Alexandar
Joined Jun 2003
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges8
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings542
Alexandar's rating
Reviews18
Alexandar's rating
12 Angry Men (1957)****
In 1957. following five films were in the competition for the Best Picture Academy Award: David Lean's "Bridge on the River Kwai", Joshua Lagan's "Sayonara", Mark Robson's "Peyton Place", Sidney Lumet's "12 Angry Men" and Billy Wilder's "Witness for the Prosecution". Pretty impressive list. Not surprisingly, Oscar went to Bridge
The last two (12 Angry Men and Witness for the Prosecution) were both exciting and intense courtroom dramas. 12 Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, was about 12 jurors with not an easy task to decide whether a young man is guilty or innocent on the charge of murder. Their decision must be unanimous. Witness for the Prosecution was a complex, unpredictable and full-of-surprises mystery from the novel written by famous Agatha Christie. Both excellent movies.
Somewhere I read that Agatha Christie once said something like:12 Angry Men is an awfully stupid movie because it is not operating with the facts but only with the jurors' presumptions. I don't know whether she really said that (she'll excuse me if not) but this is rather pseudo-argument.
Although it is true that the jurors are operating rather with "ideas" than "facts" in this film this is certainly not a flaw or weakness.
Almost everything seems clear after the trial and jurors vote 11:1 for "guilty". Only, juror #8 (Henry Fonda) votes "innocent" not because he think he is but because he think that the boy deserves some discussion. Slowly, toward the end, one by one, all judges change their votes as a result of a long, intense discussions and quarrels.
These discussions are the battle of nerves, personal observations, prejudices, moralities in a word characters. Because there is a little fact, jurors are forced to project their own perspectives. This is very significant, since it is happening in all courts and among all judges.
While all the judges, one by one, reveal their thoughts, there is absolutely brilliant, detailed and consistent character development in this film. Also, since the judges are from the various backgrounds there's a superb representation of American society. In addition with the great directorial effort from Lumet (in his debut!), who made great atmosphere using special lenses, long cadres and extracting the maximum from the actors, we have a truly unforgettable film.
Agatha Christie maybe created the great plot (also clever dialog) in Witness for the Prosecution, but "12 Angry Men" is digging much deeper.
In 1957. following five films were in the competition for the Best Picture Academy Award: David Lean's "Bridge on the River Kwai", Joshua Lagan's "Sayonara", Mark Robson's "Peyton Place", Sidney Lumet's "12 Angry Men" and Billy Wilder's "Witness for the Prosecution". Pretty impressive list. Not surprisingly, Oscar went to Bridge
The last two (12 Angry Men and Witness for the Prosecution) were both exciting and intense courtroom dramas. 12 Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, was about 12 jurors with not an easy task to decide whether a young man is guilty or innocent on the charge of murder. Their decision must be unanimous. Witness for the Prosecution was a complex, unpredictable and full-of-surprises mystery from the novel written by famous Agatha Christie. Both excellent movies.
Somewhere I read that Agatha Christie once said something like:12 Angry Men is an awfully stupid movie because it is not operating with the facts but only with the jurors' presumptions. I don't know whether she really said that (she'll excuse me if not) but this is rather pseudo-argument.
Although it is true that the jurors are operating rather with "ideas" than "facts" in this film this is certainly not a flaw or weakness.
Almost everything seems clear after the trial and jurors vote 11:1 for "guilty". Only, juror #8 (Henry Fonda) votes "innocent" not because he think he is but because he think that the boy deserves some discussion. Slowly, toward the end, one by one, all judges change their votes as a result of a long, intense discussions and quarrels.
These discussions are the battle of nerves, personal observations, prejudices, moralities in a word characters. Because there is a little fact, jurors are forced to project their own perspectives. This is very significant, since it is happening in all courts and among all judges.
While all the judges, one by one, reveal their thoughts, there is absolutely brilliant, detailed and consistent character development in this film. Also, since the judges are from the various backgrounds there's a superb representation of American society. In addition with the great directorial effort from Lumet (in his debut!), who made great atmosphere using special lenses, long cadres and extracting the maximum from the actors, we have a truly unforgettable film.
Agatha Christie maybe created the great plot (also clever dialog) in Witness for the Prosecution, but "12 Angry Men" is digging much deeper.
L'Eclisse (1962)***1/2
Third film in Antonioni's trilogy of alienation following L'Avventura (1960) and La Notte (1961) about a young woman (Monica Vitti) and her brief affair with handsome Alain Delon.
Like in his other movies, Antonioni uses specific techniques not to tell the story but rather to express the lack of communication among the characters, their alienation and incapableness to make a strong and meaningful relation. May this be because of their shallow characters or as a result of living in a modern society marked with the superficial values like prestigious and run-for-the-money it's up to the viewer to decide. Anyway, long cadres, real time events, visual metaphors and visual contrasts between the characters on the one side and landscapes and/or modern day creations like buildings, streets (usually empty) on the other is what makes this rather experience than a plot-movie (intentionally) but nevertheless effective in their purpose (which is to express and transmit this same feelings of alienation to the viewer). So, if you're looking for an entertainment, you better skip this one. Final scene is great in concluding the movie. A bit weaker of great L'Avventura.
Third film in Antonioni's trilogy of alienation following L'Avventura (1960) and La Notte (1961) about a young woman (Monica Vitti) and her brief affair with handsome Alain Delon.
Like in his other movies, Antonioni uses specific techniques not to tell the story but rather to express the lack of communication among the characters, their alienation and incapableness to make a strong and meaningful relation. May this be because of their shallow characters or as a result of living in a modern society marked with the superficial values like prestigious and run-for-the-money it's up to the viewer to decide. Anyway, long cadres, real time events, visual metaphors and visual contrasts between the characters on the one side and landscapes and/or modern day creations like buildings, streets (usually empty) on the other is what makes this rather experience than a plot-movie (intentionally) but nevertheless effective in their purpose (which is to express and transmit this same feelings of alienation to the viewer). So, if you're looking for an entertainment, you better skip this one. Final scene is great in concluding the movie. A bit weaker of great L'Avventura.
L'Avventura (1960)****
Young woman (Lea Massari) suddenly disappears during a boating trip on an inhabited island. Shortly afterward, her boyfriend (Gabriele Ferzetti) and her best friend (Monica Vitti) became attracted to each other.
However, don't expect the mystery. This is a study of emotional isolation, moral decay, lack of the communication and emptiness of rich people in contemporary (then) society. You can easily be bored by the slow pace and the lack of dramatics of this movie unless you capture its true purpose. This is "state of mind" or experience film rather than conventional plot film. Antonioni practically discovered the new movie language in L'Avventura. By using formal instruments he is expressing emotions of the characters (loneliness, boredom, emptiness and emotional detachment) and the viewer is forced rather to feel this same emotions himself than to be involved in the story and its events. These formal instruments are: slow rhythm, real-time events, long takes, visual metaphors like inhabited island(s), fog, extreme long shots (small characters in panorama) and putting protagonists on inhabited streets or large buildings and landscapes.
Great cinematography. Forms trilogy with La Notte (1961) and L'Eclisse (1962).
Young woman (Lea Massari) suddenly disappears during a boating trip on an inhabited island. Shortly afterward, her boyfriend (Gabriele Ferzetti) and her best friend (Monica Vitti) became attracted to each other.
However, don't expect the mystery. This is a study of emotional isolation, moral decay, lack of the communication and emptiness of rich people in contemporary (then) society. You can easily be bored by the slow pace and the lack of dramatics of this movie unless you capture its true purpose. This is "state of mind" or experience film rather than conventional plot film. Antonioni practically discovered the new movie language in L'Avventura. By using formal instruments he is expressing emotions of the characters (loneliness, boredom, emptiness and emotional detachment) and the viewer is forced rather to feel this same emotions himself than to be involved in the story and its events. These formal instruments are: slow rhythm, real-time events, long takes, visual metaphors like inhabited island(s), fog, extreme long shots (small characters in panorama) and putting protagonists on inhabited streets or large buildings and landscapes.
Great cinematography. Forms trilogy with La Notte (1961) and L'Eclisse (1962).
