Abbas Kiarostami: Legendary Iranian filmmaker world renowned for making artistic cinema. What do you expect from somebody of that calibre when you watch a movie of his for the first time? Certainly something cinematic ally classy and encyclopaedic, and inspiring for an aspiring filmmaker. But if you get a pseudo show of art, it is discouraging.
The film's cinematography is brilliant. The reddish tone given throughout to maintain the graveness of the matter, and the greenish tone at the end to depict wellness, is excellent! Of course, the director has due contribution in it.
Homayon Ershadi has done such naturalistic acting that it is a lesson of acting for actors and directors. This is mainly the genius of Kiarostami. Most of the scenes were improvised, as mentioned in the trivia section.
Kiarostami has maintained the tempo of the film in a very beautiful way. His use of voice overs is unique. But most of all, the best part about the film is the way he reveals characters' faces at the climax of a conversation/scene. He is a directors' director.
Now getting down to business. The movie is too slow. Such long shots with so many pans and tilts, so many similar looking shots, too many voice overs, the monotony of a car just driving around the hills, same angle of camera inside car etc. The saddest part of the film is when the protagonist leaves home in the night and is standing on the hill. It's so dark that you can't see a thing. And God! That scene is so long. Why do you take a shot if you aren't showing anything? But the let down of the film is the ending. It is a smart move, but it seems contrived. Seems like he ran out of ideas, or may be his character base wasn't strong enough to give it a better conclusion.
Yet, I'd say this movie is a learning experience for a student of cinema. But an average audience would be wasting their time/money.
The film's cinematography is brilliant. The reddish tone given throughout to maintain the graveness of the matter, and the greenish tone at the end to depict wellness, is excellent! Of course, the director has due contribution in it.
Homayon Ershadi has done such naturalistic acting that it is a lesson of acting for actors and directors. This is mainly the genius of Kiarostami. Most of the scenes were improvised, as mentioned in the trivia section.
Kiarostami has maintained the tempo of the film in a very beautiful way. His use of voice overs is unique. But most of all, the best part about the film is the way he reveals characters' faces at the climax of a conversation/scene. He is a directors' director.
Now getting down to business. The movie is too slow. Such long shots with so many pans and tilts, so many similar looking shots, too many voice overs, the monotony of a car just driving around the hills, same angle of camera inside car etc. The saddest part of the film is when the protagonist leaves home in the night and is standing on the hill. It's so dark that you can't see a thing. And God! That scene is so long. Why do you take a shot if you aren't showing anything? But the let down of the film is the ending. It is a smart move, but it seems contrived. Seems like he ran out of ideas, or may be his character base wasn't strong enough to give it a better conclusion.
Yet, I'd say this movie is a learning experience for a student of cinema. But an average audience would be wasting their time/money.