|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.254.139.217
The murder of a young girl in a beautiful French village is NOT the interest of Dumont's film. Rather, he uses the crime as an apertif to his real subject: love or the lack of it between human beings.
I hate being hit over the head with "deep meanings" which too many French directors take as their divine right to express. Just write a philosophic tract and be done with it.
Anyhow, Schotté, the lead, does a Gallic impersonation of Forest Gump, without Gump's good humor or electrifying personality.
This is the second French film I've recently seen in which the actor did nothing. Stoicism is a valid philosophy but in an actor it may disguise a lack of craft. I find I care not a whit for such a vapid jellyfish.
There also hasn't been a less attractive romantic female lead in any major film I can recall.
Follow Ups:
She also won the Best Actress award at Cannes for this performance, which was just as worthy as Gourmet's award for the The Son . Oh, and Emmanuel Schotté? He won the Best Actor award at Cannes. Real people don't look like Hollywood stars, and the lower classes and common folk also have sexual desires, both overt and repressed.Subtle, restrained acting isn't "doing nothing," and it's a lot harder and more preferable than the over-emoting we get from the likes of Hanks and Nicholson.
The world's best film critic offers his thoughts on the film below.
Odd that you would call Rosenbaum the word's best film critic, given his opinion of Bergman, as expressed in his review of Saraband - "The performances are perfectly distilled, but the traits I dislike in Bergman are all here -- self-pity, brutality, spiritual constipation, and an unwillingness to try to overcome these difficulties."And "I find a neurotic spitefulness and puritanical narrowness in the films he made after the 60s." You, on the other hand, feel that Bergman is one of the ten best directors ever to have stepped on a set.
World's best, huh. Oh yea, he also liked Star Wars III. But hey, what you do know? And is Rosenbaum a full time film critic? He has reviewed a grand total of thirteen of the of the last 100 films I have seen. Maybe he is the World's best part time film critic who does not like Bergman.
That speaks volumes about your film knowledge, doesn't it? Stands to reason he doesn't waste time on most of the mainstream shit you're drawn to. Noting Rosenbaum doesn't review your kinds of films is like pointing out a classical music critic doesn't write enough about the Billboard pop top 40.
Well, you never addressed his comments relative to Bergman. Your silence speaks volumes.With respect to those films. These are among the "mainstream" films that I have seen and he has failed to review: 2046 (Chinese film directed by Kar Wai Wong), Junebug (indie film if ever there was one), Seaside (French film directed by Julie Curval), My Father and I (French film directed by Anne Fontaine), Intimate Strangers (French film directed by Patrice Leconte), The Machinist, The Embalmer (Italian film directed by Matteo Garone), In July (German film directed by Fatih Akin), Hotel Rwanda, Up and Down (Czech film directed by Jan Hrebejk).
Now, let's look at some of the non-mainstream films that he has reviewed: Star Wars III, Mr. and Mrs. Smith, Fever Pitch, Kung Fu Hustle, Mindhunters, and Alfie. Almost 50% of those thirteen films are decidedly mainstream.
Care to make any more insipid comments without checking your facts?
What about his Bergman comments? Rosenbaum most certainly is a fan of Bergman, just less so of his later work. What the fuck does that have to do with the Dumont film? I apologize for not addressing your changing of the subject and your meaningless analysis. Boo hoo. Why such a chip on your shoulder, l'il hypersensitive philistine?Some people are apparently too dense to be embarrassed by being shown up as idiots and keep coming back for more.
"Rosenbaum most certainly is a fan of Bergman, just less so of his later work."Incorrect. You should try reading. Maybe even comprehending. Rosenbaum is most certainly not a fan of his later work. "I find a neurotic spitefulness and puritanical narrowness in the films he made after the 60s." This is not the statement of a critic who is a fan of a director.
Me change the subject? You must be more daft than I thought. You changed the subject with the following in your response - "Stands to reason he doesn't waste time on most of the mainstream shit you're drawn to."
Well, knowing that you have difficulty checking facts, and rather than childishly respond to an insult in kind, I provided you a list of the "mainstream" films that Rosenbaum has "wasted his time on", that clearly demonstrated you to be the lazy person that you are, or that you really do not read Rosenbaum, but like to name drop. Otherwise, if you read him, would not you know that he regularly reviews mainstream films? I like to help the factually challenged.
Your response? You again duck (pun intended), and hurl insults. The last vestige of the intellectually dishonest and mentally lazy. Perhaps before you put finger (probably only index) to key and prove to us the vastness of your vocabulary, you could edumacate me as to what you were writing about when you wrote that Rosenbaum does not waste time on mainstream films.
Let's assume Rosenbaum totally despises Bergman. So what? Rosenbaum has certainly reviewed some mainstream films, there was no contention to the contrary. Again, so what? What are these diversionary topics supposed to demonstrate? You totally digressed from the topic of L'humanite to launch into a petty, pointless assault on Rosenbaum, citing facts which are in support of nothing. As usual, you seem to have no apparent purpose other than to be a contrary prick.You're not only a philistine, you're dumb as a fuckin' brick. Sorry for being too intellectually lazy to initially address your strawman arguments. Would you care to erect another for everyone to laugh at now, genius?
With apologies to Fat Albert:Dumbass Donald quote #1: "Stands to reason he doesn't waste time on most of the mainstream shit you're drawn to."
Dumbass Donald Quote #2: "Rosenbaum has certainly reviewed some mainstream films, there was no contention to the contrary."
When confronted with facts, retreat, hunker down, then begin the vulgarities. Although you seem to coming 'round on the Bergman thing. Claiming that someone is the world's best film critic but does not like Bergman is like saying that someone who hates the sound of the violin is the world's best classical music critic.
I like my roasted duck plain, thank you.
Good grief, you're illiterate, too. I never said he never reviews mainstream film, but it's quite obviously not something if spends a lot of time on, as even a casual glance at this body of work reveals."Stands to reason he doesn't waste time on most of the mainstream shit you're drawn to."
Do you have nothing better to do than embarrass yourself with feeble, petty arguments? Go watch a fucking movie.
The other films that he has reviewed, and which I have seen, are Melinda and Melinda, Saraband, New Suit, Yes, Rosenstrasse, Crash, and History of Violence. You can decide whether these films are mainstream.
"Stoicism is a valid philosophy but in an actor it may disguise a lack of craft. I find I care not a whit for such a vapid jellyfish."I should have paid more attention in Philosophy class in college. I missed the chapter on Stoicism. Was it right after "relativism.?" I guess stoicism is helpful to snakes sneeking up on prey.
This is a character who is devoid of emotion, because he lives his life through others. Emotionally stunted. You or I become mad, happy, etc., because we have experienced these things. I am not sure why an actor would demonstrate emotion when the character has none. An actor's craft is to serve the role.
.
Ex nihilo, nihil fit . . .
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: