I am neither British nor homosexual therefore the particular circumstances of the characters of this movie do not relate directly with my personal experience. But I liked it very much because the particular case described can be generalized not withstanding its specific trappings as a depiction of the dilemmas and strategies that are available to people who realize that their choices and identity do not conform with those of the majority of their fellow humans in their working environment and society in general. The minority identity should be asserted in an outspoken manner to gain recognition or should one tread carefully and discreetly so as not to offend the sensibilities of the majority? "Blue Jean" depicts characters that make those different choices. It does so in a sensitive manner and that is what I liked in this movie. I also liked the acting and the depiction of the humdrum reality of school athletics. Truly a chunk of life in the border of realism with naturalism.
Reviews
119 Reviews
Anaïs in Love
(2021)
The unbearable lightness of being
22 August 2022
This particular movie is a testament of the moral climate of our times. The central character is a young woman living in the affluent West whose actions are dictated by her purely subjective criteria of her own emotional and carnal truth. She is not subject to any outside objective moral code( the obligation to pay the rent to her landlady, the duty to inform intelligibly the foreigners to whom she sublets her appartment about the dangers of certain electrical devices, the fact that her older lover has already a wife, the need to honor her obligations towards her academic supervisor) and everything and everyone has to succumb to her personal quest for self-realization and romantic/sexual interest.
She is very charming and lovable( the female lead is ideal for the role) but hardly a paragon of domestic virtue or a model of a responsible citizen.
She is the embodiment of the western ideal of hedonistic self-actualisation which makes Islamists and Russian ideologues and Chinese Communist Party officials so furious in its insistence on personal choice over tradition and the demands of the collectivity.
Of course this bacchanalian celebration of "anything goes" stumbles over the disapproval of venerable if declining institutions of the West itself such as the Roman Catholic Church. I quote from paragraph 61 of the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium issued by Pope Francis: "...We recognize how in a culture where each person wants to be bearer of his or her own subjective truth it becomes difficult for citizens to devise a common plan which transcends individual gain and personal ambitions." There is a saying attributed to de Gaulle: "How can you govern a country that has 245 kinds of cheese?" The French officials of today must come to terms with the reality of inspiring collective action and prosaic restraint to millions of self-willed hedonists if the behaviour depicted in the movie is representative of a large enough segment of modern French society.
Young and beautiful and irresponsible as an Olympian goddess Anais lives her life as she pleases giving to the pleasure principle precedence over the reality principle if one is to use Freudian terminology. Is such an attitude towards life feasible and sustainable in a long-term or collective level? Is it mature from a psychological standpoint? Is it sinful from a religious point of view? Can significant segments of the affluent West live in such a manner overcoming the realm of necessity and achieving the realm of freedom?
It is a seemingly light movie but if engaged in a deeper manner it raises fundamental questions.
Anais Demoustier and Valeria Bruni Tedeschi give stellar performances and their romance will be included in the anthology of cinematic lesbian romances. Comic interludes as well as certain scenes with sombre undertones interspersed with the frantic activity of Paris and the beauty of the French countryside make for a very appealing result which reinforces the image of the West in general and France in particular as a permissive heaven-on-earth or a society where social bonds are so loose that its collapse is imminent-depending on your point of view.
Either way a must-see if one wants to feel the modern western zeitgeist.
She is very charming and lovable( the female lead is ideal for the role) but hardly a paragon of domestic virtue or a model of a responsible citizen.
She is the embodiment of the western ideal of hedonistic self-actualisation which makes Islamists and Russian ideologues and Chinese Communist Party officials so furious in its insistence on personal choice over tradition and the demands of the collectivity.
Of course this bacchanalian celebration of "anything goes" stumbles over the disapproval of venerable if declining institutions of the West itself such as the Roman Catholic Church. I quote from paragraph 61 of the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium issued by Pope Francis: "...We recognize how in a culture where each person wants to be bearer of his or her own subjective truth it becomes difficult for citizens to devise a common plan which transcends individual gain and personal ambitions." There is a saying attributed to de Gaulle: "How can you govern a country that has 245 kinds of cheese?" The French officials of today must come to terms with the reality of inspiring collective action and prosaic restraint to millions of self-willed hedonists if the behaviour depicted in the movie is representative of a large enough segment of modern French society.
Young and beautiful and irresponsible as an Olympian goddess Anais lives her life as she pleases giving to the pleasure principle precedence over the reality principle if one is to use Freudian terminology. Is such an attitude towards life feasible and sustainable in a long-term or collective level? Is it mature from a psychological standpoint? Is it sinful from a religious point of view? Can significant segments of the affluent West live in such a manner overcoming the realm of necessity and achieving the realm of freedom?
It is a seemingly light movie but if engaged in a deeper manner it raises fundamental questions.
Anais Demoustier and Valeria Bruni Tedeschi give stellar performances and their romance will be included in the anthology of cinematic lesbian romances. Comic interludes as well as certain scenes with sombre undertones interspersed with the frantic activity of Paris and the beauty of the French countryside make for a very appealing result which reinforces the image of the West in general and France in particular as a permissive heaven-on-earth or a society where social bonds are so loose that its collapse is imminent-depending on your point of view.
Either way a must-see if one wants to feel the modern western zeitgeist.
Benedetta
(2021)
Passions human and divine
19 November 2021
Some film critics in Greece thought that this movie is a hybrid of parody and satire in its attitude towards organized religion. I disagree. Although the treatment of religious themes is rather blasphemous by pietistic standards the amount of human misery and suffering portrayed does not allow the viewer to conceive the movie as satire at least solely as such. Surely the religious visions and the sexual adventures of Benedetta treat religion irreverently but the consequences for her and her protégé Bartolomea have nothing humorous about them. In that time, unlike ours - at least in the West- no jokes were allowed concerning religion.
Misery, violence, intrigue abound in the plot and lust, although explicit, is just one of the sins portrayed. Ambition, struggle for power and precedence, avarice are the prevailing motives of the characters. Christian charity pales before those demonic passions although it is not totally absent.
The plight of the poor, the intrigues of the powerful, the omnipresence of the plague, the violence of the soldiery offer a bleak picture of society. One is reminded of Flesh and Blood by the same director situated in about the same historical period. Both have a central heroine with superb survival skills to help her navigate through insurmountable adversities.
Humour and satire exist but the general atmosphere is so ominous, so laden with menace, violence and disease that you are left saddened with the misery inherent in the human experience of 17nth century Tuscany. Nothing betrays the artistic splendour of the Renaissance, just a bleak struggle for survival and mastery, for power and precedence, for wealth and prestige where Christianity is used to serve those ulterior motives.
It is a sad movie. That said Virginie Efira and Daphne Patakia are gorgeous both artistically and sexually. But I think Charlotte Rampling in the role of the abbess gives the more memorable performance as a character full of ambiguity and contradictions. Lambert Wilson shines as the satanic nuncio although his character is rather flat in his evil propensities.
The costumes and the representation of the era are superb and the religious visions of Benedetta are far-fetched and subversive. Pietistic believers are going to be offended and will probably say: would he dare to do the same with Muslim religious symbols? But I do not think that the movie is anti-Christian. It shows how lofty ideals are used by flawed humans to further very earthly ambitions.
It is true though that without divine solace the society portrayed by Benedetta would be impossible to live in. Watch the movie and form your own opinion.
Misery, violence, intrigue abound in the plot and lust, although explicit, is just one of the sins portrayed. Ambition, struggle for power and precedence, avarice are the prevailing motives of the characters. Christian charity pales before those demonic passions although it is not totally absent.
The plight of the poor, the intrigues of the powerful, the omnipresence of the plague, the violence of the soldiery offer a bleak picture of society. One is reminded of Flesh and Blood by the same director situated in about the same historical period. Both have a central heroine with superb survival skills to help her navigate through insurmountable adversities.
Humour and satire exist but the general atmosphere is so ominous, so laden with menace, violence and disease that you are left saddened with the misery inherent in the human experience of 17nth century Tuscany. Nothing betrays the artistic splendour of the Renaissance, just a bleak struggle for survival and mastery, for power and precedence, for wealth and prestige where Christianity is used to serve those ulterior motives.
It is a sad movie. That said Virginie Efira and Daphne Patakia are gorgeous both artistically and sexually. But I think Charlotte Rampling in the role of the abbess gives the more memorable performance as a character full of ambiguity and contradictions. Lambert Wilson shines as the satanic nuncio although his character is rather flat in his evil propensities.
The costumes and the representation of the era are superb and the religious visions of Benedetta are far-fetched and subversive. Pietistic believers are going to be offended and will probably say: would he dare to do the same with Muslim religious symbols? But I do not think that the movie is anti-Christian. It shows how lofty ideals are used by flawed humans to further very earthly ambitions.
It is true though that without divine solace the society portrayed by Benedetta would be impossible to live in. Watch the movie and form your own opinion.
The Dazzled
(2019)
The dangers of enclosed communities
13 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I was moved and impressed by this movie. It describes the gradual immersion of an average French family within the practices and norms of a Roman Catholic charismatic community. A community of zealots belonging to the fringes of the established Church which exercises strict control over all aspects of their members life from dress and behavior to sexuality and finance.
The eldest daughter of the family, a rebellious and strong-willed teenager questions the authority the sect exercises over her parents and siblings and is responsible for the final catharsis.
The movie portrays admirably the everyday life within the community, its rites, songs and prayers and the contradiction of its value-system with that of mainstream French society, acutely felt by the teenage daughter in opposition to her fellow pupils at high-school.
The control of the community over the sexuality of its members goes along with the teachings of the official Catholic Church and is no news for those accustomed with Christian sexual mores. Almost all branches of Christianity profess an ascetic morality in dire contrast with the loose sexual mores of contemporary hedonistic and consumerist society. You do not need to be an enclosed charismatic community to preach the need to control the sexual impulse you just have to be Christian. The punishment of theft is also an aspect of civil society and the secular French Republic. It is not an originality of charismatic communities.
In order to prove that the community is flawed the director chooses the rather facile stratagem to make the eldest daughter witness the sexual abuse of one of her younger brothers by a male member of the community. This event acts as a catalyst for the plot since the girl tells the police about it and all the nuances and subtleties are demolished in the final scene.
I think this was an abrupt way to end the movie since it is different to be eccentric, counter-cultural and different from the average norm compared to being criminal.
As the American conservative intellectual Rod Dreher has stated in his book The Benedict Option being a practising Christian in the West is by definition a counter-cultural choice. Being different, antiquated and naive is not the same with being a community that fosters child-abuse. Of course the recent findings of Ciase, the French acronym for the Independent Committee for sexual abuses in the Church have proved that after the family the Church is the second social institution where sexual abuse occurs more commonly.
The actors play their roles convincingly and ably and even the parents who are under the spell of the Sheperd, the leader of the charismatic community are not portrayed in black and white at least in the beginning.
The director of this movie lived herself from eight to eighteen within the confines of such a community and speaks from experience.
The Charismatic Renewal inspired by Protestant examples provided the mainstream Catholic Church with many communities eager to live the faith more authentically compared with the lukewarm cafeteria Catholicism of mainstream religious culture. Sometimes their zeal led to excesses.
Surely the predominant secular culture in the West allows for more sexual freedom and self-expression than serious religious commitment. France is an obvious example since it is one of the most secularized societies in the EU. Even my native Greece which even before the sixties and seventies experienced the phenomenon of religious fraternities eager to live the faith in a more serious manner than allowed by the mainstream has succumbed to the lure of secular post-modernity.
The film correctly criticizes the narrow horizons and thought control of enclosed charismatic communities. But if one is honest one has to admitt that modern western culture does not have a problem solely with enclosed charismatic communities, it has a problem with the Faith as such.
The eldest daughter of the family, a rebellious and strong-willed teenager questions the authority the sect exercises over her parents and siblings and is responsible for the final catharsis.
The movie portrays admirably the everyday life within the community, its rites, songs and prayers and the contradiction of its value-system with that of mainstream French society, acutely felt by the teenage daughter in opposition to her fellow pupils at high-school.
The control of the community over the sexuality of its members goes along with the teachings of the official Catholic Church and is no news for those accustomed with Christian sexual mores. Almost all branches of Christianity profess an ascetic morality in dire contrast with the loose sexual mores of contemporary hedonistic and consumerist society. You do not need to be an enclosed charismatic community to preach the need to control the sexual impulse you just have to be Christian. The punishment of theft is also an aspect of civil society and the secular French Republic. It is not an originality of charismatic communities.
In order to prove that the community is flawed the director chooses the rather facile stratagem to make the eldest daughter witness the sexual abuse of one of her younger brothers by a male member of the community. This event acts as a catalyst for the plot since the girl tells the police about it and all the nuances and subtleties are demolished in the final scene.
I think this was an abrupt way to end the movie since it is different to be eccentric, counter-cultural and different from the average norm compared to being criminal.
As the American conservative intellectual Rod Dreher has stated in his book The Benedict Option being a practising Christian in the West is by definition a counter-cultural choice. Being different, antiquated and naive is not the same with being a community that fosters child-abuse. Of course the recent findings of Ciase, the French acronym for the Independent Committee for sexual abuses in the Church have proved that after the family the Church is the second social institution where sexual abuse occurs more commonly.
The actors play their roles convincingly and ably and even the parents who are under the spell of the Sheperd, the leader of the charismatic community are not portrayed in black and white at least in the beginning.
The director of this movie lived herself from eight to eighteen within the confines of such a community and speaks from experience.
The Charismatic Renewal inspired by Protestant examples provided the mainstream Catholic Church with many communities eager to live the faith more authentically compared with the lukewarm cafeteria Catholicism of mainstream religious culture. Sometimes their zeal led to excesses.
Surely the predominant secular culture in the West allows for more sexual freedom and self-expression than serious religious commitment. France is an obvious example since it is one of the most secularized societies in the EU. Even my native Greece which even before the sixties and seventies experienced the phenomenon of religious fraternities eager to live the faith in a more serious manner than allowed by the mainstream has succumbed to the lure of secular post-modernity.
The film correctly criticizes the narrow horizons and thought control of enclosed charismatic communities. But if one is honest one has to admitt that modern western culture does not have a problem solely with enclosed charismatic communities, it has a problem with the Faith as such.
Cambio tutto!
(2020)
Subdued woman's ego boosted by alternative therapist
14 August 2020
Despite the negative reception of this movie by Greek film critics I went to its opening with a friend and when it finished she told me:"Bravo George a very good choice". It is not a masterpiece but it portrays convincingly the all too familiar case of a professional woman entering early middle age who is exploited by her social environment by subtle and less subtle ways. She obligingly perseveres until a session with an alternative therapist, about the existence of whom she learned while zapping on TV late in the night, has a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde effect on her character and behavior. I will not disclose more but I have to point out that the hedonistic consumerism of post-modern culture is ably presented, as well as the cult of youthfulness and boundless self-expression. Most of the characters are likeable despite or perhaps because of their foibles and faults. The bittersweet taste of life is displayed in a playful manner with Italian finesse. Ignore the highfalutin critics and watch this movie.
The August Virgin
(2019)
The easygoing residents of Madrid engage in socializing and soul searching during summer
13 August 2020
I went to watch the movie the first night it opened in Athens and I was not disappointed. It has a very specific social context, the social world of thirty something Madrilenos who seem very easygoing and direct in their affective relationships, something that a traditionalist Catholic or practicing Muslim might find strange or unfamiliar. They are steeped in the hedonistic mentality of our times although they do not lack warmth or emotional depth. I have visited Madrid once and had a very good time therefore I had an additional motive to like the movie and I have to admit that I was very moved when I saw the heroine staring for sometime before the lady of Elche( Dama d' Elche), a striking Celtiberian sculpture, that I had also admired when visiting the Archeological museum of Madrid.
Everybody seems approachable and easygoing and one wonders if the movie seeks to portray a 68 utopia in the present. There are some memorable scenes such as a an impromptu theatrical on the road or an alternative therapy session which display elements of life that high culture now and in the past views with disdain or at least condescension although they are chunks of the lived experience of many people.
I advice you to watch this movie unless you are socially conservative and your sensibility might be offended by what a certain section of the public considers as the degeneration and laxisme of modern metropolitan life. Otherwise this experiment in sociability and soulsearching has its charms.
A non-conformist among traditionalists
21 November 2019
I have just watched this movie in Athens and I am very satisfied with it. We were eleven spectators in the theatre during the 20:00 local time screening while rain and wind were raging outside. I had read about the message it seeks to convey and I think it does so very effectively. It is one-sided aligning with progress against religious tradition, obscurantism and male chauvinism. Some of those who uphold religious tradition and patriarchal authority are portrayed very negatively, the equivalent of "church and king" crowds of earlier times. Others such as the priest and some policemen are more ambivalent characters with both negative and positive aspects. Even the TV journalist though who upholds progressivism is not an altogether positive character. The plot is simple: an educated young woman who is nevertheless unemployed performs almost thoughtlessly a symbolic act which puts her at odds with the longstanding conventions and prejudices of a backward society and suffers the consequences. Clearly the movie sides with the open society option against ossified tradition. Not everyone will like this but most people in the West will.
New Biz in the Hood
(2019)
A light comedy about class and race differences in modern France
7 August 2019
What came first in my mind when I heard about this movie and its plot was that it would have similarities with "Serial (Bad) Weddings" 1 & 2. It has. Although the plots are different both deal with the problems and misunderstandings stemming from the insurmountable differences of class, status, religion, ethnic origin etc which exist among the various segments of the population in modern French society. They deal with them with a humorous manner which sometimes approaches genuine emotional involvement and try to promote the message that with a little goodwill and mutual effort we shall realize that we are one big human family despite the petty differences of race, creed and class that strive to keep us separated in a state of mistrust and enmity. I am not a professional sociologist and and political analyst to be able to assess the realistic possibilities of such a social vision in modern France or the world in general. Obviously there is an agenda in those comedies which try to promote the ideal of the "Open Society". Whether it will be materialized only the future can tell.
The movie as such has able actors and many humorous moments although it does not always avoid the stereotypes it purports to fight. Some of the cast are physically very attractive and many embody characters with whom the viewer can develop empathetic feelings. Nevertheless the criminals are very stereotyped despite the effort to portray some of them in a somewhat positive manner. My point is that some elements of race and character portrayal undermine instead of promoting the humanistic and universalist message of the film. There are characters belonging to ethnic minorities and colored people which are positive role models but still the villains are Arab and not Français de souche.
Still I recommend this particular movie because it is funny, at times poignant, the acting is competent, love seems to triumph over racial differences and all people can strive for the common good despite being different. All these things can happen- at least on the big screen.
The movie as such has able actors and many humorous moments although it does not always avoid the stereotypes it purports to fight. Some of the cast are physically very attractive and many embody characters with whom the viewer can develop empathetic feelings. Nevertheless the criminals are very stereotyped despite the effort to portray some of them in a somewhat positive manner. My point is that some elements of race and character portrayal undermine instead of promoting the humanistic and universalist message of the film. There are characters belonging to ethnic minorities and colored people which are positive role models but still the villains are Arab and not Français de souche.
Still I recommend this particular movie because it is funny, at times poignant, the acting is competent, love seems to triumph over racial differences and all people can strive for the common good despite being different. All these things can happen- at least on the big screen.
Serial (Bad) Weddings 2
(2019)
Treating serious matters in a lighter vein
24 July 2019
Having watched the first movie I decided to give a chance to the second bearing in mind that often the continuation of a successful recipe does not live up to the original movie. This observation was confirmed although the second film is still very funny. I have to admit that it is full of commonplaces and cliches to an annoying degree. The truth is that you laugh and that is the aim of a comedy. There is no originality in the jokes, they are as commonplace and trite as you could imagine but I found myself laughing most of the time.
The plot is simple. The bourgeois elderly couple strives to keep their four daughters in France while the latter under the instigation of their foreign husbands seek to pursue their luck outside their country to destinations linked with the origins of their spouses. The lengths to which the paterfamilias and his wife go to incite their daughters and grooms to remain in France inspire the main comedy effect of the film.
It is important to note that the scenario is very apt concerning current affairs in French society so that anyone closely following developments in French social reality will recognize imediately that important and "heavy" matters dividing national opinion such as immigration, integration and tolerance towards Muslim practices or legalization of homosexual marriage are treated in a lighter vein and produce ample laughter despite their insoluble and often tragic aspects in real life.
I recommend this movie which without being a masterpiece will appeal to those with a vivid interest in the dilemmas of postmodern multicultural society who are ready to put aside for a moment the often tragic connotations of those matters and accept the comic element which is inherent even in the most serious aspects of human social coexistence.
The plot is simple. The bourgeois elderly couple strives to keep their four daughters in France while the latter under the instigation of their foreign husbands seek to pursue their luck outside their country to destinations linked with the origins of their spouses. The lengths to which the paterfamilias and his wife go to incite their daughters and grooms to remain in France inspire the main comedy effect of the film.
It is important to note that the scenario is very apt concerning current affairs in French society so that anyone closely following developments in French social reality will recognize imediately that important and "heavy" matters dividing national opinion such as immigration, integration and tolerance towards Muslim practices or legalization of homosexual marriage are treated in a lighter vein and produce ample laughter despite their insoluble and often tragic aspects in real life.
I recommend this movie which without being a masterpiece will appeal to those with a vivid interest in the dilemmas of postmodern multicultural society who are ready to put aside for a moment the often tragic connotations of those matters and accept the comic element which is inherent even in the most serious aspects of human social coexistence.
By the Grace of God
(2018)
The deadly sins of the French Catholic Church
4 April 2019
I have followed the events described in this movie through the French press and internet. I knew therefore about the facts and they did not appear as a revelation to me. What surprised me was the quality of the movie. It was very good. It was not an attack towards the institution of the Catholic Church per se. Nevertheless it is critical towards the Church and not as balanced and neutral as it wants to appear. I think that many people will evaluate the film based on their gut feeling for the Catholic Church. The faithful will be offended disbelieving the veracity of the offenses described and attributing them to a hostility against the institution while those in the other end of the spectrum will be happy to see how corrupt the Church really is confirming thus their pre-conceived notions.
Artistically though I consider this movie slightly superior to the Ocsar winning "Spotlight" which dealt with a similar case although on a grander scale and through the view of the investigating journalists rather than the victims. I watched it at the cinema of my neighborhood the first day it opened in Greece. I think that the established film critics of the Athenian press mildly underrated it. This has a positive aspect because when I watched it myself I was pleasantly surprised by the overall quality of the movie. We were only six in the theatre understandable perhaps because it was Thursday. Greeks are relatively pious by European Union standards and perhaps piety deterred them from going to such a movie. On the other hand they are mostly adherents of the Orthodox variety of Christianity and therefore consider Roman Catholics somewhat heretical and thus they would be glad to watch their dirty linen washed in public. Sociological explanation cuts both ways but personally I wish it finds a large audience in Greece and worldwide because it has the artistic quality and the social concern required to touch thinking people conversant with the problems relevant to excessive deference towards ecclesiastical authority.
Artistically though I consider this movie slightly superior to the Ocsar winning "Spotlight" which dealt with a similar case although on a grander scale and through the view of the investigating journalists rather than the victims. I watched it at the cinema of my neighborhood the first day it opened in Greece. I think that the established film critics of the Athenian press mildly underrated it. This has a positive aspect because when I watched it myself I was pleasantly surprised by the overall quality of the movie. We were only six in the theatre understandable perhaps because it was Thursday. Greeks are relatively pious by European Union standards and perhaps piety deterred them from going to such a movie. On the other hand they are mostly adherents of the Orthodox variety of Christianity and therefore consider Roman Catholics somewhat heretical and thus they would be glad to watch their dirty linen washed in public. Sociological explanation cuts both ways but personally I wish it finds a large audience in Greece and worldwide because it has the artistic quality and the social concern required to touch thinking people conversant with the problems relevant to excessive deference towards ecclesiastical authority.
Stunning visual effects and humanitarian new age ideology
3 September 2017
This particular movie has raised a controversy among the critics and the public concerning its quality. My subjective and personal opinion is positive; I liked it. The technical aspects were superb and the acting of the two leads was OK while important actors and Rihanna played secondary roles that were very interesting. The political message was humanitarian, multicultural and globalization friendly bringing in mind personalities like Pope Francis, the Dalai Lama, Guardian columnists and New Age pundits. It is true that many creatures, characters and themes were similar to other science fiction movies but the stock is limited therefore I do not blame the creators of Valerian. Truly I can't elaborate my preference in a long well- argued logical exposition; just my gut feeling as a viewer drove me to assess Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets positively and this mainly emotional and naive response makes me recommend it. I have to point out that certain people will find it's ideology repugnant, naive and hypocritical. Others will think that the plot and certain themes are not original and there will be a portion of viewers not satisfied with the acting quality of the protagonists. Those concerns have been described already in the reviews of critics and viewers. I can not counter them through reasoned arguments. For me the overall impression of the whole thing was enjoyable and emotionally satisfying- not all people think or feel alike though...
Silence
(I) (2016)
Universalist v nationalist religious loyalties
8 January 2017
Before going to watch this movie I had read a lot of reviews and opinions about it. Positive and negative. In Greece where I live the review of the leading daily "Kathimerini" was politely and mildly negative. I share an interest in the portrayal of religion and spirituality on film therefore I decided that "Silence" was worth seeing. Despite a rather unpromising start mainly because of the vivid depiction of human misery and wretchedness, the story becomes more interesting, the depiction of Japanese society more diversified and you are treated with some superb dialogue between characters embodying different world views.
Japanese authorities regard Christianity as a subversive force and a foreign influence threatening the independence of their country. The argument is that Christianity may be good and true for Portugal and Spain but that does not mean that the same can be told for Japan. To this point the hero of the story Jesuit Father Rodriguez answers that something can be true regardless of time and place denying thus relativism and parochialism in religion. If we supplant 17nth century Roman Catholicism with modern day Human Rights we may have a glimpse of the same perennial debate couched in present day terms.
I will not enter in more detail so as not to reveal the plot to those not yet familiar with it. Although the setting of the movie is situated in 17nth century Japan and the predicament of Christians there, the questions asked have a far wider significance and resonate to our own times as well. The context is Catholic Christianity but one can ponder to the limits we can go to be steadfast to the beliefs which form the core of our identity. The sufferings people undergo to remain constant to their faith. On the other hand one has to reflect on the right of a culture and a society to safeguard its particularity against what is perceived as onerous foreign influence. Those are not easy questions and the movie does not give easy answers.
Images are striking especially those of nature, weather and sea. A feast for the eyes. Dialogue is also top notch specifically concerning issues of truth, religion, tradition and such topics. The actors are very good. The pace is rather slow and the depiction of torture quite disturbing. Misery and wretchedness abound but also wit and conviction.
I do not think this movie is a masterpiece but I found many things to be impressed. If your are interested in spiritual issues you should probably watch it. It is boring at times but it is original, brave and special. If such questionings leave you cold then you should think twice before attempting to go....
Japanese authorities regard Christianity as a subversive force and a foreign influence threatening the independence of their country. The argument is that Christianity may be good and true for Portugal and Spain but that does not mean that the same can be told for Japan. To this point the hero of the story Jesuit Father Rodriguez answers that something can be true regardless of time and place denying thus relativism and parochialism in religion. If we supplant 17nth century Roman Catholicism with modern day Human Rights we may have a glimpse of the same perennial debate couched in present day terms.
I will not enter in more detail so as not to reveal the plot to those not yet familiar with it. Although the setting of the movie is situated in 17nth century Japan and the predicament of Christians there, the questions asked have a far wider significance and resonate to our own times as well. The context is Catholic Christianity but one can ponder to the limits we can go to be steadfast to the beliefs which form the core of our identity. The sufferings people undergo to remain constant to their faith. On the other hand one has to reflect on the right of a culture and a society to safeguard its particularity against what is perceived as onerous foreign influence. Those are not easy questions and the movie does not give easy answers.
Images are striking especially those of nature, weather and sea. A feast for the eyes. Dialogue is also top notch specifically concerning issues of truth, religion, tradition and such topics. The actors are very good. The pace is rather slow and the depiction of torture quite disturbing. Misery and wretchedness abound but also wit and conviction.
I do not think this movie is a masterpiece but I found many things to be impressed. If your are interested in spiritual issues you should probably watch it. It is boring at times but it is original, brave and special. If such questionings leave you cold then you should think twice before attempting to go....
Queen of the Desert
(2015)
A romantic yearning for the East
24 August 2016
Opinions concerning this movie are considerably divided. I state my subjective personal opinion without claiming particular knowledge of the director's previous work or the historical period and geographical area around which the film evolves.
It is a Bildungsroman, that is a work which treats the evolution of a certain human character in time and space, or to put it in simpler terms a biographical movie. The person concerned is Gertrude Bell a charismatic British adventuress and scholar who left her comfortable circumstances in Britain to seek self-knowledge and adventure in the Arabic provinces of the moribund Ottoman Empire and was instrumental in the succession arrangements which arose after the demise of the Ottoman rule after the end of the First World War.
This is a tale of seeking self-fulfillment in the unknown, about the longing a Westerner feels for the (Middle) East. It strikes a chord with the present urge in rich Western countries to imagine the East as a place of spiritual wisdom and purity uncontaminated from the over-sophistication of Western civilization. I wonder if Gertrude Bell was alive today whether she would be a yoga enthusiast or a volunteer in a NGO for refugees...
The Gertrude Bell I am speaking about is the one portrayed in the movie by Nicole Kidman, not the historical one about whom I do not know enough to offer a sound opinion. The heroine is a troubled soul unlucky in her love life and uncomfortable with the rigid etiquette of her social environment. She is though highly intelligent and evolves in a mastermind of intercultural communication as she learns to interact meaningfully with the rough people of Arabia without scorning or snubbing them. The British Establishment realizing her skills as a scholar and social facilitator try to enlist her to the British cause in the the Middle East.
As the drama of her life takes place the vast canvas of the historical repercussions of the demise of the Ottoman Empire and the antagonisms of the Great European powers is portrayed. She meets the fellow eccentric and adventurer T.E. Lawrence and their destinies as British expatriates and flamboyant personalities but also would be power- brokers interact. After ''Lawrence of Arabia'' every appearance of Lawrence in a movie suffers by comparison because of the striking good looks of Peter O'Toole and the inevitably secondary importance this character has compared with the limelight he enjoyed in the famous David Lean film.
Other famous historical figures such as Winston Churchill or Faysal of Mecca appear fleetingly to give an impression of period authenticity. The latter role of Gertrude Bell as politician and king-maker is understated as is her role in nation building notably of Iraq.
The landscapes are admirable as well as the costumes. Aesthetically this movie is a triumph. Many people were unhappy with the scenario and I have to admit that it is not the strong point of the work. I was moved by the search of a highly intelligent and independent woman for meaning, happiness, knowledge and love in the Middle East although one has to consider that she probably idealized the subjects of her affection. Towards the end of the movie Arab dignitaries( future kings in the making) ask her ''why an Englishwoman loves us so much?''
My impression is that this is a story about an interesting character in an interesting place during an interesting historical period. I watched it in August in an open cinema and was thrilled to leave imaginatively the Athenian metropolis for an unknown age and land.
It is a Bildungsroman, that is a work which treats the evolution of a certain human character in time and space, or to put it in simpler terms a biographical movie. The person concerned is Gertrude Bell a charismatic British adventuress and scholar who left her comfortable circumstances in Britain to seek self-knowledge and adventure in the Arabic provinces of the moribund Ottoman Empire and was instrumental in the succession arrangements which arose after the demise of the Ottoman rule after the end of the First World War.
This is a tale of seeking self-fulfillment in the unknown, about the longing a Westerner feels for the (Middle) East. It strikes a chord with the present urge in rich Western countries to imagine the East as a place of spiritual wisdom and purity uncontaminated from the over-sophistication of Western civilization. I wonder if Gertrude Bell was alive today whether she would be a yoga enthusiast or a volunteer in a NGO for refugees...
The Gertrude Bell I am speaking about is the one portrayed in the movie by Nicole Kidman, not the historical one about whom I do not know enough to offer a sound opinion. The heroine is a troubled soul unlucky in her love life and uncomfortable with the rigid etiquette of her social environment. She is though highly intelligent and evolves in a mastermind of intercultural communication as she learns to interact meaningfully with the rough people of Arabia without scorning or snubbing them. The British Establishment realizing her skills as a scholar and social facilitator try to enlist her to the British cause in the the Middle East.
As the drama of her life takes place the vast canvas of the historical repercussions of the demise of the Ottoman Empire and the antagonisms of the Great European powers is portrayed. She meets the fellow eccentric and adventurer T.E. Lawrence and their destinies as British expatriates and flamboyant personalities but also would be power- brokers interact. After ''Lawrence of Arabia'' every appearance of Lawrence in a movie suffers by comparison because of the striking good looks of Peter O'Toole and the inevitably secondary importance this character has compared with the limelight he enjoyed in the famous David Lean film.
Other famous historical figures such as Winston Churchill or Faysal of Mecca appear fleetingly to give an impression of period authenticity. The latter role of Gertrude Bell as politician and king-maker is understated as is her role in nation building notably of Iraq.
The landscapes are admirable as well as the costumes. Aesthetically this movie is a triumph. Many people were unhappy with the scenario and I have to admit that it is not the strong point of the work. I was moved by the search of a highly intelligent and independent woman for meaning, happiness, knowledge and love in the Middle East although one has to consider that she probably idealized the subjects of her affection. Towards the end of the movie Arab dignitaries( future kings in the making) ask her ''why an Englishwoman loves us so much?''
My impression is that this is a story about an interesting character in an interesting place during an interesting historical period. I watched it in August in an open cinema and was thrilled to leave imaginatively the Athenian metropolis for an unknown age and land.
Un + Une
(2015)
Ex Oriente Lux
7 March 2016
I have to confess that I have not watched the first film of the director about a man and a woman in order to use it as a criterion of comparison. I simply evaluate this movie independently. There is a certain aspect which I found amazingly pertinent, current and within the realities of modern western life. When the two protagonists speak to each other during certain scenes of the movie the wife of the ambassador played by Elsa Zylberstein describes certain feelings and thoughts she has about self-realization, communication with the universe and other ideas pertaining to New Age spirituality. The protagonist answers with irony. Later the spiritual longings of the lady are satisfied through a pilgrimage to the river Ganges and a visit to a modern day Indian Hinduist saint. In short she has the fascination of the affluent westerners with supposed oriental wisdom. I loved this aspect of the movie as it was portrayed by witty dialogues and the real as well as the esoteric and spiritual journey of the protagonists through India. If you observe the success of figures as the Dalai Lama with western audiences or read magazines such as the French "Le Monde des Religions" you will have a picture of this unmistakable trend in affluent Western countries as France and Britain. It forms the backbone of the film which is also a love story.
The colorful depiction of India and the lively and lovely actors as well as the music add to the total impressive ambiance of this movie. But for me the fascination with the East as a place of spiritual self-discovery and the dialogues where Anna Hamon the ambassador's wife played by Elsa Zylberstein expresses herself freely in a flow of New Age speak, stand as monuments of perceptiveness about how a considerable number of women and men in the West think, fantasize and feel about the alleged spiritual qualities of an imaginary East.
The colorful depiction of India and the lively and lovely actors as well as the music add to the total impressive ambiance of this movie. But for me the fascination with the East as a place of spiritual self-discovery and the dialogues where Anna Hamon the ambassador's wife played by Elsa Zylberstein expresses herself freely in a flow of New Age speak, stand as monuments of perceptiveness about how a considerable number of women and men in the West think, fantasize and feel about the alleged spiritual qualities of an imaginary East.
Ainsi soient-ils
(2012–2015)
Many paths to the Seminary
9 November 2014
I am writing here a review for season one only. I have read about the series in French newspapers and I found the theme original and interesting so I decided to buy the DVDs' of the first season. I was not disappointed. The acting is good and the topics treated deal with major issues of life choices and moral dilemmas that befall most people in modern society. The characters of the young seminarians, for the series has as heroes young people training for the Roman Catholic priesthood in contemporary Paris, are all singular in the sense that are all characters with particular problems instead of adhering to an average mundane grey conformity. Each of them has a particular personal drama to overcome in his path to Christian formation. Their superiors in the Seminary or in the Vatican are also colorful personalities. They are all subject to normal human temptations to which they often succumb. The production is relatively rich. If you are interested in moral dilemmas in a modern setting and not very touchy in your religious sensibilities you must watch Ainsi soient-ils.
The Seminary
5 November 2014
I had read a lot about this series and was eagerly awaiting to watch the first episode of the first season to form a personal opinion. I was not disappointed. With succinct pithiness we are shown the different paths the young men have trodden to converge to the seminary of the Cappucins in Paris. We are also introduced to the characters of the older ecclesiastics to the pastoral care of whom those young people are from now on entrusted. The personality traits of some of the major characters are revealed. Acting is good and the production is state of the art. The juxtaposition of the solemn scenes of liturgical ritual with the noisy scenes of everyday life is interesting and successful. The clashes of personalities among the church hierarchy are ably portrayed. The personal histories of the young entrants start to be woven with the life and tradition of the Seminary while the larger picture and the wider ramifications within the Roman Catholic Church in France start to become perceptible by the viewers.
The Counselor
(2013)
Evil prevails
24 November 2013
This is a very strange movie one of the strangest I have ever seen. It has great actors, a plot impossible to understand, murders and death, sexual perversion, able cinematography, philosophical villains and disgusting morals.
The point of the movie is very simple.Evil rules human life and the more evil you are the best chances you have to survive. The most moral character of the movie meets the worst fate, the worst character prevails. It seems the whole movie was made to vindicate the worldview of the Marquis De Sade! All this is rather simple really and it does not need to be explained in literary platitudes. Neither it is something original. What's the point of having a stellar cast and an obviously big budget to reach such a humdrum conclusion?
Obviously some people, the screen-play writer whom I did not know but who seems to be rather famous, have a morbid fascination with the human propensity for evil and perversity. I do not want to create spoilers but if you watch the movie with some attention the kind of fate at least two of the main characters shall meet latter becomes more than obvious, this movie have the subtlety of an hippopotamus.
I mean it simply is as plain as having wolfs making sermons to seep about the futility and brevity of life before they eat them. Does this thing make for great art, subtlety and insight to the human condition as quite a lot of reviewers state or imply?In my opinion no although my view may be in a degree conditioned by the fact that I find the morality of the movie repulsive and therefore I punish the whole movie based on the wrong criteria.
I did not like this movie I had a bad feeling leaving the theatre. On the other hand I liked the actors. They weren't characters they were human allegories for the passions of the soul. Cameron Diaz symbolized the naked will to prevail and sexuality without confines. In Freudian terms the urge for aggression and the sexual urge unhinged by any moral constrains. The prosperity of vice to site one of Sade's novels. Cruz was the Lilly of the valley that was the prey of a cruel and perverse world. The Counsellor was the good man who took a wrong path and was destroyed(although there is no explaining which was his motive for evil-doing despite the continual warnings to do otherwise-the only conclusion is that he did for kicks for its own sake).Two other characters exist played by Bardem and Pitt who are very colorful in terms of character as well as in terms of stylistic choices. They are the ones who warn the hero of the fate that awaits him.
You could say that all this has allusions to Elizabethan tragedies and drama but this is an overstatement. And one must note that the way Mexicans are portrayed confirms all the Wasp stereotypes about them.But one thing is certain, this film will gain a cult following among all those who pride themselves for having understood the true workings of nature and society under the hypocritical facade of the JudeoChristian ethic. Their self- satisfaction will gain an immense boost- as if one had slapped the Pope publicly the moment he went to bless the public in St Peter's Square after his election....
The point of the movie is very simple.Evil rules human life and the more evil you are the best chances you have to survive. The most moral character of the movie meets the worst fate, the worst character prevails. It seems the whole movie was made to vindicate the worldview of the Marquis De Sade! All this is rather simple really and it does not need to be explained in literary platitudes. Neither it is something original. What's the point of having a stellar cast and an obviously big budget to reach such a humdrum conclusion?
Obviously some people, the screen-play writer whom I did not know but who seems to be rather famous, have a morbid fascination with the human propensity for evil and perversity. I do not want to create spoilers but if you watch the movie with some attention the kind of fate at least two of the main characters shall meet latter becomes more than obvious, this movie have the subtlety of an hippopotamus.
I mean it simply is as plain as having wolfs making sermons to seep about the futility and brevity of life before they eat them. Does this thing make for great art, subtlety and insight to the human condition as quite a lot of reviewers state or imply?In my opinion no although my view may be in a degree conditioned by the fact that I find the morality of the movie repulsive and therefore I punish the whole movie based on the wrong criteria.
I did not like this movie I had a bad feeling leaving the theatre. On the other hand I liked the actors. They weren't characters they were human allegories for the passions of the soul. Cameron Diaz symbolized the naked will to prevail and sexuality without confines. In Freudian terms the urge for aggression and the sexual urge unhinged by any moral constrains. The prosperity of vice to site one of Sade's novels. Cruz was the Lilly of the valley that was the prey of a cruel and perverse world. The Counsellor was the good man who took a wrong path and was destroyed(although there is no explaining which was his motive for evil-doing despite the continual warnings to do otherwise-the only conclusion is that he did for kicks for its own sake).Two other characters exist played by Bardem and Pitt who are very colorful in terms of character as well as in terms of stylistic choices. They are the ones who warn the hero of the fate that awaits him.
You could say that all this has allusions to Elizabethan tragedies and drama but this is an overstatement. And one must note that the way Mexicans are portrayed confirms all the Wasp stereotypes about them.But one thing is certain, this film will gain a cult following among all those who pride themselves for having understood the true workings of nature and society under the hypocritical facade of the JudeoChristian ethic. Their self- satisfaction will gain an immense boost- as if one had slapped the Pope publicly the moment he went to bless the public in St Peter's Square after his election....
Blue Is the Warmest Colour
(2013)
A mundane love story between two very different women
1 November 2013
This is a good movie. I liked very much the way in which it describes the birth, maturity and end of a love interest among two young and attractive humans. The scenes in the park and the interplay of sentiments and nuances between the two lovers are very emotional and engaging. The difference of characters is very well presented.
The other good point is the sometimes humoristic way in which the down to earth and pragmatic family and social environment of Adele is juxtaposed with the artistic, intellectual and avant guard family and friends of Emma. I think this is the best part of the movie when one compares the realism of Adele with the artistic license of Emma. The scenes where both eat with each others family and the ensuing dialogues are a treat.
And now what you are all waiting for: the sex scenes. They are long, hot and explicit. I can not pronounce with conviction whether they served the artistic purposes of the movie or not. If someone wanted to watch the full bloom of a lesbian love story, the scenes may be considered indispensable, if you just wanted to watch a human love story between two people that happen also to have the same sex without caring for so much carnal detail, the scenes could be shorter and more circumspect. The point nevertheless is that those scenes caused a sensation and created a furore and debate from which the movie profited in terms of advertisement. People may now blame or praise it for the wrong reasons.
Both actresses where very good in playing their roles. The portrayal by Exarchopoulos of Adele as a teacher in a kinder-garden reading to the children didactic stories with animals or of her abilities as a cook and her insistence that Emma should eat something while Emma is consumed by a telephone call in which she raves about her artistic personality, integrity and vision ignoring Adele and the immediate environment are superb. She is also an actress which made feel empathy for her character. Seydoux is also very credible as the pretentious modernistic and ultimately self-centered Emma. And to conclude with a personal view I liked Adele much more than Emma as a person...
The other good point is the sometimes humoristic way in which the down to earth and pragmatic family and social environment of Adele is juxtaposed with the artistic, intellectual and avant guard family and friends of Emma. I think this is the best part of the movie when one compares the realism of Adele with the artistic license of Emma. The scenes where both eat with each others family and the ensuing dialogues are a treat.
And now what you are all waiting for: the sex scenes. They are long, hot and explicit. I can not pronounce with conviction whether they served the artistic purposes of the movie or not. If someone wanted to watch the full bloom of a lesbian love story, the scenes may be considered indispensable, if you just wanted to watch a human love story between two people that happen also to have the same sex without caring for so much carnal detail, the scenes could be shorter and more circumspect. The point nevertheless is that those scenes caused a sensation and created a furore and debate from which the movie profited in terms of advertisement. People may now blame or praise it for the wrong reasons.
Both actresses where very good in playing their roles. The portrayal by Exarchopoulos of Adele as a teacher in a kinder-garden reading to the children didactic stories with animals or of her abilities as a cook and her insistence that Emma should eat something while Emma is consumed by a telephone call in which she raves about her artistic personality, integrity and vision ignoring Adele and the immediate environment are superb. She is also an actress which made feel empathy for her character. Seydoux is also very credible as the pretentious modernistic and ultimately self-centered Emma. And to conclude with a personal view I liked Adele much more than Emma as a person...
Elysium
(I) (2013)
A science fiction moral parable
29 August 2013
This film which utilizes the most advanced technology for its special effects has as a core a very ancient myth. I am not writing my personal idea I just reproduce the characterization that Dimitris Bouras, the film critic of "The Kathimerini" newspaper in the issue of Thursday 22nd of August gave to the central hero: a Messiah leading the downtrodden to heaven/redemption- that is to Elysium. Truly it is one of the times that I agree completely with the film critic. Perhaps I should have read the critique after I had seen the movie.
Briefly the plot is that in a future world human society is sharply divided between the poor masses who live in filth and the privileged rich who live in an artificial world, a satellite of Earth called Elysium, from the Greek name of the after-world where the souls of heroes dwelled- the equivalent of the Christian Paradise although the qualification for entry were different. This point is very strongly made from the first instance of the film. It follows a long line of dystopian fiction such as "The Time Machine" by Wells, "The Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley, "1984" by George Orwell, the science fiction comic "The Incal" by Jean Giraud(Moebius) and Alejandro Jodorowsky and also the theories of many theorists of oligarchical rule in the 20th century such as Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca and Michels-even James Burnham. It is also based on the experience of a great part of human recorded history which witnessed a great cleavage between the ruling class and the popular masses.
This perennial theme is set in a not so distant future and with a cast of characters that E.M. Forster would term flat: The central hero, an orphan raised by nuns, a semi-criminal type and factory worker who after a terrible accident follows a path that leads him to martyrdom and the saving of the poor- thus confirming the prophecy of a nun that he would achieve great things despite his humble background- in the same sense that Jesus Christ did- although in his case he expiated the sins of others not of himself; the ruthless defense secretary of Elysium that does anything to safeguard the interests of the rich and advance her personal ambition; the sadistic and vicious undercover agent that is illegally hired by the powerful, is dumped by them and then betrays them in his turn as all self-respecting mercenaries do. And some other characters less or more sympathetic that fill the canvas of this predictable and simplistic movie.
But I have to point out that it is not a bad movie. Many people accuse it for being naive but frankly class hatred and political oppression are pretty black and white concepts and most people in history have experienced them in such a manner. Sophisticates and intellectuals may complain here but one must not rationalize too much. When sources are divided very unequally hatred and chaos follow and one does not need the theories of Jurgen Habermas or Noam Chomsky to state the obvious. Yes the movie is as subtle as a tone of bricks falling on your head as a reviewer wrote but it is a movie and not a sociological treatise. And as we know political and religious myths are more powerful motors of history than the writings of learned intellectuals.
Briefly speaking if you are conversant with Christian mythology and modern dystopian fiction and you love visual and sound effects go and see this film. If you want sophisticated descriptions of modern social problems and are offended by the idea that the poor are good and the rich evil then don't go.
Briefly the plot is that in a future world human society is sharply divided between the poor masses who live in filth and the privileged rich who live in an artificial world, a satellite of Earth called Elysium, from the Greek name of the after-world where the souls of heroes dwelled- the equivalent of the Christian Paradise although the qualification for entry were different. This point is very strongly made from the first instance of the film. It follows a long line of dystopian fiction such as "The Time Machine" by Wells, "The Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley, "1984" by George Orwell, the science fiction comic "The Incal" by Jean Giraud(Moebius) and Alejandro Jodorowsky and also the theories of many theorists of oligarchical rule in the 20th century such as Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca and Michels-even James Burnham. It is also based on the experience of a great part of human recorded history which witnessed a great cleavage between the ruling class and the popular masses.
This perennial theme is set in a not so distant future and with a cast of characters that E.M. Forster would term flat: The central hero, an orphan raised by nuns, a semi-criminal type and factory worker who after a terrible accident follows a path that leads him to martyrdom and the saving of the poor- thus confirming the prophecy of a nun that he would achieve great things despite his humble background- in the same sense that Jesus Christ did- although in his case he expiated the sins of others not of himself; the ruthless defense secretary of Elysium that does anything to safeguard the interests of the rich and advance her personal ambition; the sadistic and vicious undercover agent that is illegally hired by the powerful, is dumped by them and then betrays them in his turn as all self-respecting mercenaries do. And some other characters less or more sympathetic that fill the canvas of this predictable and simplistic movie.
But I have to point out that it is not a bad movie. Many people accuse it for being naive but frankly class hatred and political oppression are pretty black and white concepts and most people in history have experienced them in such a manner. Sophisticates and intellectuals may complain here but one must not rationalize too much. When sources are divided very unequally hatred and chaos follow and one does not need the theories of Jurgen Habermas or Noam Chomsky to state the obvious. Yes the movie is as subtle as a tone of bricks falling on your head as a reviewer wrote but it is a movie and not a sociological treatise. And as we know political and religious myths are more powerful motors of history than the writings of learned intellectuals.
Briefly speaking if you are conversant with Christian mythology and modern dystopian fiction and you love visual and sound effects go and see this film. If you want sophisticated descriptions of modern social problems and are offended by the idea that the poor are good and the rich evil then don't go.
Not just a movie about a shy schoolboy
24 December 2012
I was interested in a movie about a shy schoolboy because I have been one myself. But I have to admit that the movie went well beyond that. The hero was not just shy but had other deeper problems originating in the relationship he had had when very young with- a now departed- relative. The people with whom he associated with, to act as mentors and to provide an initiatory experience to the real world, were in many aspects even more problematic than he was. The trailer is misleading because you expect a movie about shyness and social awkwardness and you get a movie about homosexuality, drugs and entrance to adulthood. The case-studies of the characters are too special to be typical. Nevertheless I keep the appearance of Emma Watson of whom I am a fan. Since I am neither British or American I can not tell the difference between a British and an American accent about which so much was made by some reviewers- I just found her English intelligible and that is enough for me. The scene where she stands out of the car with spread hands reminded me of a similar scene of another much older movie about youthful rebellion "If".
Indignados
(2012)
The Odyssey of an immigrant in the context of general history(from below)
26 March 2012
This film was played in Greece within the context of the 13nth French-speaking Film Festival. It is a strange blend of genres, drama, documentary and certainly a film with an agenda. This last observation is the one that must be emphasized the most. What was "The Triumph of the Will" for Nazism is this film for Leftism. It loosely follows the itinerary of a girl of African origins which has reached Europe. She encounters the hostility of policemen and bureaucrats and through her adventures we watch events and mass rallies in Athens, Paris and Madrid. She is the sole person in the movie who can be described as the protagonist. All others appear briefly or participate in mass scenes in which they are indistinguishable from the crowd. The movie is interspersed with dicta and slogans against capitalism from the book of a French writer who is believed to have inspired this film. They are not particularly ingenious or bright but they stress the fact of exploitation. A poor girl is used as a paradigm and her personal story is used as a parable of the story of the wretched of the Earth-that is Thirld World immigrants as well as Roma people, who are the people the director belongs to. Inevitably your opinion of this particular movie will be very much conditioned by how much you agree or disagree with its politics. I think that it makes a powerful message for the cause it espouses although it is rather loosely structured.Surely it will mean different things to different people.
The Giants
(2011)
Tom Sawyer in a modern bleaker context
26 March 2012
This is the story of two young brothers and a friend of them trying to survive in an indifferent or even hostile environment in modern day France. Some of the people they encounter are evil- as a drug-dealer that tries to swindle them or a rather abusive young man acting as the drug-dealers stooge other are kind- as a lady that finds them on the road and offers them food and shelter.
The boys themselves are no saints since they still, enter the houses of other people and speak a very foul language. But it is an interesting story of survival and resilience as well as friendship in a bleak modern social and natural environment.
The boys themselves are no saints since they still, enter the houses of other people and speak a very foul language. But it is an interesting story of survival and resilience as well as friendship in a bleak modern social and natural environment.
Crazy Horse
(2011)
Crazy Horse from inside
24 March 2012
This movie was played in Greece thanks to the 13nth Festival of French-speaking Film. It is a documentary about the world famous Paris cabaret "Crazy Horse" where a show featuring very scantily dressed girls takes place. It has been made by an eminent documentary maker and it is a combination of the live show and rehearsals with the everyday day aspects of life of the contributors to the show as well as the discussions between the director, the artistic director, the costumes expert and a representative of the shareholders. It also shows an audition for new girls who want to enter the show.
It has an aura of realism since there is no effort to distance the viewer from what is presented but everything is realistically portrayed. This applies mainly to the sequences where we watch the inside workings of the show creating and show managing process, where the various participants try to make their view and opinions prevail. In the rehearsals we learn about the effort and pain needed to achieve the glamorous spectacle. The spectacle itself is a very artistic and stylish form of soft pornography.
If you have any affinity with dance and are not bored with documentaries and if you are not much of a prude this is a movie to watch.
It has an aura of realism since there is no effort to distance the viewer from what is presented but everything is realistically portrayed. This applies mainly to the sequences where we watch the inside workings of the show creating and show managing process, where the various participants try to make their view and opinions prevail. In the rehearsals we learn about the effort and pain needed to achieve the glamorous spectacle. The spectacle itself is a very artistic and stylish form of soft pornography.
If you have any affinity with dance and are not bored with documentaries and if you are not much of a prude this is a movie to watch.
Wonderful window-dressing of a void plot
6 January 2012
A very uneven movie. This is what I thought after having seen this movie. While the special effects, the costumes and the reproduction of late 19nth century social world are superb, the scenario is very weak in my opinion.
On the enmity between Holmes and Professor Moriarty, the origins of which are never explained, a whole diplomatico-military intrigue is based, the satanic sinews of which are masterminded by the sinister genius of the Professor. The well attested fact that a rivalry existed between France and Germany in the end of the 19nth century is almost attributed to the machinations of Moriarty who tried to foment war between nations for his own purposes as if deeply ingrained national antagonisms were the work of a single criminal intelligence.
Also the dialogues between Holmes and Moriarty which are supposed to be the pinnacles of sophistication and wit and concern a battle of wits as well as ponderous reflections on good and evil, war and peace- were in my opinion naive, obfuscating, adolescent and desperately trying to sound intelligent while they were not.
The eccentricities of Holmes and the genius of Moriarty, verified by his Cambridge lectureship were the silliest effort I have met with, to pass a certain form of eccentric Britishness as a mark of special qualities.
While I admired the costumes and the dynamism of the movie, I could not stop thinking how silly its whole premises were.
On the enmity between Holmes and Professor Moriarty, the origins of which are never explained, a whole diplomatico-military intrigue is based, the satanic sinews of which are masterminded by the sinister genius of the Professor. The well attested fact that a rivalry existed between France and Germany in the end of the 19nth century is almost attributed to the machinations of Moriarty who tried to foment war between nations for his own purposes as if deeply ingrained national antagonisms were the work of a single criminal intelligence.
Also the dialogues between Holmes and Moriarty which are supposed to be the pinnacles of sophistication and wit and concern a battle of wits as well as ponderous reflections on good and evil, war and peace- were in my opinion naive, obfuscating, adolescent and desperately trying to sound intelligent while they were not.
The eccentricities of Holmes and the genius of Moriarty, verified by his Cambridge lectureship were the silliest effort I have met with, to pass a certain form of eccentric Britishness as a mark of special qualities.
While I admired the costumes and the dynamism of the movie, I could not stop thinking how silly its whole premises were.
Larisa empisteftiko
(2012)
Greek village rivalry from a comic perspective
3 January 2012
This particular comedy which is similar to the preceding "I love Karditsa" is a movie which follows a pre-established pattern. Action is situated in Thessaly, the main agricultural region of Greece and the thin plot-the rivalry between two neighboring villages which both do not want a certain public utility located in their premises but in those of the village opposite, is a pretext for a satire on the political mores, petty egoisms, rustic language pronunciation and love lives of provincial Greeks. In that sense, it is a movie full of the most obvious and commonplace stereotypes one can imagine, intelligible to Greeks but lost to foreigners. It is prejudiced against the little people of the province and even more against their petty leaders. I can not say that the prejudice is totally unfounded but it is very far-fetched and not at all subtle. Nevertheless if you are Greek and have some familiarity with that environment it is sure that you will have some cheap but hearty laughs. And some of the ladies look attractive, those that do not succumb to the stereotype of the housewife. I may point out that the movie is prejudiced against gays also and the political message is somewhat naive. But I can not deny that it is really funny although in a crude way.
Tell Your Friends