Jarek163
Lifetime Total
1+
IMDb Member
12 years
Reviews
Les beaux jours d'Aranjuez (2016)
A brutal and merciless test of patience.
Driven by completely random, shallow and pretentious attempt at a philosophical dialogue, this film absolutely knows what it's going for - it is meant to torture the spectator. Perhaps the film invokes the desperate feelings of its writer character, it just fails to keep your attention and it takes pride in doing so, boasting about it and rubbing it in your face.
"No action, only dialogue!" I get it, dialogue-driven films that resemble plays can be brilliant. The Before trilogy, or Carnage are perfect examples of it being done right. If you are aiming to ignore action and focus on dialogue, the dialogue better be amazing and engaging. Here it is not.
The fact that this was shot in 3D is even more mind-boggling. What led to this decision? Was it a streak of 3D movies by Benoit? A '3D' factor in a dialogue-driven film is concerning straight away as it tries to engage the film-goers by a different means where it fails to in traditional ones. But at the same time, it could also help to elevate it to a different level if done right. Here it is just left completely untapped and is only an additional burden.
Interestingly, the third act and the final few minutes are particularly interesting and engaging, unfortunately it only leads to nothing at all.
"No action, only dialogue!" I get it, dialogue-driven films that resemble plays can be brilliant. The Before trilogy, or Carnage are perfect examples of it being done right. If you are aiming to ignore action and focus on dialogue, the dialogue better be amazing and engaging. Here it is not.
The fact that this was shot in 3D is even more mind-boggling. What led to this decision? Was it a streak of 3D movies by Benoit? A '3D' factor in a dialogue-driven film is concerning straight away as it tries to engage the film-goers by a different means where it fails to in traditional ones. But at the same time, it could also help to elevate it to a different level if done right. Here it is just left completely untapped and is only an additional burden.
Interestingly, the third act and the final few minutes are particularly interesting and engaging, unfortunately it only leads to nothing at all.
Wild (2014)
I never write reviews, but.....
A fantastic movie that didn't bore me for a single minute of its runtime.
Many people here are bashing it because the protagonist was basically an antagonist and that's somehow affected their view on the film as a film, so they only rate the story part of it as a moral guideline.
Yes, to me she is an antagonist. Thirty minutes in, I hated Cheryl. That feeling of hatred was progressively increasing with every minute of her screen time. And it did not stop in a final salvation, she just kept on being "wild". We get more than a deeper glimpse into her soul, and how she was a nice girl until her mother passed away, which turned her around completely. I'm not saying that something like that is easy, I understand that's a milestone and it's one of the hardest things in life, but she clearly chose the way, because she wanted. She was liberated from her conservative self, as she proclaims at the very end.
The movie was beautifully shot, the camera really captured the mood of trekking and the nature shots were just marvelous.
The thing that stands out is the editing. Both audio and video editing in this film were better than most of the films that came out in 2014, and dare I say, even belong in the top 5 of that year. No Academy Award for the two when something like American Sniper, which was far away from having stand out editing, received a nomination for both of these categories, is simply despicable.
Another thing that is exceptional in the film goes together with the previous point: it is very personal and emotional. It reminded me of Perks of Being a Wallflower in this sense, as it utilized flashbacks in the same way - to create tension, and ultimately climax in emotional breakdown. Witherspoon's performance was excellent, I'd place her in the top 3 of this year's AA nominees, she has a solid shot on actually getting the award, and I would be okay with that.
Many people here are bashing it because the protagonist was basically an antagonist and that's somehow affected their view on the film as a film, so they only rate the story part of it as a moral guideline.
Yes, to me she is an antagonist. Thirty minutes in, I hated Cheryl. That feeling of hatred was progressively increasing with every minute of her screen time. And it did not stop in a final salvation, she just kept on being "wild". We get more than a deeper glimpse into her soul, and how she was a nice girl until her mother passed away, which turned her around completely. I'm not saying that something like that is easy, I understand that's a milestone and it's one of the hardest things in life, but she clearly chose the way, because she wanted. She was liberated from her conservative self, as she proclaims at the very end.
The movie was beautifully shot, the camera really captured the mood of trekking and the nature shots were just marvelous.
The thing that stands out is the editing. Both audio and video editing in this film were better than most of the films that came out in 2014, and dare I say, even belong in the top 5 of that year. No Academy Award for the two when something like American Sniper, which was far away from having stand out editing, received a nomination for both of these categories, is simply despicable.
Another thing that is exceptional in the film goes together with the previous point: it is very personal and emotional. It reminded me of Perks of Being a Wallflower in this sense, as it utilized flashbacks in the same way - to create tension, and ultimately climax in emotional breakdown. Witherspoon's performance was excellent, I'd place her in the top 3 of this year's AA nominees, she has a solid shot on actually getting the award, and I would be okay with that.