Tarkovsky has a way of capturing nature that is unparalleled. Every depiction feels expansive yet reserved. Silence is emphasized because the beauty of every frame speaks volumes. The length of each shot provides a feeling of calm catharsis, not unlike that of a Pre-Ralphaelite painting, in the sense that there is fundamental and poetic truth to be found in nature. In this film, Tarkovsky puts this to question by thrusting viewers into a world in which nature is void of truth; serving as an existential contrast to his other works.
Reviews
5 Reviews
The Image Book
(2018)
A Unique Experience.
22 February 2019
My immediate reaction to this film was: a modern, edgy and less focused film comprable to Tarkovsky's "The Mirror."
I genuinely don't know what to rate this film. I'm pretty indifferent towards it. Throughout watching, I noticed my mind regularly wandering, and, unlike how I normally respond to that observation, I let it continue to happen. I feel like Godard would appreciate that because, at the end of the day, isn't that what film is? Visual and sonic stimulus that leads to inward thought? With allowing myself to drift came a meditative quality. The difference with this film is that inward thought inspired by the screen was incredibly immediate but far less direct. I say it's indirect because there doesn't seem to be any complete or clear idea throughout the film that I could have used to inwardly springboard off of.
Like the film, this review doesn't seem grounded in much concrete thought, and I think that's an appropriate response to have. That sounds like a negative statement but it truly isn't. The whole thing felt like an unabashed visual stream of consciousness into Godard's various woes with the world in which meaning can be more drawn from the form than the substance. It was a unique experience to say the least.
I genuinely don't know what to rate this film. I'm pretty indifferent towards it. Throughout watching, I noticed my mind regularly wandering, and, unlike how I normally respond to that observation, I let it continue to happen. I feel like Godard would appreciate that because, at the end of the day, isn't that what film is? Visual and sonic stimulus that leads to inward thought? With allowing myself to drift came a meditative quality. The difference with this film is that inward thought inspired by the screen was incredibly immediate but far less direct. I say it's indirect because there doesn't seem to be any complete or clear idea throughout the film that I could have used to inwardly springboard off of.
Like the film, this review doesn't seem grounded in much concrete thought, and I think that's an appropriate response to have. That sounds like a negative statement but it truly isn't. The whole thing felt like an unabashed visual stream of consciousness into Godard's various woes with the world in which meaning can be more drawn from the form than the substance. It was a unique experience to say the least.
Roma
(2018)
Roma.
16 January 2019
Quietly and commonly tragic. That's where this film's beauty comes from. However, I would say that there is a degree of cinemanarrative dissonance in that the story being told is one of viscerality, triumph and sorrow but the visual language paints a different picture. Cinematically, the film has beautifully lit shots, masterful camera work and a silky slow pace. It is in this juxtaposition that the film falls short for me. The text and the visuals tell different stories, making the audience feel disconnected from the protagonist. But maybe that disconnection was intentionally done, asking viewers to question their perspective on the everyday tragedy that is so painfully common.
The House That Jack Built
(2018)
We need more films like this.
15 January 2019
Films that focus so heavily on aesthetic, raw emotional stimulation and defying expectations, films that experiment with every aspect of the medium and utilize unconventional possibilities of it to emphasize points and pose deeply personal questions... Films like these give me hope that there is still more to discover in art.
Brilliant
17 November 2014
Birdman is a film that left me feeling truly raw as I walked out of the cinema the first night I saw it, in fact, I have been turning it over in my mind for the past two weeks since I witnessed the (obvious) best film of the year, picking apart the beautiful details. Now, there are only a few movies I will watch over again within the same year, but I saw Birdman in the cinema for a second time a week after my first viewing and bought it on Blu-Ray.
The cinematography is flawless, even revolutionary. Each scene seamlessly stitched together with passionate craftsmanship that can only be accomplished by cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, who recently won an Oscar for his work on Gravity.
Director Alejandro González Iñárritu has been quoted as saying that he intended for Birdman to be "a cinematic desert." And that is being modest. This movie truly feels like a breath of fresh air in the film industry because of its creativity and originality. Now, I have only given five other films a 10 out of 10 rating, this being the sixth. Those films include The Godfather, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Pulp Fiction and The Big Lebowski.
The technical aspect of this film is obviously extraordinarily noteworthy, but how is the acting? In one word. Radiant. Michael Keaton gives the performance of a lifetime as a washed up actor who's ego is far beyond what it should be. Emma Stone, Ed Norton and Zach Galifianakis have also never been better. In fact, they are all Oscar Worthy, except for maybe Zach Galifianakis, but that's only due to his abbreviated screen time.
I also loved how it touched on the expectations of movie goers today and their opinions on what they want to see when watching a blockbuster film,as well as film critics and how all they ever do is use big unnecessary words to avoid actually reviewing films and look for a good quotes to put on the posters and DVD covers.
I predict that this film will age very well and hopefully resonate in the thoughts of moviegoers and critics alike. And there is no reason why Birdman shouldn't sweep the 2015 Academy Awards.
The cinematography is flawless, even revolutionary. Each scene seamlessly stitched together with passionate craftsmanship that can only be accomplished by cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, who recently won an Oscar for his work on Gravity.
Director Alejandro González Iñárritu has been quoted as saying that he intended for Birdman to be "a cinematic desert." And that is being modest. This movie truly feels like a breath of fresh air in the film industry because of its creativity and originality. Now, I have only given five other films a 10 out of 10 rating, this being the sixth. Those films include The Godfather, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Pulp Fiction and The Big Lebowski.
The technical aspect of this film is obviously extraordinarily noteworthy, but how is the acting? In one word. Radiant. Michael Keaton gives the performance of a lifetime as a washed up actor who's ego is far beyond what it should be. Emma Stone, Ed Norton and Zach Galifianakis have also never been better. In fact, they are all Oscar Worthy, except for maybe Zach Galifianakis, but that's only due to his abbreviated screen time.
I also loved how it touched on the expectations of movie goers today and their opinions on what they want to see when watching a blockbuster film,as well as film critics and how all they ever do is use big unnecessary words to avoid actually reviewing films and look for a good quotes to put on the posters and DVD covers.
I predict that this film will age very well and hopefully resonate in the thoughts of moviegoers and critics alike. And there is no reason why Birdman shouldn't sweep the 2015 Academy Awards.
Tell Your Friends