(fr) wrote: I have no idea how to handle this movie. It is the first movie I??ve seen at this festival, this year or last year, where no one clapped at the end. What can you say, really? It is so inappropriate to clap after a movie like this, even if it were a masterpiece.It is interesting to compare it to my favourite movie of last year??s festival (Horror, Which is Always With You) with which it shares its country of origin and also tone, aesthetic, and pacing. But in other ways it is entirely different. Horror was a highly symbolic, metaphorical, surreal, farcical parable, whereas this movie had no metaphoric elements that I could see. Still, it feels, so much of the time, like a farce. Misery packaged as satirical entertainment.I felt nauseous for about 20 minutes after I left the theatre, and I had strong physiological reactions to events in the movie (which is very disturbingly violent). There was something really wrong about it.I think I can sum it up like this.No one needs to see a girl raped in a room full of rotting corpses, even if it really happened, no wait, especially if it really happened, and especially if it??s then packaged as some farcical trope, some black comedy, some ambiguous almost-pornography (the girl, who is in some ways portrayed as a hysterical and ridiculous victim, grotesque in her reactions to her systemic abuse, seems almost to be enjoying her rapes - I wondered if I was imagining this but my companion agreed with me).As an indictment on Russian culture, then, it probably succeeds. Pretty much every character in the movie is some way a sociopath, except for a Vietnamese labourer killed in the first half hour. As a satire it sits very uncomfortably, to me, particularly alongside its ??true story?? status. Velmi, velmi spatne.Nonetheless, after a few days I find myself seeing this movie a little bit differently - it has an extremely evocative format, and I find the tone/feel of it fascinating. I feel like Russia is working through some kind of extreme trauma through its films, which are never easy to watch, but often very interesting. Russia has become a kind of badlands in Europe, and viewed in the light of other Russian films I have seen this year I feel that perhaps people are right to consider this film significant, as difficult as it was to watch. But it will never be a popular film in suburban America, for instance?
(ru) wrote: Though not always intriguing, "Gangs of New York" has memorable performances, notably that of Day-Lewis's, and some very remarkable production design.
(de) wrote: While I was watching See No Evil, Hear No Evil I was laughing super hard at the beginning but was left wishing the end was like that. David Lyons is a deaf man who can read lips and Wally Karew is a blind man who has excellent hearing. This was a great setup for a movie and it was a great movie at the beginning! Then it kinda went down from there... The action lead to funny situations but didn't give off big laughs. I really liked every character especially Richard Pryor who was the funnier half in my opinion. The scene when the lady is trying to take the mugshot of David is the best scene. It delivers a ton of what the movie is about. I was disappointed by the way the movie ended but I loved the first 3/4. B-
(jp) wrote: A little bit on and on and on with same stuff, different angle...But a little bit out the ordinary, so well worth watching.