alain_pinel

Very well acted. Good soundtrack and photography. Excellent integration of the correspondence with the rest of the story. From the perspectives of the history of scientific emergence, identity appropriation and the sexual emancipation of Quebecers, this film is essential and should be seen by as many people as possible, particularly teenagers aged 15 and over. However, the two-pronged production (the relationship between Marie-Victorin and Gauvreau in relation to the mise en abyme of the cast) adds nothing to the film and even harms its pace and intensity, even its depth: one gets the impression that the director does not trust her audience.

The excerpts of texts read are sublime and the multiple narrations are perfect. Good use of intertitles. The introspective scenes are, and it's a shame, too numerous, too long and too emphatic. The music is interesting for this proposal of an auteur film in the first sense of the expression, or even of a cinematographic essay. Beautiful generosity of the cast. The passages intended to be horrific are rather disgusting. Without offering us a brilliant overall production, Simon Lavoie knew how to find particularly brilliant ideas. I had really enjoyed his two previous feature films (The Little Girl Who Loved Matches Too Much, Nulle Trace); this one captivates me much less, but it has undeniable qualities and a message that could take on a universal character regarding the effects of conquests and colonizations. Unfortunately, certain breaks in rhythm, too frequent, make it difficult to maintain sustained interest, without however being fatal to the general interest. The trailer doesn't give a good indication of the type of work we're being presented with.

It's a good thing the film isn't long, because there's nothing particularly captivating about it. The storyline doesn't stand out from the vast majority of mountain survival films, nor from films dealing with the refugee issue. The performances of the main characters are honest. The music is the film's strong point, along with its discussion of the difficult lives of refugees. There's little development in the first two-thirds of the film, and the side stories are extremely secondary in their treatment. It's difficult to find any credibility in the last third of this cinematic offering. Good for passing a 90-minute afternoon.

Only Wim Wenders can present a film where the first words are only spoken after a little over 10 minutes while still maintaining interest; unfortunately, if you are not in the right state of mind to receive this film, this interest diminishes over time since there is not really a narrative in the usual sense, at least, in the first half of it, but it fortunately returns afterwards if you have not stopped watching. Actor Koji Yakusho is simply perfect for the role. Great use of music to describe the main character's state of mind. The latter is so serene that each appearance of the secondary character, who serves as a sort of foil, becomes disturbing. In short, a tribute to resilience, extreme politeness and respect for others in Japanese society... as well as a master class in the art of cleaning toilets! Unfortunately, we must admit that we feel the majority of the minutes constituting the first hour of the film passing by.

The most striking thing about this film is seeing the natural aging of the actors, but the collage of the different projects into a single film is rather shaky and risks turning off several people at the start of the film. Several bold choices from the directors, including the use of intertitles and what appear to be images taken from surveillance cameras. When we get to the end of the film, we can be moved and consider this project as a good film, especially with the evolution of the relationship between the two main characters, but the first part prevents us from being very generous for the rating of the work. Good use of music (it's more of a musical film than a dialogue film). Good soundtrack. Good finale.

Another excellent Almodóvar! Everything that made him famous as a director is there (bright colors, attention to detail in the sets, exemplary photography, etc.), but he also knew how to renew himself and take risks. Absolutely extraordinary and transcendent actresses, from the first scene to the last scene! Tilda Swinton is overwhelming, both in her physical appearance for the role and in her nuances of acting. Weaker male characters. I don't get a perfect rating because of a little bit of length around the second third of the scenario, but it's right after that. Moving, calling for personal and community reflection, with careful aesthetics and carried out with kindness.

For its creativity, inventiveness, soundtrack, boldness, unique humor, cast, and sociolinguistic vision, it's a yes. For the film's length, contextual setup, and a few redundancies, it's less so. Excellent directing technique and a brilliant idea in how the characters are written in one of the film's final scenes (a remarkable process) and its significance up to the end. One shouldn't go into this movie expecting a linear narrative. That said, this aspect doesn't truly detract from the quality of the plot. A beautiful progression from Rankin as a director since his film The Twentieth Century. A few common elements between these two productions (dreamlike quality, kitsch...) are already beginning to define what will become his personal signature over time.

Another very good film from Ceylan. It lasts 3 hours 17 minutes, but it feels like a 120 minute film at most. Rather wordy, but still interesting. We find a lot of resilience in these teachers from an environment far from major centers. The intellectual exchange, towards the middle of the film, between the characters played by Merve Dizdar and Deniz Celiloglu is epic and reminiscent of Denys Arcand (just after, the director does something that is really out of the ordinary - I do not reveal more). The young actress who plays the role of the student Sevem is wonderful and will surely have a great career. Apart from the last minutes, everything takes place in winter, but it is in these last minutes that we understand the choice of the film's title. Very little use of music and this serves the purpose presented to us well.

Good, pretty fairly rhythmic start, almost too much, but the film runs out of steam in an interminable ending which doesn't really serve the dramatic plot. Beautiful writing of the main character of the commissioner, intelligently played by Roschdy Zem. Good performances from actresses Léa Seydoux and Sara Forestier. The writing of the secondary characters and the direction of the actors concerning them are weaker and clash with the main characters. Honorable mention for the soundtrack. Very nice camera work. A well-made film on a technical level, but which lacks soul, depth and writing finish.

A nice film, without length, which becomes touching with the evolution of the characters of the two sisters. We also have, as a bonus, a certain sociological portrait of Peru. The film takes an intense turn from approaching the 80th minute until shortly after the 90th. The small weak point in the writing is the carelessness of the other characters in the face of the father's actions. Jimena Lindo (the mother) bursts onto the screen and little Abril Gjurinovic (the youngest sister) delivers an excellent performance with a face that adequately expresses her emotions. There are pretty clothes during festive or solemn scenes. Nice song while the credits roll.

In a way, it is a fable in homage to the classic filmmakers and authors cherished by the director, as well as to some scientific and artistic concepts which must have marked his imagination. Lots of self-references too. It was put together, in a way, like an opera. Fast, dense, verbose and bombastic. Some shots pastiche television recordings of theater plays. Others, major Hollywood productions from the 1920s to the 1960s. The mixture of cinematographic genres is not happy in this proposal. The scenario gets lost, as it often happens with projects that took too long to come to fruition. It's difficult not to give up, like when you attend a bad concert. The music is sometimes exciting, sometimes annoying (here again, the eclecticism of styles becomes distressing). Laurence Fishburne seems straight out of ''The Matrix''. Adam Driver still does well, but, strangely, his character, who wants to be progressive, often speaks conservatively, even moralistically. Special mention to Nathalie Emmanuel for the quality of her playing.

A touching story in its nature. However, I don't feel the truth of the relationships between the characters. The resilience of the protagonists is sometimes respectable, sometimes irritating. The narration is well used. The plans with the photos annoyed me. The music is very beautiful. I know we shouldn't make it too long a film, but the transitions in the first half of the plot are brought about too quickly for the film to be sincerely moving. The last thirty minutes allow the work to be better than simple banality. Laetitia Dosch, Eol Personne and Andranic Manet stand out from the rest of the cast with the truth of their acting.

A very beautiful humanist film imbued with gentleness, socially responsible, as well as a real cooking lesson whose plans are brilliantly executed. Good temporal transitions. Michele Di Mauro plays very well, but, and it's a shame, Chiara Merulla's face essentially only expresses a single feeling (semi-smiling neutrality) regardless of the emotion her character is experiencing. The acting of the rest of the cast is very good. Excellent music, skillfully measured, whose recurring theme is particularly beautiful. Nice scouting work for the locations of the different scenes. No lengths. Everyonr must see it!

Good film, but heavy: there aren't many respite scenes. Lubna Azabal is truly excellent. Good game also from Kenza Benboutcha who presents a very nuanced game. It's hard-hitting, but the subject is not treated much differently from several other films dealing with the same subject released in recent years, except, perhaps, the time taken to expose the sociological thoughts of the protagonists. Jawad Rhalib's production aims to be overwhelming, shocking, instructive and awareness-raising: it is successful. One thing is certain: we wouldn't want to be in this class. It is a film that must be seen by as many people as possible, in the hope that individuals in our current society are not locked into a speech of the deaf.

Really very good. Poignant socio-economic portrait of city life in modern Mongolia, more particularly of poor people who wish to get by by acquiring a good education, among other things. The harsh and cruel side often associated with extreme poverty, hard to receive, is relevant, effective and striking. We also see all the resilience, mutual aid and generosity that human beings can demonstrate. The point presented can be transposed almost anywhere in the world, even in so-called rich countries. Excellent soundtrack to support the story. The recurring musical theme is very beautiful and moving. However, at the beginning of the film, there is an error in the translation of a mathematical term, in the subtitles, surely coming from the fact that the translation was done from Mongolian to English, then to French (confusion between ''integrals'' and ''integers'' which gives ''integers'' in the translation rather than the correct term ''integrals''). A relatively open ending, as is customary in films from the Orient. This work presents us with beautiful life lessons. Good duration.

The film adaptation of this theatrical play was difficult. The cast is excellent, the music is beautiful, the references to cinema of the past are relevant, but the film fails to capture interest. The whole thing is too polished. We perceive too much the "recipe" for success that Ozon seems to want to put in place, as if he were bringing together all the elements necessary for success, but without a binder to make it something that holds together well. It's neither bad nor good. I wouldn't be surprised if this film's destiny is to become the kind of thing that is broadcast, on TV, in the afternoon or late at night.

This film would have deserved a much better release in theaters. Excellent production by Jean-Marc Peyrefitte; died prematurely, we could have expected a slew of great films from him. His destiny seems tragically linked to that of the main character of this film who could have become one of the great presidents of the Republic if he had been able to complete his seven-year term. Jacques Gamblin, always excellent and choosing his roles wonderfully, impeccably embodies the character, certainly unknown, but so rich, that is Paul Deschanel, although, at times, the film seems rather to illustrate the decline of George Clemenceau. The soundtrack, throughout the 97 minutes, is terrific. This film, although it tackles a relatively serious subject, is nonetheless devoid of brilliant strokes of judiciously measured humor. All that's missing is a little something elusive (perhaps a question of rhythm) for this work to be masterful.

We understand the "discretion" of the trailer. Those who endure the rather disgusting first 30 minutes that the viewer is subjected to will find an interesting film on the evolution of cinema in its infancy. Some other unpleasant scenes appear occasionally to demonstrate a certain decadence of the environment; including the beginning of the film, the director did not have to shoot such disgusting images to support his work. Otherwise, excellent performances from the actresses and actors, mainly Margot Robbie and Diego Calva (transcendent in his role). Very good soundtrack in general and good choice of music. Well chosen sets and costumes. The last scene of the film is perfect. However, 3 hours 9 minutes is too long: another argument for cutting superfluous degrading scenes.

8/10 for the first third, 6/10 for the second and 7/10 for the last. Mariloup Wolfe chose a good angle for his creation. Good acting from the entire cast, who brilliantly avoided the pitfalls into which the writing of the roles could have led them. Excellent original music which goes well with the choice of classical pieces. Quebec City is filmed in such a way as to appeal to an international audience. However, the lack of twists and turns and bite of the scenario, spread over almost two hours, sees our interest slowly fade as we watch, especially in the last hour; If it weren't for that aspect, this could have been a great film.

I so wanted to love. However, I appreciate art-house films, but first the "author" must have something to say to the people who will watch his film; something other than a "flash" on two old newspaper headlines. This film is technically well done, despite some questionable choices, but the screenplay has catastrophic weaknesses. The actors do wonderfully with the material that was put in their hands, mainly Stéphane Laplante, Larissa Corriveau, Denis Houle and Marie-Laurence Moreau. Almost perfect score for the soundtrack (and sound recording). Bad choice of filming location: a little more research would have been beneficial. It's rather long, bland (despite two or three good bits of humor) and generally tasteless. The room was half empty during the viewing I attended.

It's a good film that achieves the feat of talking about subjects emanating from deep texts, while still being able to appeal to a wide audience. However, there is, in the scriptwriting, a little too much exaggeration of the place of "wokism" and clientelism in colleges, enough to be somewhat annoying, preventing me from giving a rating of 8. Otherwise, the production is really very successful (we feel a little touch of the Arcand-Robert duo) and the photography is beautiful while remaining a discreet element of the film. Beautiful musical coating by Philippe Brault. The actresses perform at a remarkably fair level.

There are plenty of qualities in this film, such as the audacity of not translating numerous exchanges into Innu-aimun, without harming understanding, or the choice to depict Schefferville as it is, without trying to embellish it in a version falsely romantic. The acting of Christine Beaulieu, very credible, and that of Jean-Luc Kanapé, very fair, is a pleasure to see on the screen. However, certain writing tendencies in the screenplay are a little irritating, such as the personality of Jean-Sébastien Courchesne's character which changes into a one-dimensional line very quickly in the film, or the French dialogues of the Innu and Naskapis which introduce us to these communities as being systematically unfriendly and disrespectful. The conclusion of the film can justify this writing a little, but it would have been appreciated if there were more nuances there. The opening, in documentary form, seemed like a good idea, but falls flat by not adding much to the story. However, the rest of the film itself makes us feel the adversity that the inhabitants of this corner of the country must face on a daily basis. All in all, it will be interesting to follow Sarah Fortin's next projects.

Obviously, it's a strange cinematic object. However, there are some excellent things in terms of direction, including the camera, the costumes and the changes of pace, which may explain why we wanted to reward it, but the Palme d'Or was perhaps exaggerated. It's shot in the style of Tarantino-style violence, more sexualized, which meets Almodovar-style suspense like The Skin I Live In. However, the storyline often falls flat and certain "round corners" at the beginning of the film bothered me for the rest of the viewing. Besides Agathe Rousselle, the level of play is correct, nothing more, and Vincent Lindon is often incomprehensible by declaiming his barely articulated text too quickly. However, it remains an interesting proposition for movie buffs. The scenes of violence and sexuality are not as hard to watch as the reputation this work has built would suggest.

Mystery: plenty. Contemplation: a little less. Interesting as a cinematographic proposition. The part of "dream" and the part of "concrete" are well balanced. There are also some lines of rather fine humor. Good distribution and good direction of actors (even François Papineau does well; that says it all). You should not try to overinterpret the scenario: the story presented is clear and complete in itself. Towards the end, we are presented with sublime images! Apart from one or two slightly less sustained moments and a few elements that would have been nice to explore in more depth, the film is really good.

Interesting look at the rather dark Batman universe, which will surely be better exploited in future films. Robert Pattinson's interpretation is the one that comes closest to what Batman should be according to my own vision of the character. It's hard to believe, but despite the length of the film, the editing is very tight. However, the density of the scenario presented did not require it to be stretched over three hours. The music is very sober throughout most of the film, but a pastiche of Star Wars music when Batman plays the hero at the end. No additional scene, but a short nice message at the very end of the credits.