IMDb रेटिंग
7.4/10
18 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA romance between young Parisians, shown through a series of vignettes.A romance between young Parisians, shown through a series of vignettes.A romance between young Parisians, shown through a series of vignettes.
- पुरस्कार
- 3 जीत और कुल 3 नामांकन
Evabritt Strandberg
- Elle (la femme dans le film)
- (as Eva-Britt Strandberg)
Yves Afonso
- L'homme qui se suicide
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Henri Attal
- L'autre lecteur du bouquin porno
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Mickey Baker
- Record producer
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Brigitte Bardot
- Brigitte Bardot
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Antoine Bourseiller
- Le partenaire de Brigitte Bardot
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Chantal Darget
- La femme dans le métro
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Françoise Hardy
- La compagne de l'officier américain
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Med Hondo
- L'homme dans le métro
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Elsa Leroy
- Mlle 19 ans de 'Mademoiselle Age Tendre'
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Dominique Zardi
- Le lecteur du bouquin porno
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
कहानी
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाDue to the portrayal of youth and sex, the film was prohibited to persons under 18 in France - "the very audience it was meant for," griped Jean-Luc Godard.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटContrary to what Paul and his friend decide in the laundry mat sequence, Godard points out just before the credits that the word "féminin" does in fact contain another word: "fin" [end].
- कनेक्शनEdited into Bande-annonce de 'Masculin féminin' (1966)
- साउंडट्रैकLaisse-Moi
Music by Jean-Jacques Debout
Lyrics by Jean-Jacques Debout
Performed by Chantal Goya
Editions de RCA
फीचर्ड रिव्यू
This film was a chore to watch. I've never had to pause a movie so many times, taking me three days and a significant amount of perseverance to get through it. The primary issue lies in the fact that the film offers little more than dialogues between boys and girls, which, for the most part, came across as uninteresting and irrelevant.
In dialogue-driven films, it is crucial to have an engaging story in the background to maintain the audience's interest. This film, however, fails in that regard. The background story is not only incoherent but also ambiguous, making it hard to follow and even harder to care about. The discussions among characters fail to strike a chord, often feeling out of touch and unrelatable.
The dialogues in this film lack the ability to transcend their era, feeling stuck in the sixties without offering any timeless insights or universal themes. As a result, the conversations feel dated and fail to engage a contemporary audience. This detachment from current relevance makes it difficult for viewers to connect with the film on a deeper level.
A successful dialogue-driven film needs more than just conversations; it requires a compelling narrative that gives context to those dialogues, characters that are well-developed and relatable, and themes that resonate across different times and cultures. Unfortunately, this film falls short on all these fronts. The dialogues are flat and fail to develop the characters or advance the plot in a meaningful way. The characters remain one-dimensional, and their interactions do little to reveal any depth or complexity.
In essence, this film exemplifies how a dialogue-driven movie can go wrong. Without engaging dialogue, a coherent background story, well-developed characters, and relevant themes, it becomes a tedious experience. The film's failure to connect with the audience on any significant level results in a viewing experience that is more frustrating than enjoyable.
To summarize, this film is an example of missed opportunities and poor execution. Its dialogues are neither engaging nor relevant, the story is muddled and unclear, and the characters lack depth. The themes do not resonate with modern viewers, and the pacing makes the film feel interminable. Watching it felt more like a test of endurance than a form of entertainment. For a dialogue-driven film to succeed, it must excel in areas where this film has unfortunately fallen flat.
In dialogue-driven films, it is crucial to have an engaging story in the background to maintain the audience's interest. This film, however, fails in that regard. The background story is not only incoherent but also ambiguous, making it hard to follow and even harder to care about. The discussions among characters fail to strike a chord, often feeling out of touch and unrelatable.
The dialogues in this film lack the ability to transcend their era, feeling stuck in the sixties without offering any timeless insights or universal themes. As a result, the conversations feel dated and fail to engage a contemporary audience. This detachment from current relevance makes it difficult for viewers to connect with the film on a deeper level.
A successful dialogue-driven film needs more than just conversations; it requires a compelling narrative that gives context to those dialogues, characters that are well-developed and relatable, and themes that resonate across different times and cultures. Unfortunately, this film falls short on all these fronts. The dialogues are flat and fail to develop the characters or advance the plot in a meaningful way. The characters remain one-dimensional, and their interactions do little to reveal any depth or complexity.
In essence, this film exemplifies how a dialogue-driven movie can go wrong. Without engaging dialogue, a coherent background story, well-developed characters, and relevant themes, it becomes a tedious experience. The film's failure to connect with the audience on any significant level results in a viewing experience that is more frustrating than enjoyable.
To summarize, this film is an example of missed opportunities and poor execution. Its dialogues are neither engaging nor relevant, the story is muddled and unclear, and the characters lack depth. The themes do not resonate with modern viewers, and the pacing makes the film feel interminable. Watching it felt more like a test of endurance than a form of entertainment. For a dialogue-driven film to succeed, it must excel in areas where this film has unfortunately fallen flat.
- ahmadniazrahman
- 7 जून 2024
- परमालिंक
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Masculine Feminine?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Masculine Feminine
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Scandic Hotel Continental, Norrmalm, स्टॉकहोम, स्टॉकहोम लान, स्वीडन(sequence of film seen at the cinema)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $2,00,380
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $26,855
- 13 फ़र॰ 2005
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $2,05,543
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 50 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें