|
|
Posted by Gunther Gloop on 02/14/06 19:39
Temsonic wrote:
> "Gunther Gloop" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:45c1koF5ue0oU1@individual.net...
>> To my shame, it was only today that I saw A Very Long Engagement for
>> the first time.
>> It definitely hasn't had anywhere near as much credit as it deserves.
>>
>> I wasn't crazy about Amelie to be honest, but City of Lost Children
>> is one of my favourites of all time. Most people seem to prefer
>> Delicatessen -and I agree that is lovely in lots of ways too.
>>
>> But anyway, A Very Long Engagement for me is possibly the greatest
>> World War I movie ever. It doesn't dwell on the day-to-day action
>> (or lack of it) in the trenches, but instead deals with how people
>> slowly and inevitably continued to live and exist following that war.
>> Still, it's not depressing stuff. Very funny in places, in fact.
>>
>> Looks beautiful, as to be expected.
>> The movie can be quite confusing at times, though, and the subtitles
>> on the version I saw (2-disc R2) are quite fast, adding to the
>> confusion. The story is complex, with lots of names and (for me)
>> similar-type faces cast about all over the place.
>>
>> This made it all the harder to fully appreciate the look and sound
>> of the movie, but I think it also shows how confusing and
>> disorientating it must have been for people at that time to find
>> answers to their own questions of exactly what happened the men who
>> never returned... (I mean, not that they had to read quick
>> subtitles, but that the subtitles here increase the sense of
>> confusion -not always in a bad way). Anyway... just wanted to say... If
>> you haven't already... go see it
>> now. -Kevin.
>
> I felt the same way after the first time I saw it in the cinema. I
> knew it was excellent but still felt very confused by exactly who was
> doing what to who at certain points in the film. I strongly recommend
> a second watch, as when I saw it again on DVD I was already familiar
> with certain characters and plot points and it all makes a lot more
> sense.
> E.g. in the opening scene where the soldiers are being marched
> through the trench and the narrator introduces them all, it's far
> clearer who's who and what their relationships to each other are.
> Also things like the subplots re Jodie Foster and the Tina Lombardi
> character make a lot more sense.
> It is a stunningly photographed film, and quite fittingly was
> nominated for Oscars in cinematography and art direction. Though lets
> be clear about this, it features a very nice shot of Audrey Tautou's
> arse, and I can think of no further reason why this film shouldn't be
> in everyone's collection :D
Ah but _is_ it her arse!?
Nice, er, cinematography on that scene alright though. ;)
I'll definitely be watching again soon -I'm already half-way through the
excellent director's commentary.
(Tend to watch commentaries over multiple-sittings... would never do that
when watching normally.)
-Kevin.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|