weaknesses of this movie, they have to do, from my point of view, with some of the side story paths, which are a bit stretched and not as believable as the rest of the movie. The same applies to some of the emotional moments, which don't necessarily bring added value to the story.
More time could have been given to the development of the relationship between Otto and Marisol's family. While we realize that this relationship strongly impacts Otto's path, I had the impression that I could not really witness all the events leading to the developments in Otto's life story, or at least, that some of that moved too fast. In other words, some of these developments don't seem fully justified by what we have seen in terms of characters' exploration. It is a bit of a pity, as other than that, well-developed characters and their intense interactions are a big part of what makes this movie so good.
Touching and enjoyable movie. 7 Stars!
The movie tells the story of Otto. By following him in his daily duties in the first part of the movie, we get to know him more and more. Otto is an old and grumpy man, who has lost his wife, and with that, any hope for happiness and purpose in his life. He is retired and lives in Pittsburgh. In his neighborhood, he is the self-appointed responsible one for a series of maintenance tasks and, most importantly, for checking that rules are followed, without any room for flexibility. He acts like a sociopath and is extremely annoyed by the people around him. Through a series of flashbacks, we also learn about his past and about the love story with his beloved wife.
The first thing I want to say is that Otto is a very believable character with a very realistic human path, and all of that is portrayed very well in the movie. Following his wife's death, Otto finds himself locked in a bubble, including only himself and his pain, preventing him from moving on, and rejecting people around him. We can see that he is a good man, but one who doesn't allow himself to show that side to other people. We can see that he is an unhappy man, who doesn't allow himself to enjoy even little things. Whenever he even smells some of the "outside world", he immediately goes back to his bubble. In one of his outbursts, he perfectly summarizes his human condition: "I don't want to clear Sonya from my life. There was nothing before her, and there's nothing after!"
The movie brings the viewer into Otto's world, and does it with a very light touch, which provides for fun moments and for touching moments, and fully preserves the complexity of Otto's character and of his drama.
Needless to say, Tom Hanks does an amazing job in the role of Otto and that brings so much added value to the movie. Mariana Treviño, who portrays Marisol, a young woman, mum of three kids, moving to Otto's neighborhood with her family, is also excellent in this movie.
Having this new family in the neighborhood brings changes and a lot of fresh air in Otto's life. While I want to keep this a spoiler-free review, I want to highlight that A Man Called Otto does not only make us reflect on lost love and its consequences, but also on the inestimable value that can be brought to our life by unexpected people in unexpected circumstances at unexpected times. "Can a man be born again, once he is old?" (John 3:4).
Regarding the weaknesses of this movie, they have to do, from my point of view, with some of the side story paths, which are a bit stretched and not as believable as the rest of the movie. The same applies to some of the emotional moments, which don't necessarily bring added value to the story.
More time could have been given to the development of the relationship between Otto and Marisol's family. While we realize that this relationship strongly impacts Otto's path, I had the impression that I could not really witness all the events leading to the developments in Otto's life story, or at least, that some of that moved too fast. In other words, some of these developments don't seem fully justified by what we have seen in terms of characters' exploration. It is a bit of a pity, as other than that, well-developed characters and their intense interactions are a big part of what makes this movie so good.
Touching and enjoyable movie. 7 Stars!
The Equalizer 3 is the last chapter of the Equalizer franchise, and is directed by Antoine Foqua, and stars, of course, Denzel Washington as Robert McCall, and Dakota Fanning as a CIA officer.
As an action movie fan, I really enjoyed the Equalizer movies, still being aware that we are not talking about masterpieces. They are fun and enjoyable vigilante movies where Denzel Washington is freaking cool and badass as he takes down, alone, large and structured criminal organizations. Without the value he brings into these movies, I don't know if they would be even worth watching. The Equalizer 3 fits perfectly into this path, with some slight changes.
The first thing to say is that this movie is very very gory and brutal, much more compared to the first two movies. Clearly it was decided to go one level up, so one needs to be prepared. The movie looks very dark, the Italian Mafia gives sort of modernized Godfather vibes, and most importantly, is beautifully shot. All of that can be appreciated since the very beginning of the movie, where fantastic camera work is done as the viewer follows a man entering a building full of dead people, brutally murdered. This very intense initial scene really sets the tone of the movie, to which the music score also fits really well.
The movie is located in a tiny Italian village, whose people are constantly threatened by the mafia, where "business" brought McCall (Denzel), too. This is the third big action movie to be shot in Italy (after Indy 5 and Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning) to come out in theaters in 2023, at least that I know of. Whether or not this decision is based on financial benefits of some sort, it provided The Equalizer 3 with beautiful and picturesque scenery.
As an Italian and fan of Denzel Washington, it was really entertaining to watch Denzel Washington sitting at the cafe, talking broken Italian, making friends, getting familiar with the people and the quiet atmosphere of the town. I found the representation of the town and of the people authentic, very well done, and not too stereotypical. The Italian language is real Italian spoken by Italian actors, the accents are real, the film is shot in different Italian towns on the Amalfi coast, and so on. One can see the great attention to detail and care that was put into the making of this movie, which I mentioned above about the directing. I did have a "what?!" moment, though, that I could not wrap my head around: Aminah (Gaia Scodellaro) takes McCall on a tour of the village, by telling him that she'll help him discover the authentic food specialties of the town. As they go on a stroll and talk, they pass by some food stands, and Aminah shows McCall different authentic Italian dishes. Then, however, she invites him to grab a Kebab (great, but not Italian at all!), which he does! Seriously, what happened there? There was all that nice fish and stuff, too-why a Kebab??
I have read a lot of criticism about the action in this movie, especially about it being too little. The problem that I see with the action is with the fact that McCall is never really challenged by any of his enemies rather than with the length of the action scenes. In other words, none of the villains or his men are even close to Robert McCall's level, so it seems quite easy for him to take them down in creatively brutal ways. This applies, unfortunately, also to the ending of the movie, which is, anyway, very very powerful. Also, the non-action parts build the tension between McCall and the villain, and they are not boring at all.
Another weak point of the movie, from my point of view, has to do with some of the supporting characters and their relationship to the hero (McCall). Dakota Fanning's character (CIA) could have been a very good helper in the fight against the mafia, but instead she ends up not doing so much at all... Along with that, one aspect of McCall being in this town is the attachments that the townspeople form with him, but we actually don't have much evidence of this beyond him eating in a cafe once in a while. We do see McCall having an emotional response when they are threatened, we do see him getting comfortable in the town, but while a deeper layer to that is mentioned, the viewer doesn't directly witness this: for example, when McCall says that the people of the town brought him peace, or that he understood that this is the place where he belongs. All these sentiments sound a bit out of place and don't match the level of interactions that we as viewers have witnessed. We expect some deeper character development to happen in the "kebab"/walks scene, but the dialogue between McCall and Aminah doesn't actually build to anything relevant.
Overall, a very good and extremely brutal vigilante movie, with some weaknesses, very well shot, with a fantastic Denzel Washington doing very badass things. Worthwhile final chapter, 7 stars!
As an action movie fan, I really enjoyed the Equalizer movies, still being aware that we are not talking about masterpieces. They are fun and enjoyable vigilante movies where Denzel Washington is freaking cool and badass as he takes down, alone, large and structured criminal organizations. Without the value he brings into these movies, I don't know if they would be even worth watching. The Equalizer 3 fits perfectly into this path, with some slight changes.
The first thing to say is that this movie is very very gory and brutal, much more compared to the first two movies. Clearly it was decided to go one level up, so one needs to be prepared. The movie looks very dark, the Italian Mafia gives sort of modernized Godfather vibes, and most importantly, is beautifully shot. All of that can be appreciated since the very beginning of the movie, where fantastic camera work is done as the viewer follows a man entering a building full of dead people, brutally murdered. This very intense initial scene really sets the tone of the movie, to which the music score also fits really well.
The movie is located in a tiny Italian village, whose people are constantly threatened by the mafia, where "business" brought McCall (Denzel), too. This is the third big action movie to be shot in Italy (after Indy 5 and Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning) to come out in theaters in 2023, at least that I know of. Whether or not this decision is based on financial benefits of some sort, it provided The Equalizer 3 with beautiful and picturesque scenery.
As an Italian and fan of Denzel Washington, it was really entertaining to watch Denzel Washington sitting at the cafe, talking broken Italian, making friends, getting familiar with the people and the quiet atmosphere of the town. I found the representation of the town and of the people authentic, very well done, and not too stereotypical. The Italian language is real Italian spoken by Italian actors, the accents are real, the film is shot in different Italian towns on the Amalfi coast, and so on. One can see the great attention to detail and care that was put into the making of this movie, which I mentioned above about the directing. I did have a "what?!" moment, though, that I could not wrap my head around: Aminah (Gaia Scodellaro) takes McCall on a tour of the village, by telling him that she'll help him discover the authentic food specialties of the town. As they go on a stroll and talk, they pass by some food stands, and Aminah shows McCall different authentic Italian dishes. Then, however, she invites him to grab a Kebab (great, but not Italian at all!), which he does! Seriously, what happened there? There was all that nice fish and stuff, too-why a Kebab??
I have read a lot of criticism about the action in this movie, especially about it being too little. The problem that I see with the action is with the fact that McCall is never really challenged by any of his enemies rather than with the length of the action scenes. In other words, none of the villains or his men are even close to Robert McCall's level, so it seems quite easy for him to take them down in creatively brutal ways. This applies, unfortunately, also to the ending of the movie, which is, anyway, very very powerful. Also, the non-action parts build the tension between McCall and the villain, and they are not boring at all.
Another weak point of the movie, from my point of view, has to do with some of the supporting characters and their relationship to the hero (McCall). Dakota Fanning's character (CIA) could have been a very good helper in the fight against the mafia, but instead she ends up not doing so much at all... Along with that, one aspect of McCall being in this town is the attachments that the townspeople form with him, but we actually don't have much evidence of this beyond him eating in a cafe once in a while. We do see McCall having an emotional response when they are threatened, we do see him getting comfortable in the town, but while a deeper layer to that is mentioned, the viewer doesn't directly witness this: for example, when McCall says that the people of the town brought him peace, or that he understood that this is the place where he belongs. All these sentiments sound a bit out of place and don't match the level of interactions that we as viewers have witnessed. We expect some deeper character development to happen in the "kebab"/walks scene, but the dialogue between McCall and Aminah doesn't actually build to anything relevant.
Overall, a very good and extremely brutal vigilante movie, with some weaknesses, very well shot, with a fantastic Denzel Washington doing very badass things. Worthwhile final chapter, 7 stars!
"Oppenheimer" is a movie telling the story of Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb. It stars, among others, Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Robert Downy Jr., Florence Pugh, and is directed by Christopher Nolan.
I would like to start with a few words about my theater experience, in Munich in original language: not only the theater, not a small one, was completely full, but also the tension and the concentration were palpable in the room, which was super silent from start to end and even extra seconds after that. This is not something you see often at the theater and tells a lot about the atmosphere surrounding this film.
The movie covers, with different levels of depth, many aspects of Oppenheimer's life story: his professional career, including the project leading to the development of the atomic bomb as well as the context surrounding that, his political beliefs, the allegations related to leakage of sensitive information, his private life, the moral issues related to the application of his work. The movie covers all of that in around three hours, and in a very fast pace.
"Oppenheimer" is packed with dialogue, so one needs to be prepared for it. These dialogues are everything but superficial. In fact, they are intense and relevant to the whole story. I believe that one or more rewatches will reveal to the viewer more and more details and allow for a deeper understanding of the movie: this is very typical of Nolan's works.
As mentioned, the film deals with the moral issue related to certain technological developments, a topic of extreme importance back then as well as nowadays. While doing that, it doesn't try to pick a side, to blame, to judge, to put people in the right or wrong side of history. It tells a complex story in a complex and still realistic way and it does that exceptionally. My wife and I post-processed the movie together after watching it, and we noticed how many questions and input for deep thinking the movie gave to us. I wish this kind of experience to all of "Oppenheimer"'s viewers.
One of the aspects of the movie that made us reflect a lot is how the different people involved think in very separate boxes. Scientists think as scientists, politicians as politicians, military as military, and so on: no bigger picture, no harmony in view of the common good as the Manhattan project, leading to the first nuclear weapon, is carried out.
As this project advances over multiple years, I noticed and appreciated the absence of a breakthrough moment related to Robert Oppenheimer's scientific activities: the brilliant intuition of the genius, typical of other movies dealing with great scientific achievements, suddenly cracking the problem in a burst of energy. This choice doesn't take away any tension from the story and adds even more realism. Oppenheimer understands how necessary other scientists and brilliant minds around him are for his research, and is very good at valuing and, when possible, taking the best out of them.
One of the turning points of the project and of the sequence of events is the Trinity test, whose representation is one of the best scenes of "Oppenheimer". These are a few minutes of rare intensity and graphically stunning, in which the viewer experiences the countdown leading to the nuclear explosion in an incredible climax. It almost seems that the countdown for the bomb matches the duration of the scene, making it even more intense and suspenseful for the viewer.
Everything just clicks in this movie: the story, the casting, the graphics / visual effects, the score, etcetera. I do have to say that in several points it is quite hard to understand what the people say, because the dialogues are drown in the sound effects or in the score. This is for sure done on purpose and makes the movie very dynamic: dialogues happen in a context full of other things, or people, or events and this is well portrayed in the movie. Still, one wishes to understand better what people are saying, especially in some parts.
Fantastic movie, 9 stars!
I would like to start with a few words about my theater experience, in Munich in original language: not only the theater, not a small one, was completely full, but also the tension and the concentration were palpable in the room, which was super silent from start to end and even extra seconds after that. This is not something you see often at the theater and tells a lot about the atmosphere surrounding this film.
The movie covers, with different levels of depth, many aspects of Oppenheimer's life story: his professional career, including the project leading to the development of the atomic bomb as well as the context surrounding that, his political beliefs, the allegations related to leakage of sensitive information, his private life, the moral issues related to the application of his work. The movie covers all of that in around three hours, and in a very fast pace.
"Oppenheimer" is packed with dialogue, so one needs to be prepared for it. These dialogues are everything but superficial. In fact, they are intense and relevant to the whole story. I believe that one or more rewatches will reveal to the viewer more and more details and allow for a deeper understanding of the movie: this is very typical of Nolan's works.
As mentioned, the film deals with the moral issue related to certain technological developments, a topic of extreme importance back then as well as nowadays. While doing that, it doesn't try to pick a side, to blame, to judge, to put people in the right or wrong side of history. It tells a complex story in a complex and still realistic way and it does that exceptionally. My wife and I post-processed the movie together after watching it, and we noticed how many questions and input for deep thinking the movie gave to us. I wish this kind of experience to all of "Oppenheimer"'s viewers.
One of the aspects of the movie that made us reflect a lot is how the different people involved think in very separate boxes. Scientists think as scientists, politicians as politicians, military as military, and so on: no bigger picture, no harmony in view of the common good as the Manhattan project, leading to the first nuclear weapon, is carried out.
As this project advances over multiple years, I noticed and appreciated the absence of a breakthrough moment related to Robert Oppenheimer's scientific activities: the brilliant intuition of the genius, typical of other movies dealing with great scientific achievements, suddenly cracking the problem in a burst of energy. This choice doesn't take away any tension from the story and adds even more realism. Oppenheimer understands how necessary other scientists and brilliant minds around him are for his research, and is very good at valuing and, when possible, taking the best out of them.
One of the turning points of the project and of the sequence of events is the Trinity test, whose representation is one of the best scenes of "Oppenheimer". These are a few minutes of rare intensity and graphically stunning, in which the viewer experiences the countdown leading to the nuclear explosion in an incredible climax. It almost seems that the countdown for the bomb matches the duration of the scene, making it even more intense and suspenseful for the viewer.
Everything just clicks in this movie: the story, the casting, the graphics / visual effects, the score, etcetera. I do have to say that in several points it is quite hard to understand what the people say, because the dialogues are drown in the sound effects or in the score. This is for sure done on purpose and makes the movie very dynamic: dialogues happen in a context full of other things, or people, or events and this is well portrayed in the movie. Still, one wishes to understand better what people are saying, especially in some parts.
Fantastic movie, 9 stars!