Winona

I wanted to add extra stars to Winona, the movie... People in the comments are getting a bit harsh. Sometimes the question is, why do you watch movies? Personally, I crave emotions-and Winona really gave me that! Some people comment that all of this was nonsense... but so is our everyday life: a break from routine, a form of exploration, a question and, at the same time, an answer to our identity. I think this movie is pure, not pretentious. More than that, movies are not meant to give us a precise mirror of our lives, but to give us reasons to daydream and expand our headspaces. Also, I believe that before writing a critique, it's better to have a full picture of the filmography and the artist's work.✨✨✨✨

"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.

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.

Pretentious lines, soulless recital of dialogue (which may perhaps work in Giorgos Lanthimos' films but in this case it just feels cheap), pop-culture references and name-dropping just for the sake of it. Just because the colours look pretty it doesn't necessarily mean that this films conveys the atmosphere and spirit of a lazy summer day. Just because something is shot on 16mm film, it doesn't equal great filmmaking. Definitely not worth sitting through this so you can get a semblance of plot for the last 15 or so minutes.

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!