russogerard
Joined Jun 2006
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews2
russogerard's rating
First I would like to mention some of my favorite films, all of which have to do with human misery: Antonioni's "Eclipse," Bergman's "The Silence" and "Persona," Richardson's "Mademoiselle," Anderson's "This Sporting Life," Polanski's "Repulsion," and some which are so morbid they are difficult for many people to handle: Almodovar's "Matador," McNaughton's "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer," Haneke's "Funny Games," Noe's "Irreversible." I know what art is when I'm looking at it, and I'm not afraid of sick characters or unsavory subjects.
"Naked" is a pretentious, meaningless film. It is an excuse for a lot of neurotic actors to over-act (very self-consciously), and to chew up the scenery in attempts to impress us with how gritty and down and dirty they are able and willing to become while practicing their "craft." The most sickening example of this is seen in the final, ridiculously protracted shot, in which we have to watch David Thewlis hobbling toward the camera with that asinine expression on his face, after so many scenes in which we've had to watch him and the other "artists" in this film mugging and hamming it up ad-nauseum. I wanted to scream out: "I am NOT impressed!" Thewlis is not a great actor. His performance is that of a pathetic man who clearly didn't get enough attention as a child.
"Naked" is a pretentious, meaningless film. It is an excuse for a lot of neurotic actors to over-act (very self-consciously), and to chew up the scenery in attempts to impress us with how gritty and down and dirty they are able and willing to become while practicing their "craft." The most sickening example of this is seen in the final, ridiculously protracted shot, in which we have to watch David Thewlis hobbling toward the camera with that asinine expression on his face, after so many scenes in which we've had to watch him and the other "artists" in this film mugging and hamming it up ad-nauseum. I wanted to scream out: "I am NOT impressed!" Thewlis is not a great actor. His performance is that of a pathetic man who clearly didn't get enough attention as a child.
"Psyche '59" opened at an art theatre in New York City in 1964. Receiving lukewarm reviews, it closed quickly, and was then used as a co-feature in neighborhood theatres. I consider it a near-masterpiece. Starring Patricia Neal, Curt Jurgens, and Samantha Eggar, it is a spellbinding study of a woman suffering from hysterical blindness, her sex addict husband, and her younger sister, who it seems was sexually imposed-upon at a young age, and who is both cruelly nymphomaniacal and masochistic as a result. This film was clearly ahead of its time.
The screenplay by Julian Zimet, from a novel by Francoise des Ligneris, is a finely-nuanced piece of work.
Alexander Singer might be considered a great director of films about women's issues, as well as a great director of actresses. Consider his direction of Lola Albright in "A Cold Wind in August" three years before, and his direction of Lana Turner in "Love Has Many Faces" the year following. The fact that all three of these films were failures is clearly the reason why Singer is not widely known ("Love Has" having failed simply because its critics and audiences could not appreciate its deliberately melodramatic style).
The cinematography in "Psyche '59" is outstanding. One shot, in which the camera manages to look upward towards Samantha Eggar, while she is lying on the sand, took my breath away. Within the context of the scene, this use of strange camera angle was intensely effective, and not at all pretentious. Whether it was Singer's idea, or that of cinematographer Walter Lassally, I guess I'll never know.
The only flaw in "Psyche '59" is that the actress in the role of the grandmother seems too young for the part.
The screenplay by Julian Zimet, from a novel by Francoise des Ligneris, is a finely-nuanced piece of work.
Alexander Singer might be considered a great director of films about women's issues, as well as a great director of actresses. Consider his direction of Lola Albright in "A Cold Wind in August" three years before, and his direction of Lana Turner in "Love Has Many Faces" the year following. The fact that all three of these films were failures is clearly the reason why Singer is not widely known ("Love Has" having failed simply because its critics and audiences could not appreciate its deliberately melodramatic style).
The cinematography in "Psyche '59" is outstanding. One shot, in which the camera manages to look upward towards Samantha Eggar, while she is lying on the sand, took my breath away. Within the context of the scene, this use of strange camera angle was intensely effective, and not at all pretentious. Whether it was Singer's idea, or that of cinematographer Walter Lassally, I guess I'll never know.
The only flaw in "Psyche '59" is that the actress in the role of the grandmother seems too young for the part.