victoria-y-huan
Lifetime Total
1+
IMDb Member
10 years
Reviews
Call Me by Your Name (2017)
A beautiful instagram post from Italy...and nothing more.
Two beautiful men, beautifully shot, in a beautiful country....what could go wrong?
The problem is that the connection between the two men is purely based in sexual attraction, which makes for an inherently boring story (actually it's a non story). Sure it could also be that they are both Jewish but let's not be naive here. If either character were old, fat, and bald, I highly doubt being Jewish would be the reason they "fall in love" with each other.
You know how when you open up Instagram and see a beautiful picture of a beautiful person in a beautiful country? Imagine having to stare at that picture for more than two hours. How long does it take for it the tedium to set in? That's what this movie is. Amie Hammer's character has all the depth of a J. Crew model. His "thing" is to brush his hair back with his fingers. It is simply not believable that he is a pHD candidate in archeology.
Elio's character is a bit better. But in the end, it's a movie that tries to dress itself in depth when it's content is the antithesis of deep. All the pretentious dialogue, the foreign languages, the academic posturing, cannot change the fact that two people wanting to have sex with one another is interesting for about a hot minute. Which is way less time than is needed for an entire movie!
The problem is that the connection between the two men is purely based in sexual attraction, which makes for an inherently boring story (actually it's a non story). Sure it could also be that they are both Jewish but let's not be naive here. If either character were old, fat, and bald, I highly doubt being Jewish would be the reason they "fall in love" with each other.
You know how when you open up Instagram and see a beautiful picture of a beautiful person in a beautiful country? Imagine having to stare at that picture for more than two hours. How long does it take for it the tedium to set in? That's what this movie is. Amie Hammer's character has all the depth of a J. Crew model. His "thing" is to brush his hair back with his fingers. It is simply not believable that he is a pHD candidate in archeology.
Elio's character is a bit better. But in the end, it's a movie that tries to dress itself in depth when it's content is the antithesis of deep. All the pretentious dialogue, the foreign languages, the academic posturing, cannot change the fact that two people wanting to have sex with one another is interesting for about a hot minute. Which is way less time than is needed for an entire movie!
La vie d'Adèle (2013)
Disppointing!
I highly anticipated this film, mostly because of the glowing reviews by those who evaluate movies for a living. Anyways, the movie itself was a big disappointment. It's marketed as realistic, wrenching love story about two women; I was hopeful that such a movie would be somewhat female centric in it's point of view. I was wrong. This is a movie for men by men. It is replete with beautiful young women who are (surprise surprise) extremely sexual. There are many shots of the main character's backside (in jeans, in pants, in a dress) as she walks away from the camera which feel highly objectifying and gratuitous. The sex scenes (featuring one party masturbation as well as two party lovemaking) are terribly unrealistic and likely represent the director's fantasy of what a woman's sexuality is like.
I want to talk about the main character for a bit. Adele is frankly not believable as a lesbian. I know people are going to take issue with my saying this (how exactly does one "appear" like a lesbian...) but movies are made with some consideration of casting in mind. Characters have to look like the part that they are playing. Adele resembles a male fantasy; traditionally feminine. The contrast between Adele and other, more believable, lesbians is apparent when she ventures into a lesbian bar for the first time. In addition, I kept wondering if Adele was suffering some sort of delay in her intellectual functioning or traumatic brain injury. She eats like a five year old, cries like a 3 year old; she is sexual in public places; she is constantly putting things in her mouth (the scene in the café close to the end of the movie is laughable); her mouth is perpetually open and her eyes have an unfocused dumb quality. I suppose this is charming coming from a beautiful young woman and may contribute (sadly) to her being seen as sexually arousing to men; however, if we were to imagine an older person conducting themselves this way, one would have to consider the diagnosis of dementia.
Despite all the talk of female sexuality in this film, there is little that has to do with women or love. I look back on all of the positive reviews and recall that they were mostly written by men. Put two very attractive, very young women in a movie, include many close-up shots of them, and all of a sudden, this is passed off as a wondrous artistic feat, rather than a lazy effort to cater to the lowest common denominator. The fact that the two leading actresses were awarded the Palme d'Or is preposterous. Even more so because the only other female to win the Palme d'Or is Jane Campion, a film-maker of a totally different caliber.
Women could go see this movie to be reminded of how men think. Or they could simply stay home and Google "two women" or watch a robin thicke music video.
I should end this review by disclosing that I am female.
I want to talk about the main character for a bit. Adele is frankly not believable as a lesbian. I know people are going to take issue with my saying this (how exactly does one "appear" like a lesbian...) but movies are made with some consideration of casting in mind. Characters have to look like the part that they are playing. Adele resembles a male fantasy; traditionally feminine. The contrast between Adele and other, more believable, lesbians is apparent when she ventures into a lesbian bar for the first time. In addition, I kept wondering if Adele was suffering some sort of delay in her intellectual functioning or traumatic brain injury. She eats like a five year old, cries like a 3 year old; she is sexual in public places; she is constantly putting things in her mouth (the scene in the café close to the end of the movie is laughable); her mouth is perpetually open and her eyes have an unfocused dumb quality. I suppose this is charming coming from a beautiful young woman and may contribute (sadly) to her being seen as sexually arousing to men; however, if we were to imagine an older person conducting themselves this way, one would have to consider the diagnosis of dementia.
Despite all the talk of female sexuality in this film, there is little that has to do with women or love. I look back on all of the positive reviews and recall that they were mostly written by men. Put two very attractive, very young women in a movie, include many close-up shots of them, and all of a sudden, this is passed off as a wondrous artistic feat, rather than a lazy effort to cater to the lowest common denominator. The fact that the two leading actresses were awarded the Palme d'Or is preposterous. Even more so because the only other female to win the Palme d'Or is Jane Campion, a film-maker of a totally different caliber.
Women could go see this movie to be reminded of how men think. Or they could simply stay home and Google "two women" or watch a robin thicke music video.
I should end this review by disclosing that I am female.