At an institute in Manila, researchers and eco-tourists trade stories about the Mara tribe, who live on a remote island and have an annual festival of rebirth in which some of the tribe forget who they are and begin again. Laure is the daughter of the institute's director; she's a free spirit who has captured the fancy of Nicola, a European photographer. After a courtship in which the voyeuristic Nick indulges Laure's exhibitionism and sexual freedom, they set off for Mara land with Gualtier, an anthropologist, and his philosophical lover, Myrte. As they approach the Mara on the night of rebirth, who of the group will actually join the tribe to begin life anew?
At an institute in Manila, researchers and eco-tourists trade stories about the Mara tribe, who live on a remote island and have an annual festival of rebirth in which some of the tribe ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Anna C (ru) wrote: The beginning is really bad, I couldn't believe it, but if you stand on after the first 15-20 min. it goes better. I mean... it's not a masterpiece, but as a western-zombie movie is not so terrible.
Matthew L (it) wrote: There are some pretty awesome moments, but also some stupid ones too.
Rogue G (nl) wrote: I really enjoyed this movie. The fact that the movie was based on actual events made the whole experience much more interesting. I liked that the focus on the movie was on individual people and their lives rather than politics.
Angelo Dean B (mx) wrote: An Average Film. Good performance by Stephen Dorff, he executed his role nicely
Frances H (mx) wrote: What a charming delightful whimsical romance is the French movie called Jet Lag. The two stars, Juliette Binoche and Jean Reno, are probably the two best French actors today, and here prove that they can do comedy just as well as drama. This souffle does not fall flat.
Skyler B (ru) wrote: Why not just call this movie "Poster that Tells the Story" and call it quits?
Allison P (kr) wrote: i'd have to see it again to be sure of my rating, but i loved it when i saw it in manhattan in 1995.
Private U (it) wrote: I really liked this film. It's a great depictions of family life. Although, it's unfortunate b/c these days most families are split up. So, I really enjoyed this. And it was pleasant to see three generations of the Douglases playing in one film together. Bravi!
cli o (ca) wrote: no thanks not my kinda thing
Karine M (mx) wrote: Un bon film mais qui aurait pu etre mieux ficeler. Isabelle Blais est solide et magistrale dans son role de Kiki, une jeune femme qui a peur de l'amour. Quelques scenes sont renversantes et d'autres choquantes. Bref, un amalgamme interessant mais qui aurait pu etre meilleur.
Stephen C (nl) wrote: I dont know maybe i missed something but i found this film very boring and thats a suprise considering i am a huge fan of French cinema. The subject is interesting dont get me wrong but once you get past the shock value of the leading ladies habits it just plays like a straight love story with some S & M thrown in . Schroder seems to have troble with the suject matter and cant really decide if he wants to show you whats going on or just skip round it and say ooh look we made a film about men being tied up. Bulle Ogier is very good in her role ,but you feel a role which is meant to empower her is just an excuse for her to be seen in sexy outfits Not a terrible film just a rather dull one
Edgar C (ca) wrote: "1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing.3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing.4 Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things."- 1 Corinthians 13: 1-7With Ordet, Dreyer's trademark stunts of contemplative and minimalist melodramas had been born. The tracking shots and the free nature of the dialogues, flowing as intrepid rivers, allowed for the characters to be fully dissected, and for the movie to feel like a complete essay on the human condition. It is true that most of these essays circled around religious topics, but the core of his analysis was never religion, but human frailty.Mirroring the isolation of Joan of Arc, and with the auteur's famous long shots and intentionally exaggerated theatricality, Gertrud is a woman seeking for answers regarding the meaning of love in men that clearly never had the capacity to understand such deep term, not the willingness to commit to it. Each man, regardless of the age, is pursuing his own interests, placing love in a secondary realm, until, of course, they realize the importance of love once that it is lost. But it is too late, because the heart of a woman is not a tennis ball, going back and forth within the same perimeter. The heart of a woman here seems to progress and adapt, and the heart of the man is insatiable, but deviated in the establishment of its priorities. Men are portrayed as opportunistic and manipulative, pretending to be the victims at the same time. However, Gertrud is not meant to be a generalization. She is a woman looking for answers in the wrong places, with the wrong people, and the fact that one of the film's focus is the futile banalities and mannerisms of an aristocracy that gives an improper place to feelings, it seems that there is no hope left for Gertrud. She is a woman who made the mistake of trying to understand love as long as this explanation was provided by others. She claimed to have known love, but she truly never did, because love is an everlasting thing.And the film ends with a remarkable conclusion: Love is everything that matters. With this epiphany, Gertrud reaches a level that was impossible for her to find in others, because she was forced to put her feelings above everybody else's.All of these interesting topics are, unfortunately, undermined by theatrical performances that border on utter boredom and lack of interest, like dead souls uttering words for the sake of sounding poetic and smart. The whole wonderful dialogue is almost assassinated by Dreyer's apparent lack of understanding of the dialogue he is handling. However, that is not true. He has a whole filmography that proves otherwise, and therefore the justification of the word "apparent". This is the point in which Bergman's oeuvre can be used as a proper point of reference. 75% of his films, especially since the 70s, carried a certain degree of theatricality, but the intensity of the performances and the melodramatic degrees differed in each story; most of the times, both were good compliments. Not in this case. Such internal struggle is almost killed by the lack of passion provided by the cast, resulting in a rating's penalization of close to 20 full points over 100.Being the master's last film, it is somewhat of a disappointment, because considering his past efforts, this had a great potential to become another masterpiece. It is still, however, a worthy farewell.77/100
Caleb M (au) wrote: Creepy and melancholy, but Lewton's collaborations with Karloff aren't my favorites.
Nicolas L (ag) wrote: Completely pointless.
Paul N (fr) wrote: I found it predictable and a little uninspiring. Cinematography however was excellent.
Lucas W (us) wrote: Best animated movie ever. I love every joke and soo much it offers.
Alexander P (ca) wrote: Good action and humour that the whole family can enjoy.