JulesAndVincent6
mar 2019 se unió
Te damos la bienvenida a nuevo perfil
Nuestras actualizaciones aún están en desarrollo. Si bien la versión anterior de el perfil ya no está disponible, estamos trabajando activamente en mejoras, ¡y algunas de las funciones que faltan regresarán pronto! Mantente al tanto para su regreso. Mientras tanto, el análisis de calificaciones sigue disponible en nuestras aplicaciones para iOS y Android, en la página de perfil. Para ver la distribución de tus calificaciones por año y género, consulta nuestra nueva Guía de ayuda.
Distintivos5
Para saber cómo ganar distintivos, ve a página de ayuda de distintivos.
Reseñas28
Clasificación de JulesAndVincent6
"The Thin Red Line" is a 1998 film written and directed by Terrence Malick based on the 1962 novel of the same name by James Jones.
This film isn't your typical war entertainment, it's not the classic and banal glorification of war for one's homeland. It's a raw and genuine portrait of the effects of war, not only on young soldiers, but also on the elements that shape their lives.
Terrence Malick does a phenomenal job of keeping the camera as close to the events as possible, achieving a very high level of intimacy. For 170 minutes, we feel like part of the group, witnessing the physical, psychological, and spiritual deaths of individuals.
The naturalistic approach to the dialogue and direction gives the images a mystical touch. Occasionally, we get inside the soldiers' heads to find out what they're thinking. Often, they're questioning their participation in the war or simply observing and appreciating the beauty.
The Thin Red Line isn't just another war film. It doesn't seek heroism or patriotism in an absurd way; we step into the shoes of real, flesh-and-blood human beings, with doubts, fears, dreams, and hopes. Many of them cut short by the absurdity of war.
This film isn't your typical war entertainment, it's not the classic and banal glorification of war for one's homeland. It's a raw and genuine portrait of the effects of war, not only on young soldiers, but also on the elements that shape their lives.
Terrence Malick does a phenomenal job of keeping the camera as close to the events as possible, achieving a very high level of intimacy. For 170 minutes, we feel like part of the group, witnessing the physical, psychological, and spiritual deaths of individuals.
The naturalistic approach to the dialogue and direction gives the images a mystical touch. Occasionally, we get inside the soldiers' heads to find out what they're thinking. Often, they're questioning their participation in the war or simply observing and appreciating the beauty.
The Thin Red Line isn't just another war film. It doesn't seek heroism or patriotism in an absurd way; we step into the shoes of real, flesh-and-blood human beings, with doubts, fears, dreams, and hopes. Many of them cut short by the absurdity of war.
When it comes to Yorgos Lanthimos, we can leave aside the logic and the most common conventions of cinema. Within its own universe, the film works, but at times. I feel that the same logic (or the absolute lack of it) works at the beginning but as time goes by, it no longer does.
It is difficult to judge a film like this and even more so when it is divided into chapters that follow completely different stories from each other. I think what happened to me watching this film is a progressive exhaustion. At the beginning I was surprised but curious, but after two hours it already felt excessive.
Jesse Plemons and the rest of the cast end up saving the film, which ends up seeming insufficient to me and especially after a great film by the director like Poor Things, but it is certainly appreciated to have a bit of original and authentic cinema and to get away from the same stories over and over again.
It is difficult to judge a film like this and even more so when it is divided into chapters that follow completely different stories from each other. I think what happened to me watching this film is a progressive exhaustion. At the beginning I was surprised but curious, but after two hours it already felt excessive.
Jesse Plemons and the rest of the cast end up saving the film, which ends up seeming insufficient to me and especially after a great film by the director like Poor Things, but it is certainly appreciated to have a bit of original and authentic cinema and to get away from the same stories over and over again.
Even knowing the situation regarding the bad reviews from critics, I prepared myself to see Megalopolis trusting in the vision of an acclaimed and beloved Francis Ford Coppola, but I think it doesn't make us any less cinephiles or fans of his other works to admit that this is, frankly, a very bad movie.
The main problem with Megalopolis is that it wants to be bigger than the product itself allows. It's too complex a concept to be approached with complete levity. The director expects that in his overly bombastic script, we'll learn everything that happens in this great city, with its extravagant personalities, in a frenetic ten minutes.
The film thus starts off on the wrong foot, but what follows does not bring with it improvements, but rather more and more decadence. Without going into details or spoilers, an interesting and exotic cinematography with a cast that would give something to talk about is discarded for a poorly made script.
The main problem with Megalopolis is that it wants to be bigger than the product itself allows. It's too complex a concept to be approached with complete levity. The director expects that in his overly bombastic script, we'll learn everything that happens in this great city, with its extravagant personalities, in a frenetic ten minutes.
The film thus starts off on the wrong foot, but what follows does not bring with it improvements, but rather more and more decadence. Without going into details or spoilers, an interesting and exotic cinematography with a cast that would give something to talk about is discarded for a poorly made script.
Encuestas realizadas recientemente
1,306 en total de las encuestas realizadas
