Change Your Image
tugrul-anildi
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Le vampire de Düsseldorf (1965)
High-school play
First; plot is very weak. Characters must be totally isolated in order not to find any clues. Industrialist's son was murdered and the singer can not connect the dots. The woman refusing to identify the murderer is killed and her friend does not go to the police for some unknown reason. At the final scene, everywhere must be full of police but none is seen. All in all, plot is awfully weak.
Second; acting is awful. The killer is supposed to be a complex character in order to attract the singer with his shyness and frighten the woman refusing the to identify him at the police station with his stern looks but instead he is only a meek one-dimensional person without any features.
Thirdly; integration into a socio-political background was superficial by including some scenes of workers and factory.
As a result; the film was revoltingly amateurish.
Black Death (2010)
wonderful twist, awful movie
Trist towards the nd was really shocking but direction and acting was awful. Epilogue was meaningless. I hope somebody uses the overall idea much better.
Idi i smotri (1985)
Comic-strip villains (half-)punished like in Hollywood
First part of the film was promising to display some fine intricate human feelings, both characters being out of balance in different ways. The forest scenes with birds and rain were quite good, contrasting with the violent war and threat of death to both children. The island where villagers gathered and cow-stealing scenes were still promising.
But then; a super-villain a la James Bond films enters the scene and does everything to provoke hatred in watchers using very coarse methods (killing people and laughing&eating lobster,...). When film watchers see this much inhuman villainy, they are bound to be shocked. One of the starting characters reappear at the end with blood dripping down her legs, this time to serve the hatred of the watchers.
The villains beg for mercy at the end, accuse each other to escape death, lower themselves even further in the eye of the watcher. Final scene is a symbolic return to the childhood of Hitler, in her mother's arms (and not sympathetic even then) before everything. All in all; promised a lot but ended like many other Hollywood war/revenge-of-the-innocent movie except that revenge was partial here if that is what makes an art film.
À bout de souffle (1960)
Technically new but empty
I love Fellini, Sica, Ozu, Carol Reed, Satyajit Ray , Ozu, some of Bergman besides others because they penetrate into human psychology in a REAL deep sense and Kurosawa, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Lubitsch, Powell/Pressburger besides others because they tell stories beautifully but this film (along with many others from Welles, Truffaut, Bresson, and Antonioni) contains too little human material on an inflated intellectual background and can not tell them good enough. Films should appeal to our senses and feelings not to our intellect. Technique and world views can not be used to judge art, the content should be rich or at least beautifully told. otherwise music would not be an art form. Just like Citizen Kane which is technically revolutionary but devoid of human content, this film (like many others by Godard and French New Wave directors) will remain as a technical experiment only relevant for the academia in the long run. The expression of teenage boredom does not constitute art by itself no matter the philosophical or technical justification behind it
Barry Lyndon (1975)
nice but superficial
Definitely not a masterpiece if we must do justice to movies deserving the title. First of all, Lady Lyndon has absolutely no character even a superficial one. We have no notion of her feelings towards her husband and her second son. Secondly, the main character has no dilemmas, conflicts not even a soul. Thirdly, the story consists of disconnected parts without aim. Fourthly; Barry's mother reappears as a lady after disappearing as an ordinary villager at the start of he movie. There are many other weaknesses besides these. The result is a historical setting, carefully set-up scenes, some good music but no content. Can not be compared with other Kubrick movies such as The Shining and 2001
L'avventura (1960)
Overrating the director's intentions
A highly overvalued film in my opinion. Human isolation (or lack of communication) is in the technique not in the content of this film. If you are exposed to 130 minutes of empty talk by disinterested people and cold camera work, you are bound to be affected in some way. Let us put a camera in a pub where people talk about their problems to the guy sitting next to them without asking any questions for 20 minutes and you will get the same message with a stronger emotional effect. The camera work is also stuttering without a natural flow between scenes in time or space. Let us not do Fellini injustice by comparing. Watch La Strada for how deep human loneliness and isolation can be expressed without torturing the viewers.
Au hasard Balthazar (1966)
beware nouvelle vague directors with tiny nose :)
Among many possible objections to this overvalued movie; -As usual in Bresson movies, acting is awful and I can not understand how people (mostly movie critics) overlook or tolerate such a shortcoming in any movie of considerable value - "Unpunished crime" is used in many Hollywood movies to emotionally involve the audience. In this movie, injustice against both the heroine and the donkey is utilized to agitate the audience. Criterion version includes an interview with a "Bresson Critic" who confesses that the first question that he asked the leading actress was "What happened to ..."(the bad guy) which demonstrates his emotional involvement with the plot; "Is he punished for his deed?". This is a very cheap way to attract viewer's attention. - Rhythm (as in other Bresson movies) is very monotonous. It helps in the prison escape movie "A Man Escaped" because escape effort as depicted requires meticulous monotonous effort, But only there.... -Final dramatic scene and circus scene where animals seem to communicate somehow are highlights of the movie. -It attracted my attention that many "vague" directors (including Godard) have tiny nose. It is often said that creativity is associated with bigger nose :) I have seen several convincing proofs.
The Master (2012)
a film about striving to connect
The underlying theme which powers the film is the striving to connect -to earlier lives and other's lives. Both heroes are alone in similar senses. The mystic is not loved even by his son. We see no real relation between him and his family. In fact, he does not have an intimate dialog with any family member throughout the film. The plot gets a bit off-focus making the film less than a masterpiece ("poison" concept, sailor's over-aggressive behavior,...) but still it is more subtle in it's expression of loneliness than "There Will Be Blood" which portrayed a soul-less over-cold father. The last part starting with the movie theater scene is especially powerful.
Il conformista (1970)
some nice photography but utterly as empty as soft porn
It is utter nonsensical sequence of shots with beauty but without consistent character portraits, plot, elegant symbolism with meaning. Even the lighting is exaggerated with bluish and yellowish scenes irritatingly following each other with no intention of creating mood but to display a sequence of photographs. Sensual/sexual themes are freely used as cheap instruments to make an impression. Politics can be embedded into art in much better and elegant ways (see El Laberinto del Fauna for fantastic anti-fascist ideology integrated into a fine work of art). I hope the IMDb score comes down to below 7.7 in order to do justice to much better films
Pickpocket (1959)
Moral preaching but not art
Some reviewers say that "this film is not for regular film-goers but for people with a better appreciation for art", but there is only one criterion for a true work of art; an original expression appealing to the heart. Criterion, in its introduction to one of his films says: "...Robert Bresson began to implement his stylistic philosophy as a filmmaker, stripping away all inessential elements from his compositions, the dialog and the music, exacting a purity of image and sound.". He also refrained from using professional actors. We'd better watch documentaries. This film, with its "wooden" acting, lifeless dialogs, monotonous tempo, unnecessary narrating voice, stolen but frozen version of "supermensch" argument of Nietzsche (religiously criticized in Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment with PASSION -lacking 100% in this film) leaves nothing to enjoy. All to one side; an "art" film avoiding everything popular tries to display the "subtleties of pickpocketing", orchestration of gang members in operation (without success due to non-fluid editing done) "a la Hollywood"in order to add some life to this otherwise worthless drama. I have watched a few films by Bresson: "Les dames de.." lacks emotion. "Diary of a Country Priest" is advisable only to priests. "A ManEscaped" is much better since it does not preach and has a nice change of tempo at the end.
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)
Just as empty as any other Hollywood thriller
The flow of events is not natural and "fluid". There is no surprise before the last 10 minutes. I have wasted my 2 hours on a lifeless thriller and after every Hollywood movie I watch, I become more convinced that hardly something expressive or creative comes out of Hollywood. Few reasons: 1-Why the conflict between the main characters elevate to an acute level within a day is not conveyed very convincingly. 2-The "unspoken mystery" (unexplained car crash)is revealed by the musician's mother in a few sentences towards the end with no explainable motive or enthusiasm. 3-The "unknown truth" is revealed by the main character within the last few minutes without any foreshadowing or consequence. 4-The victim could be more convincing in trying to make contact (like Cary Grant matchbox scene in North by Northwest) 5-"Forgotten star" performance could be more convincing (as in Sunset Boulevard). 6- All surprises were predictable. 7- Victim's efforts to reach out were not convincing (why not cry out when the music teacher can easily hear you), 8- No human drama but just overt expressionism (Last few minutes could easily justify an intense communication or character breakdown if handled by Fellini ) Watch something by Hitchcock, Polanski instead. By the way;Joan Crawford's eyes are more expressive than Bette Davis'.
A History of Violence (2005)
Quite good first half, failing second half
The first half is quite good providing some suspense. Yes, why is he so adept at killing people? Quite convincing. But, after killing three more men, why don't we observe media reaction as before? This seems unnatural since earlier media reaction was focused on. Making love on stairs was a brilliant scene! Indeed I think that was the best scene in the movie ("Are you the man i love?" theme) The second half was unbelievably bad, something like a caricature of Cohen Brothers movie. The mob leader as pictured, should be surrounded by much more than 3-4 men. A man can not kill these men and walkout without problems. This is unconvincingly simple. "Returning home" scene is also very simplistic. I thought that the "witness protection program" alternative would be a more convincing idea to follow in the second half.
P.S. The lead actress has the eyes of Andrey Tautou.
Orphée (1950)
real art does not say "i am art".
1- A film should convey its meaning mostly not in words but moving pictures, otherwise some other form of expression must be used. If you take out the words from this film, you would be left with careless camera-work and settings (see 1931 film Nosferatu for a much careful camera work and settings- and a much better rising from the coffin scene-19 years earlier). Instead of making a film, Cocteau could publish a book of intellectual sentences decorated with still photography and we would not miss a thing."I am your death" may be an effective sentence by itself, but only in poems. If you use such sentences in a film, you must support it with visual elements in some way. 2- Many positive criticism centers on the symbolism hidden. Somebody symbolizes "poet", other one "death", we see how "poet" prefers art (that is listening to radio) to life, how "poet" is fascinated by "death".... But this is dry symbolism appealing only to the intellect but not meant to be felt. Trying to comprehend the feelings of a "poet" could be good, but instead, we are expected to appreciate his/her drama and "poetic cause". Do watchers feel any emotional contact with the "poet"? I don't think so. That is; film should appeal much much more to senses and emotions than the intellect. 3- Many other positive criticism, on the other hand, mentions innovative camera tricks, etc... You can see all of them in films from much earlier times. For example, rising from bed is done much better in Nosferatu(1931). If careless effects usage was intentional, what was the aim? Some intellectual explanation like "reversal just like from death back to life" might just make me laugh.
All in all, we should not make injustice to excellent movies which can alter our emotions by comparing them with self-indulgent appraisal of artistic pain.
Repulsion (1965)
I rarely watched worse psychological thriller
Catherine Deneuve is surely one of the most attractive actresses ever and some close-ups disclose her beauty but the film is very shallow in giving the psychological hints or building up the tension. We are not given any thought or feeling patterns to follow in order to symphatize with the character that Deneuve plays. If we call this a psychological thriller, it would be a disrespect for what Hitchcock has done. Missing from this psychological thriller are; - The underlying causes and manifestations of the psychological disorder - Facial and behavioral expressions of inner tension communicated to the viewer. - At least some feeling from the lead actress