criterionforum.org

Jean-Luc Garbo wrote:Oh, geez, and The Devils! The portrayal of priests in that one is pretty bad, too.

Does the DVD player read the top (label) side of the DVD or the bottom?

Antoine Doinel wrote:Why some people shouldn't have DVD players. From the Zip.ca forums:

Does the DVD player read the top (label) side of the DVD or the bottom?

Making a documentary about a movie maker such as Tarkovskij only means you understand nothing about his art. In fact, I believe documentary is an insult to cinema. A documentary is not a "Tarkovsky-inspired work", it's merely a commentary, a comment, words or anything else better suited for paper. The only legacies works of art have are other works of art, not comments or analysis. Tarkovskij has plenty of legacy, but none of it is comment or critics.

well!
Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

This was awful
Even for a subtitled movie (no idea why i rented it) it was brutal and nasty and why the producer reckoned 'every human should watch it', is quite beyond me, it was not a story as such and hard to follow, Main man played chess with death on the beach and then you have no idea even if he won, you assume he did, as death is nowhere to be seen for quite sometime, til he pops up again as a monk and the main man is tricked into telling him how he was winning in chess against death, so far it was just an odd story, but then you meet some jesters, who are (by all accounts) odd anyway, they have a couple who i guess are married and have a baby (who is left wondering around the field) and a single man (who seems to have it away with any woman who shows him favour) they're on stage and suddenly a procession of monks goes thru, oh my word, they're hitting each other and moaning and groaning and it is one of THE oddest things i've ever seen in my life.

They pass on thru after head monk gives a speech about the end of the world.

Then into a tavern where they start to pick on one of the jesters and it really is brutal, they make him dance while chasing him with fire, it is odd and quite frankly made me feel ill and i switched it off and sent it back.

I really have no idea how or why i ended up with this film i can only guess i thought it was something else, i'm not one to watch forgein films and now i have even more reason not to do so!

Watch at your own risk of being sick

I'm definitely a straight woman!

Crickey, look up homoerotic and here we have it...you thought Brokeback Mountain was risque...tsk...you know nothing! What have we here! Hot, sweating, thong clad Italian men chatting in Latin and frollicking with each other like gazelles in the water. Good lord, I can see every curve and groove of the men's torsoes...definitely a gay gaze...

Yes, I hear you gay men cry and not to mention the male grooming (hair/washing rather than in a really wrong way) in the shower, the morning glory prodding and whipping of the martyr, Sebastiane!

There is a plot, sort of...as we all know (not) that Saint Sebastiane was a Christian martyr who refused to fight and for his redical pacifist leanings he was whipped and tortured in the sun. Eventually, and slightly fetishistically (I may be making words up here) he is tied to a tree and his fellow over friendly Italians take shots at him with bows and arrows.

Moral of the story? Make lurve not war and you will become a martyr...and the Renaisance movement will idolise your naked arrow wounded torso...

Not a film for a sexually frustrated straight woman... :0)

Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

kidc85 wrote:

Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

That's brilliant, sounds like Godard's "Elisabeth is the one who is sick and the other one is her nurse" review of Persona.

closelyobserved wrote:I take it all back. It might be how Bresson would have to pitch it these days :

A Man Escaped: 'Man goes in. Man comes out. Mozart.'

Mouchette: 'Ugly Betty look-alike throws stones. Finds herself in deep water.'

Au Hazard..."Ill-treated donkey failing to find kind owner finally throws towel in.

It was too hard to watch! I don't like watching in B-W anyway, but this movie/tale was just to dreary to read the small sub-titles and try to follow the plot. Perhaps great Shakespearean acting, but I passed on this tedia.

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

I should have known better! Any collaberation between Herzog and Kinski is bound to be Dreck! This movie is hard to follow and often unintelligible. The dialogue from the denizens of this small town is mostly rubbish. Real people don't talk like this! Add the decidedly homely Eva Mattes into the mix and you have a decidely awful film!

Ho-hum predictable fare, but seemingly enjoyable by teenagers. Our 16 year-old appeared to find it amusing. All in all, it was a lot like all those other teen flicks of years past.

1.0 Stars
Proof that the Russians experimented with mind altering chemicals, more specifically hallucinogenic type drugs. Abstract Expressism at it best.

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

Perkins Cobb wrote:

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

Brilliant. Enpeopled is the new embiggened.

It's like dealing with religious believers and when you point out that NOTHING backs up their beliefs and EVERYTHING denies those beliefs, they'll just say "Yes! It's the wonderful power of faith!" ------- isn't remotely as clever or interesting as he fancies himself. His whole career is just a testament to the power of being born wealthy and well-connected with a father who was an excellent magazine editor. If you are an empty-headed snobbish phony who likes things because they've been pre-approved for you, as this film was by the snobbish phony Gene Siskel years ago, then, fine, LOVE this film. Then sit around listening to jazz or whatever you fancy will make you seem smarter than you are. I'll be over here, wretching in a bucket.

kaujot wrote:I can't think of a film where a character's father was a magazine editor off the top of my head.