paulscofield68

I enjoyed this French drama. Hansen-Love seems very influenced by French New Wave filmmakers, such as Rohmer. The English title is poor since it gives away a plot line. The French title in English is A Love of Youth, or more freely A Teen Romance. It does manage to capture that interesting relationship, however it goes into other directions as well. For those who like indie/ art-house French dramas, Hansen-Love's work is well worth looking into.

Strong script, well acted, beautiful mountain scenery, great original music... some very funny moments, and some intelligent insights. Highly recommended.

Ana, Mon Amour (Anna, My Love) is a Romanian drama, inspired by a Romanian novel, Luminata, My Love. In many ways, it's a typical European art-house drama: a narrow, intense love story, very emotional scenes, jumps in time, some religious and intellectual discussions here and there, etc... The screenplay is excellent, as are the acting and direction. I liked this film much more than Child's Pose (and any recent Romanian film I've seen such as Bacalaureat or The Death of Mr. Lazarescu). It might even be better than Tuesday After Christmas. Honest and illuminating, with a damaged, melancholic streak running right through the whole film. 'Ana, mon amour' won the prestigious Silver Bear (runner up) award at the most recent Berlin Film Festival, and is highly recommended for lovers of European art-house cinema. 'Chapeau,' as we say here in France... (translation: you have my deep respect for your fine work). 8.5/10

Ava is the title character of a French coming of age / love story. It's filmed in summer in southwest France, and the scenery is great. It's competently filmed, and the acting is decent. The problem I have is with the story: too many implausible and/or over-the-top events. The film feels as though it was made by an inexperienced, young French woman for young French women. And worse, the love story was pretty weak: one felt her love for him but not his love for her. The impending blindness came to feel like an unnecessary story line gimmick, created more so to add drama than something necessary to the story itself. An unexceptional French drama.

Since I saw Uzak (Distant, his first film) years ago and enjoyed it immensely, I've made a point of seeing every film Nuri Bilge Ceylan makes. Unfortunately, his esteem in my mind was gradually fading while others, like the Russian Andrey Zvyagintsev's were rising, his Leviathan is an excellent film. With Winter Sleep, though, Ceylan has made a masterpiece- easily his finest film, and I am in awe of his talent. To make a film that is a character study of a small hotel owner's life at its twilight into such a profound meditation on so many themes...pure genius! And to learn that this movie didn't get nominated for an Academy Award...fortunately the French awarded it top prize at Cannes. It's better than Ida and Leviathan (though Leviathan is a powerful, important film). Extremely well acted; beautifully filmed. The power, though, is in the dialogues...rare the emotional and intellectual intelligence on display here. An absolute must-see for fans of art-house foreign language cinema.

A mainstream Hollywood movie for those who like superficial, pretentious movies. This film glorifies wealth, even if it has a few lines about how empty the rich's lives truly are. If you're like me and prefer European art-house and American independent filmmaking then this is one difficult viewing experience. The emphasis of style over substance is one of many problems for this Great Gatsby. It is visually dazzling, and there's music running through practically every scene (including bland hip-hop music in a period piece of the 1920s). But the acting is so artificial, so overwrought as to be almost cartoonish. DiCaprio sounds like Marlon Brando, with this strange accent. Completely emotionally uninvolving. I saw it here in New York City on the Saturday afternoon of its opening weekend in a packed theater and had the feeling that the audience thought, "Good but it tries way too hard to be something special" as we left the theater. And that's being generous. This movie's target audience is 12-27 year olds. Some tactless product placement. At times, this movie is MTVesque (and before you mistake this as a compliment, I mean this in a bad way). And finally, though it aspires to be a huge box office hit like Titanic, it surely won't manage to do so because it doesn't have the emotional impact that Titanic has. It's wooden and hollow by comparison. 3 generous stars: 2 for the visuals and 1 for the effort.

Much more a short story than a novel, but Nuit #1 has some very powerful moments, especially during the latter half so stick with it (it takes a good 20-30 minutes to truly establish itself). Well acted and shot, with some good music here and there. Deep, frank monologues dominate, sometimes reminiscent of Rohmer, yet the subject matter more often recalls the themes of Michael Winterbottom (i.e. drugs, sex, music, the outsider, despair, etc...). Definitely worth seeing if you like either of these fine directors. Bravo to all involved in this film, esp. Anne Emond and Catherine de Lean. Similar films: Candy and Morvern Callar.

So, this is my first- and last- Wes Anderson movie. Previously, I watched a five-minute segment from 'The Life Aquatic' and should have known better as that was dreadful (my wife's a fan). But I'm on summer vacation and this is the only movie playing here. Visually, this is nothing special: colors are muted and the costumes seem to have come from a Goodwill store. The camera work/editing is amateurish. My biggest problem with this movie is the story and the acting/direction. This is primarily a comedy, but it's not funny at all. For example, when the young couple run away and they're near the river, the boy says to the girl, "I want to catch a turtle, but you have to be careful because they can bite your fingers." She doesn't say anything in response. Then, cut to the boy catching a turtle in his net; he turns it over and says, "Look, someone wrote their name on this turtle." 'Albert' was written on it. And that's it for this brief scene. What was the purpose of this scene? It's stupid. Moonrise Kingdom is full of meaningless scenes like this one. A movie made by nerds (very likely on mind altering substances) for nerds. Woody Allan's 'To Rome, With Love' is a lot funnier, and the humor found in Alexander Payne's films, like 'About Schmidt' is even more sublime.

***SPOILERS*** Take 1 part Schindler's List, 1 part The Poseidon Adventure, and 1 part Blindness and what do you get? In Darkness. And don't mistake me for someone who doesn't like foreign films; I see many each year, European in particular. In In Darkness, the screenwriters rely far too much on coincidence to heighten dramatic impact. For example, when the lead character is taking his daughter to her first communion, it just so happens that there's a huge storm which forces him to make a choice: save the lives of the 10 Jewish people he's 'caring' for in the sewers or remain with his wife and daughter. His wife leaves him for choosing the former (and in the very next scene, rejoins him). This is but one example of many in this film. Technically, the camera work during the first 30 minutes was so jittery, I nearly felt seasick. Provincial, lugubrious, contrived to the extreme, and maudlin, In Darkness is a minor work beside Schindler's List or The White Ribbon.

For fans of Ceylan, this film is definitely recommended: it is long, slow, very well shot, and has some commendable scenes and themes. Yet, of Ceylan's four films: Distant, Climates, Three Monkeys, and this movie, Once Upon a Time in Anatolia is merely good. Though parts of Three Monkeys are flawed (esp. during the first half), it's a strong film. And Distant is likely still the finest of the lot. I don't find this movie to be that much of a departure for Ceylan. Finally, as with all of his movies, Once Upon a Time in Anatolia requires repeat viewings to truly appreciate its depth and richness.

***Spoilers*** Is it me or did the guy playing the dead guy move his fingers a bit at one point? I could swear that his thumb or index finger twitched after they pulled him up from his shallow grave.

I happened to be living in France when this film was released back in 2002. It had received lukewarm reviews. So, to my surprise and delight, I enjoyed it far more than I'd expected. In terms of its strengths, the acting/casting/direction are all well done (and the story is nearly like a soap opera in that it follows different individuals and couples very loosely connected with each other (if at all). They all live or are on vacation in a small seaside town on the French Atlantic coast. In my opinion, the screenplay is the single strongest aspect of this film; and although some might say that all French films are "indie" from the American perspective (which is not so), this film most definitely has an indie feel to it. The soundtrack, for one, is an indie-type soundtrack. At times, I was reminded of the American indie film "You, me, and everyone we know"...in terms of style (visually, Seaside is not as strong; but in terms of storytelling, it's every bit as strong). Seaside, too, has a lot to say about modern relationships, and it does it across a number of couples (not 1) and there are numerous valuable insights. But it's not merely about relationships; it also deals intelligently with work, social class, and addictions, among others. Finally, Seaside does an excellent job of capturing the modern French woman who's in her 50s or 60s (wholly outside of romance). Yes, this film is "typically French," but these are just the type of French films that I find truly satisfying...Thanks to all involved, and enjoy.

I learned of this movie by way of the book "Who Killed Bobby?" by Shane O'Sullivan- a book which strongly suggests that there was a conspiracy in the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. On pages 413-414 of this book, he describes the OPS (Office of Public Safety) which was run by the CIA from 1962 to 1975. It's mission was to train US ally police forces and military officers to improve their effectiveness. During these years, the OPS trained 7,500 senior officers at it's US facilities- this is shown in the film 'State of Siege'- and more than half a million foreign police overseas. One of the central aims of the OPS was to train local officials to effectively deal with "terrorist" threats from the left (and subsequently keep in power/put in power forces on the right). Techniques in torture, assassination, and all the other 'dirty tricks' the CIA (at this time, at least) was famous for, were taught to conservative, right-wing allies in a total of 47 nations. In the case of a retired police chief from Richmond, Indiana- Dan Mitrione (played by Yves Montand in State of Siege)- he took things a bit too far- granted he had his hands full with the Tupamaros. According to O'Sullivan, Mitrione "built a soundproofed room in the cellar of his house (in Montevideo, Uruguay) and demonstrated torture techniques to selected Uruguayan police officers, using beggars taken off the street, some of whom died during the sessions." pg. 414. Mitrone was kidnapped on July 31st, 1970, and 10 days later his body was found in a car. "Mr. Mitrione's devoted service to the cause of peaceful progress in an orderly world will remain as an example for free men everywhere." said a White House press release, and Frank Sinatra and Jerry Lewis visited Richmond, IN to stage a benefit show. Meanwhile, back in Montevideo, the former chief of police intelligence, Alejandro Otero, "confirmed that Mitrione had used 'violent techniques of torture....and a psychology to create despair, such as playing a tape in the next room of women and children screaming and telling prisoners that it was his family being tortured.'" (p.414) These despicable facts are not presented in State of Siege, it should be noted. Otero was a CIA agent, and he spoke only because a close friend of his was a Tupamaros sympathizer...he was demoted for speaking out. This is a fine film and it's very understandable that it's extremely hard to find in the US. It's fair to say that 99% of Americans have no idea what the CIA was up to from 1962-1975...it would be more accurate to say CIA officers were up to because, from what I can tell, there were quite a few 'loose canons' in the CIA at that time...and some of them were willing to do whatever it took to fight political forces emerging from the left (including, of course, forces within the US). See one David Morales as such an example of a CIA loose canon (although it is very hard to get information on him, O'Sullivan says that Morales later went to Montevideo and "took his own murderous revenge on the Tupamaros". It's important to view State of Siege in it's proper historical context: sure you can talk about the cold war, but it's also about an institution infused with right-wing ideology (the CIA) hellbent on getting police and military forces in as many other allies prepared to defeat any leftist challenges to the status quo (ie. in the vast majority of cases, a conservative government). If a government fell into the hands of a leftist, then it had to be taken back for fear that it might fall into the Soviet sphere of influence. But in the end, we need to look at how conservative governments aid "big business" (see 'Missing' for more on this), because in the final analysis, it all comes down to who gets what...money. This film is to radically to the left and airs Americas dirty laundry too much...no wonder it's difficult to find...It's like "Punishment Park" by Peter Watkins. Fortunately now, in this internet age, we can get both films...go ogle 'rap id share (one wo rd) title of film 'etat de siege' and sub titles 'all subs' (one wo rd).

Bruno Dumont is back in form here with his fourth release (I found the plot of his previous "Twentynine Palms" to be flawed). Any of you who saw 'The Life of Jesus'('97) and/or 'Humanity'('99) can expect much of the same in terms of style; and to a certain extent, themes as well. This is by no means an easy film to watch (the war scenes, shot in Tunisia, are, at times, just dreadful). And even the storyline which takes place in Flandres, in the north of France (where Dumont is from, and his first two films are set), is full of emotional pain. A very French film, but not of the condescending, intellectual sort, but rather of the realistic, naturalistic, and yes, minimalistic variety. To be seen on the big screen for full effect.

Those of you who have seen Isabel Coixet's first film- My Life without Me- shouldn't miss this one. Like that film, this has a tragic-romantic essence at its core. A very well-written script, with a handful of themes, superbly acted, and direction/editing/score/soundtrack all good to very good (at times excellent). Dense, literate, and increasingly absorbing. By no means your mainstream action flick; yet this movie should find a large audience in those who like 'independent films' (or 'European', for Americans). Filmed in Ireland (much shot indoors), and entirely in English. A very satisfying drama- I found it even better than 'l'Enfant', which took top prize at this past Cannes Film Festival. Both are highly recommended...enjoy.