Winona

I rarely rate films this highly, but Winona got under my skin in a way few others ever have. Four outstanding actors play young women who have come together on an isolated beach for an unspecified reason. They swim, talk, play, read. Mostly they spin tales of a house overlooking the bay, of a car that seems to be observing them, and they imagine themselves the subjects of a film.

Over the course of the meandering first hour we become aware there is more that links these women than short-sightedness and a love of Woody Allen films. They are unnaturally close, intimate but not in a sexual way. Twice, maybe three times over the course of the day, heartbreak spills out into their lives. We feel there is something unsaid. Some might guess the ending - the clues are all there - but I didn't try, and it devastated me. I am not emotional as a rule, but I was so involved with this group, so comfortable with them, that the final scenes had me in tears. Even then, though, this quartet made me laugh with an insider joke about copyright (funny even if you have never encountered Greek bootleg CDs / DVDs).

Good cinema takes us out of ourselves and places us in a different world. Winona made me one of this group, and I am glad of the day I spent with them.

Nonsensical dialogues, unbelievably slow and almost like watching a (bad) Lanthimos film. The acting was decent - maybe even it was quite limited due to weak plot.

Then you have the fact that the movie feels EXTREMELY pretentious. What I mean by that is at first that it's filmed in 2019, on 16mm film. Well ok, it's possible but to prove what?

Also it's completely unclear when does the film take place. Is it the 80's, the 90's or in 2019? We see an analog camera, a very old radio/cassette player, but at the same time a modern house on the hill. If it's set in 2019, what's with all this hipster aesthetic with the retro glasses and the retro tech?

To sum up the steps: Step 1: Get some young pretty actresses Step 3: Make them memorise all Woody Allen movies (insert Allen tribute here) Step 2: Let them (mainly) improvise Step 4: Add a few almost sexual and other provocative scenes Step 5: ???

Step 6: Profit

Clearly a film made on a budget - nothing wrong with that - but it just feels that it doesn't have what it takes to make you get absorbed.

Having a recognised director father does not mean that anyone can also become a director as well - it doesn't work like any other family business.

The movie as a whole is not bad, the director though tried his best to do something a little bit unusual, a little bit confusing, i dont know exactly how to describe it without spoiling the movie but i got the feeling that it was tiring. The idea behind the movie is very good, especially in a emotional and psychological dimension. The problem for me is that the director overdid it with some lines and some scenes which were totally unnecessary, didnt help the plot they were used just to be used. A typical example of Art only for Art. Also this confusion between weird lines and weird scenes makes it hard for normal person to understand the movie, which is a pity because the movie as is said is good, but in a way it selfdestructs!

Fought to stay awake through it.

Seemed like mediocre writers generated large volumes of inane, vapid dialogue hoping that some it would be good enough for the final script and all of it got used, even though almost none of it was any good.

"Winona" (2019) is one of those films that you have a strong suspicion they will be really bad right from the first few minutes....and they don't let you down. Loaded with cacophonous music and nonsensical dialogue, the film plays like a bad imitation of Lanthimos, or maybe a failed experimental work of the 1960s. And at the end it tries to wring genuine emotion, which is very hard to do out of something so - deliberately - stilted and posè. At least the four women range from attractive (the redhead) to gorgeous (the one in the red bikini top), which, along with the secluded-beach setting, are the only things keeping you watching, really. 0.5 out of 4.