Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Senna (2010)
8/10
Sublime but...
20 September 2011
This film's style is as sublime as its protagonist, but that perhaps is its flaw.

The film is more a piece of reverence for a man who attempted and accomplished, sublime performance, perhaps even something greater. This is where the director wants our minds, and he's not wrong for that, but then the film is more about him and his idea, than about Senna.

I read up on Senna after seeing the film and while nothing shockingly contradictory was revealed, some of the human nuances that would have rounded out his character were left out of this narrative. Instead, all the story's conflict is external, and he, the victim.

In truth, he did bring many problems on himself. He was a fierce competitor. There is no blame here, but the film just didn't show a flaw in the man, which we all know is unrealistic.

It also romanticized the idea that because he was Brazilian, he had hardships making his way in the European-centric formula 1 world. Brazil, in fact, had many great drivers before Senna. Therefore, it was more convenient to twist things this way to the director's fantasy of life, than painting a more complex and flawed man in Senna.

Without these issues, I would have voted 10.

Still, beautiful film, beautiful human being.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thor (2011)
1/10
Offers absolutely nothing.
13 May 2011
This film was an amalgamation of every "superhero" cliché from start to finish. It did absolutely nothing for me or my girlfriend. Seems like a script by committee situation. An artless product by all accounts.

The only redeeming quality was the lead actor. Despite having a strong cast and a respected director, the film delivered Hollywood triteness at its worst.

I'm not sure why Hollywood penguins insist on making products terrible. No matter how many trend data sheets they sift through, a good story is not a sum of popular topics or a mix-and-match of proved techniques. A good story has a voice of its own and this had none. Branagh obviously didn't fight hard enough to get anything valuable here. It shows no effort. As I said, artless.

I only speak so harshly here because in 2011 there's no excuse to spend 150mill and this is your end product.
84 out of 173 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tetro (2009)
6/10
Doesn't work...
21 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
As a lover of Coppola's Great films, I'll watch anything he does, no matter how many misfires he produces. And I hate to admit it, but for me, Tetro was a complete misfire. I'm actually surprised at all the strong reviews and I wonder if people saw the same movie as me.

The film's Art House all the way. Black and white, staged like a play, BIG Greek and literary themes driving the story, to obvious devices like a cat named "Problema", a man in a cast until his brother arrives, symbolically driving the character arcs and story.

Coppola obvious loves theater. The film is filmed with theater pieces throughout the storyline and the movie itself feels like it belonged on stage.

This is all good if it works, but it didn't. The film was redundant, the characters cliché's, the dialogue uninteresting....and the acting of the two male leads was completely undramatic. Nothing against anyone personally, but to me, Vincent Gallo is just not a good actor. He's personae. Coppola failed because he cast an actor who looks and feels exactly like the self-indulgent "artist" that Coppola was trying to characterize in Tetro. The result was that there was nothing fresh in this film, especially in the characters. (The lead actress was strong, and she overshadowed both the men on screen.) I think Coppola is rediscovering his craft, and it's starting with story telling. The film is extremely ambitious as it tries to tackle the father and son dynamic for the 1000th time in literary history. It's hard to forgive, or miss, sub-par and redundant writing in this genre and Coppola unfortunately brought nothing fresh to the literary table. What he did bring fresh, if anything, was art house to the American public, but unfortunately the film isn't strong enough to break into mainstream America. Not even close. The film attempts to be serious and viewers who see Coppola's name over a black and white dramatic piece about fathers and sons will pretense a masterpiece...just because. But it's not a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination.

Imagine the best of American black and white films that were either derived from the stage or a homage to plays and classical dramatic writing. Tetro could be A Streetcar Named Desire if it worked. But it's not even close. Streetcar had acting, it had characters, it had fresh dialogue, it had real drama. Nothing in Tetro could measure to these standards - not even the self-conscious cinematography. The main male actors bring nothing to life in this film because they don't know how to and because the writing gets in the way. Anyone who thinks this film is great, please go back and watch these movies and remember what great character driven dramatic cinema should be. Let's not reward on intention, but on execution.

Coppola should have rewritten this script for another year before he filmed it and recast it with serious actors (V Gallo doesn't even read scripts he receives, he just reads his parts). He would have achieved something much better than what he did here.

Everyone bitches about the studio system, but, I hate to say it, Coppola was at his best when he worked with the talent the studio system affords and attracts.

As a human being, good for him that he can make films on his own terms, all the power to him. But, go deeper next time Francis and perfect your script before you shoot it and find real actors to pull it off.
44 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed