Written & Directed By: Jean-Pierre Dardenne & Luc Dardenne
Cinematography: Alain Marcoen
Editor: Marie-Helene Dozo
Cast: Arta Dobroshi, Jeremie Renier, Fabrizio Rongione, Alban Ukaj, Morgan Marinne, Olivier Gourmet, Anton Yakovlev, Gregori Manoukov
Lorna, a young Albanian woman living in Belgium, has her sights set on opening a snack bar with her lover Sokol. In order to do so, she has become involved in a scam conducted by Fabio, a gangster.
————————————————————————-
A good old fashioned film noir. it’s from explorers the fringe of a criminal underground and has the groundwork of a film noir that plays dark and realistic.
Then, when you think something positive is going to happen in the film, it reveals itself only to sing deeper into the darkness.
Here the femme fatale is the anti-hero of the film. She’s trying to do what she needs to do but isn’t as coldhearted as she would have everyone believe.
She is caught in a situation that should be easy for her to handle which morphs into a no-win one.
What makes this film feel different is that for all the traditional roles the characters play like the mole the mark the femme fatale the mobster the film doesn’t treat or show them as cliché or clueless. It makes them full three-dimensional characters
Wish I could say the film is a Home-run, but it’s not that it isn’t worth watching and the first film by the Dardenne brothers That Is really enjoyable in quite some time. As one haven’t really like any of their films that much since ROSETTA.
Though this one lends itself more to genre then their other films and seems a bit more cruel. then their usual humanist films.
Kostis is a 40-year-old doctor that finds himself in the small island of Antiparos, in order to take over the local clinic. His whole life and routine will turn upside down and fall apart when he meets an international group of young and beautiful tourists and he falls in love with Anna, a 19-year-old goddess.
————————————————————————
This film is truly disturbing. This is one of those films you watch and observe rather than watch for entertainment. As this starts off simple and then becomes a nightmare.
As it seems to be almost a middle aged fantasy that takes a wrong turn. Simply as the character takes it too far and instead of being loose and treating it as flirtation. He expects real results and lifetime commitment. Even as he should know better.
It can look like the you get characters are evil, but while annoying they are more innocent. As they Don’t know their own strength and whip at times taking advantage of the main character. They Don’t know that they are building a monster or playing with a bear so to speak.
As they take advantage of his vulnerability at first.
On one level it be can see hey he falls or is seduced by the 21 year old Anna who is gorgeous and practically a goddess to him actually is willing to show him attention. Who treats him nicer then any of her friends, but it soon becomes evident he is more only being nice to them to get closer to her. She even gives him a chance and he blows it a bit and treats it too nonchalant for him. That is when he b owns territorial
Though we see him as lonely and the island he works for doesn’t offer many singles of any age. Though in the summer season there are mroe age appropriate women for him to pursue. He becomes obsessed with the one. Even as he manages to get with someone else physically. He fixates on Anna
The film seems to set out to make the audience uncomfortable. As it increasingly becomes more cringe worthy, awkward and volatile as to goes along. Especially in the second half.
Everytime you think you know what’s going to happen. The film throws a realistic twist. At first everything seems a bit awkward more because he is a shy introvert. So the first half of the film you feel a bit embarrassed for the main character.
Then the second half becomes a full psychological thriller horror film for him. A she breaks down and seems to become an alcoholic and lose touch with his responsibilities and sanity.
At first you have some sympathy for him, but soon he bypasses all of that. Not even listening when others warn him. Like the townfolk.
Now the kids aren’t innocent, but Don’t deserve their fates. As after all they are young and Don’t necessarily know any better nor the power they have over him. As it seems they were using him. But also maybe Had some kind of feelings for him no, never any loyalty.
As One can admit. You can see why he becomes obsessed with the young lady, but also he should know better and practice better judgement. As even when he gets his chance his fantasy he blows it. So to speak, though that seems to be the point of momentum as he has gotten a taste and wants more chances to partake like an addict.
Though obviously he takes it too far
You have hope, but a single action ruins, everything, and in the middle of his downfall he doesn’t quite realize it’s happening to him.
The film has the character start out innocently and then ruining everything Essentially for a fling with a Tourist, and turning his back on the town people, he knows, and is surrounded by an actually support him. That is the depth of his loneliness. We do get hints of a dark past. When he runs into an old colleague. which should be a kind of warning that he has serious issues that are not being talked about or shown, but he still should know better.
The last scenes are especially disturbing where he finally seems to remeber who he is.
Hated the ending. Though it seems to bring him back to reality of what his oath is supposed to be, helping people and trying to heal their wounds.
The film becomes a character study as the nice guy character who he should be rooting for, becomes the villain of the film, which makes it all the more shocking and scary.
The title of the film can be taken as a metaphor since they are on a tropical island in the summer or you go to the beach you wanna get a nice tan, but you have to be careful when it comes to tanning to little no one sees any difference too much end up getting burned. So you have to find that right balance in between and unfortunately for the main character, he doesn’t maintain that balance
This is definitely a conversation starter and a film her to dissect and talk about with others but it’s also a cruel movie and what some might call. A feel bad film.
Cast: Vittoria Scognamiglio, Jacques Nolot, Sebastien Vala, Arden Bajraktaraj, Olivier Torres, Lionel Goldstein, Frederic Longbois, Fouad Zeraoui
A tale set in a decaying Parisian porn theatre, where within its dark confines, male patrons–soldiers, transvestites, married men–regularly engage in anonymous sex acts. In the ticket booth of the theatre, a wise Italian woman serves as benevolent gatekeeper, observing–but never judging–the proceedings occurring under her watchful eyes. One day, one of her regulars engages her in a conversation that leads to an unusual friendship, as these two worldly souls share their common experiences.
————————————————————————
The film takes place entirely in a porn theater hence the title focuses on the day-to-day actions mostly of this theater
This French language film is similar to SERBIS and even GOODBYE DRAGON INN.
It revolves around a movie theater, its workers, and its audience. We get to see the ins and outs of the theaters, literally as well as the various patrons, most of whom are recurring, who all have their own little side stories that we get into but don’t overtake the narrative.
The only difference about this film other than the other two is this one has a lot more homosexual sex involved throughout it simulated but it’s basically where men are watching a straight adult feature, but hooking up with one another as well as male prostitutes, cross-dressing, prostitutes, and one another.
Though the film does go for shock and intimacy throughout.
The film will show interactions and even some sexes, but then become very philosophical about the life experiences of the characters
As we get to know the audience and the regulars, as well as the staff, which is truly only the projection is the owner who works at the ticket booth
The interactions are really where the interest of the film comes in. It’s the meat of the story.
The film displays openness, and honesty though what will throw some off is the lack at times of sexual scruples and probably the action
Even though they’re watching a movie, where they seek to hide their kinks to only be kind and open to those who are strangers in the dark like them. We are the voyeurs during all of this and spying on them at their most vulnerable
The film at times can be perverse human touching and sad. It is not for the prudish or repressed and especially not for homophobic.
The film offers an interesting dynamic of how the owner hates and treats the homeless who she sees as junkies and lazy, but is nurturing to her audience
The film offers a glimpse of how the customers are treated by the outside world when the cops come in to check that nothing illicit is going on how they are treated and the comments they make to them and about them.
So that this theater is not only a hotspot but its kind of universe or considering it’s not that big maybe just its planet . As is this offers plenty of glimpses, but essentially seems more about representation and an ensemble cast.
A Testament to a location in the souls that inhabited that helped define it
Story By: Pablo Pares, Hernan Saez and Hernan Moyano
Cinematography: Matias Rispau
Editor: Leonardo Vitullo
Cast: Maca Suarez, Aldana Ruberto, Sofia Rossi, Anahi Politi, Flor Moreno, Rodrigo Ferreyra, Amanda Nara, Diego Prinz
A struggling all-girl rock band kicks off a new tour, hoping to rekindle their popularity. Things are off to a bad start, however, when they show up to their first gig to find the town deserted. After they catch the attention of horrors from beyond our reality, the band realizes that being forgotten by their fans is the least of their problems.
——————————————
Don’t let the title fool you as It’s the name of the all female band who make up the leads of this film, but just like the name ItMs
Meant to provoke but is pretty basic. Similarly this film wants you to believe it will be provocative and ends up not really being that but offers an appearance of it.
An annoying part of horror films is that when strange things happen the characters act like they have never seen a horror film or that the genre doesn’t exist
Which is why they always think there is some explanation that will solve everything and while no one. Is asking for them to be experts as this is there reality. It would be nice that horror be acknowledged as existing and either mroe questioning or realization that this is
ore out of the ordinary
I wanted to like this film as it has plenty of splatter, gore and other disgusting visuals and qualities (not that is what I look for in my horror movies) but the film is disappointing
As it offers very little to find interest in and comes across as a typical otherworldly zombie film with less action, yet very colorful. That offers plenty of gore and would be considered nasty because of it.
For all the color and wildness the rock band aspect should add to the film. It stays rather tame and uneventful. Especially when there seems to be a scene to highlight them doing drugs.
Yet there is never really too many scenes that might make any of the characters feel like this might all be some kind of hallucination due to its
Less original than expected. Where you wish there was more action.
Didn’t filmmakers expect to get by on effects and shock? It comes across as very 1999’s or even early 2000’s
It feels like a better funded foreign Trom studios film only without any real exploitation other than the title. With a little evil dead thrown in, but mainly a science fiction course in horror 102. It tries to offer some original science fiction fantasy elements. Though doesn’t necessarily save it or make the audience garner more interest.
Though while it is obviously B-Movie material with a d grade production other than special effects. This is defitnely the type that would have gone straight to home video in the past. Yet offers none of the guilty pleasures of those productions.
In the end you really Don’t care too much because you barely know the characters except one who exclusively has flashbacks to what keep her going
A film that doesn’t really feel like it needed to be made. As you wonder what it really has to offer or what story it has to tell. As it offers nothing different so it just feels like an unoriginal copy. It’s a movie of filler and not even a satisfying popcorn flick
Written By: Percy Adlon and Gwendolyn Von Ambasser
Cinematography: Johanna Heer
Editor: Jean-Claude Piroue
Cast: Marianne Sagebrecht, Elsi Gulp, Toni Berger, Manuela Denz, Will Spindler, Hans Stadlbauer, Meret Burger
An asocial, obese German woman lives in a large city. Unfortunately, despite her kind and intelligent personality, she has had a lot of trouble making a connection with people, until she gets a crush on a handsome subway conductor.
Though this film sounds more modern about an older person taking care of a beautiful younger person financially and them doing the ssmenin return socially and physically. The same happens here but it is more romantic and emotional. Same title different meaning. Oh how the times have changed
Throughout this film I had the feeling that I had seen this film before. As it constantly felt familiar though I I had only learned of this film in the previous weeks. Then by the end a particular scene jogged my memory. I didn’t see this film exactly, but a televison movie name BABYCAKES starring Ricki Lake and Craig Sheffer. Which o found out was a remake of this film.
Only with a happier and less ambiguous ending. As this original is definitely more sexual and a bit more twisted, but still sweet and more direct.
As this film goes the artistic route in It’s stark lighting and camera work that seems to go a bit haywire at times in romantic scenes. I am shocked this film hasn’t become a cult film with a following.
The lead played by Marianne Sagebrecht comes off as lonely and sad but also smart and determined. As we watch in her determined pursuit of her crush. Who seems like an epiphany to her one day.
Their romance takes up most of the film. As they find salvation in one another. Even though he is married. Most of the scenes are of their courtship and romance and some sex. The main difference between the movies other than country of origin is in the remake she has a best friend who is jealous and kind of pulls the rug out from under the romance.
The main attraction of this film is that the female is older and overweight. Making her seem all the more desperate and like her pursuit is more of a dream of fairytale. As the guy is considered think or in this original rather average but skinny. So when she manages to get him it is joyous and a wish come true. So it truly feels like the underdog finding victory. Only unlike most romances we stay way past the victory lap and watch as they deal with reality and the world. Remeber You have to defend your title at times.
As I saw the remake first I have to side with it as far as presentation of the story and offering up a happy ending. Even though the original is more truthful, artistic and focused.
Written By: Eduardo Manzanos, Ernesto Gastaldi and Vittorio Caronia
Cinematography: Emilio Foriscot and Floriano Trenker
Editor: Eugenio Alabiso
Cast: Edwige French, George Hilton, Cristina Airoldi, Manuel Gill, Alberto De Mendoza, Bruno Corazzari, Carlo Alighiero, Ivan Rassimov
After arriving in Vienna with her diplomat husband, a woman is stalked by a mysterious, razor-wielding maniac, with people around her getting killed one by one.
Right now, I am truly immersing myself and the Gallo genre or at least catching up on many that I have never seen and truly never heard of when is thankful for Tubi for actually having a lot of these films to offer finding out about these films from various box sets devoted to lesser known examples of the genre. vinegar syndrome in particularly has a bunch of these in box sets that help me just discover titles to try to find and see for myself
There is a certain grace in Giallo films
And it fees like the story telling is on a rhythm almost like liquid as it flows. This film feels more rough around the edges att times. Which adds to it’s Charms.
Though they started in these films and the women sometimes are treated horribly in them. Though the Film and filmmaker seems devoted to showcasing the actresses as unearthly beautiful but makes their behavior all the more human. That either you root for them in their indiscretions as their partners treat them horribly. So that you feel a certain sympathy for them. It is also the filmmakers putting you on yheornside as the men dominate the women to make them seem all the more human and weak to a certain extent. that way each film seems like a testament to the actress or the lead character and the actress just encases the role.
story wise this film is pretty typical of Giallos. There’s always a murder mystery at hand and the film offers. You many suspects as well as grand death scenes scenes were the lead female character is almost a victim, but it saved last minute or manages to escape.
it tries to make you believe that anyone could be the killer offering, red herrings, and plenty of motives for different characters who are close to the main character to do it as well as scenes that try to provide alibis or reasons as to why we might suspect cannot be the killer.
While also providing plenty of intrigue, seduction, glamour, international landscapes, sex scenes, nudity and graphic violence that the directors usually try to make seem brutal, yet artistic in the aftermath.
Even though a little more predictable than usual, this film is truly an undiscovered gem as again it’s imperfections or set it apart from the typical Giallo, which can be original sometimes are so stylistic that it’s too much for their own good.
Edwige French captivtes the screen. As you want to see more of her or for her to do more. One can’t take their eyes off of her. Conchita Airoldi does the same in a more supporting role. Which has her leavi g the film before she can truly make too much of an impression, but while she is there. She works as a distraction at times though one with a great smile.
By the end the puzzle isn’t too hard to figure out but the end packs a hell of a punch.
Cast: Bernard Verley, Zouzou, Francoise Verley, Daniel Ceccaldi, Malvina Penne, Babette Ferrier
The last of Rohmer’s Six Moral Tales. Frederic leads a bourgeois life; he is a partner in a small Paris office and is happily married to Helene, a teacher expecting her second child. In the afternoons, Frederic daydreams about other women, but has no intention of taking any action. One day, Chloe, who had been a mistress of an old friend, begins dropping by his office. They meet as friends, irregularly in the afternoons, till eventually Chloe decides to seduce Frederic, causing him a moral dilemma.
Though I knew most of the story beats, the film actually still lives up to the hype and still feels like a revelation as it is one of Eric Rohmer’s six Moral tales and I’ve only seen one previously. This definitely fits alongside it and is memorable.
Chris Rock’s version Is more gag-filled. You could see where there could be room for a bit more humor while trying to take a realistic look at a man in midlife crisis, not in a bad marriage but in a marriage where he’s standing bored and here comes temptation. Both versions are focused on a single narrative where things happen to shape the films and have a full cast. Though what allows the films to prosper is that no certain story ever rears its head, allowing the film to seem more random
Zazou is perfectly cast as she appeared throughout the 60s and 70s and in many films. This seems to be the one that is the classic that she is remembered for so she does have that bit of a one and done screen present square she is just a goddess in this film, but not, like a I can if anything he is more the tease in there bombshell, but someone beautiful, but you could also see her as normal and it’s not only about. It’s the way her character comes across with her personality and her matter at first it seems more like she’s playing and then she actually does have a plan and admit to her feelings so it doesn’t always feel like she’s trying to con him and he is more the tease in their relationship and intimacy as she seems usually willing and he’s the one who’s always backing away in the moment or at the last minute
The film does offer some genuine, sexy scenes without actually showing any physical sexual scenes, but just the intimacy, the longing, the heat, the sexual energy, sometimes the blocking angles imposing, just add up to making this film, somewhat erotic even when it’s not trying to
Though through all of this, the film never feels quite horny. It has a sophistication, even though it’s clearly identifiable mainly Moore bourgeois and also offers the difference between being free spirited and responsible, running away in a fantasy and dream, but I also having to wake up to reality and responsibilities, the difference between what we’d like to do but in the end might be best for you.
Shot by legendary Nestor Almendros, one can understand why, though at times the film takes place in closed-off, tight spaces. It still feels vivid and quite visual, especially when it comes to the angles.
This film more or less feels like a lighthearted, sometimes funny look at a midlife crisis of a man dealing with fantasy, desire, love and responsibility. It feels like a more serious, but not as overwrought Woody Allen film in the early stages of his career, as this film came along around the same time, so deals with a neurotic main character who seems more laid-back and tries to play it a little more cool when it comes to life in his decisions,
after all he is and this film has more of European sensibilities of having emotions, but not being as hung up at least noticeably or visibly dealing with things as they come. Not treating life and people as something of pure fantasy. At least that is what the audience is led to believe by the cinema and on-screen pictures.
It’s much more formal and nuanced than most films with the same situations. Thigh, then again to heighten as a thriller or comedy, and here it is more or less presented for the characters and audience to decide where their loyalties lie.
It’s another film that seems more a study or a discussion piece while having full characters and not so much on action.
When it comes to the character of Chloe, you can understand the temptation, but she is a bit weird as she is obviously beautiful, but at times or angles, looks more basic or normal. I guess it’s her personality, attitude and demeanor more than anything. Even though she is obviously attractive in her own way. As she is like a Monet, looks better far away, up close you see more of the cracks or the resentment.
In certain scenes, the film offers a hint of skin, touching, and flirting as the character slowly gets closer, she even declares to be in love with him as she can have him at any time, but she wants. He obviously wants her but resists. So that it is a constant tango between the two of them is sexy and sensual simply, but not gratuitous
The film is a middle-aged male fantasy that is granted and presented with the drama of the reality of it, especially when having second thoughts.
The film was remade. I THINK I LOVE MY WIFE, which was more comedic, but I liked when I saw it in theaters. I saw that film first before I saw this one, so this film feels quite familiar. Where is that film feels more like a crowd pleaser, both films, the main character, the main character comes across as a tease.
The film is like a Woody Allen film without so much of the comedy and a much smaller cast. We’re only the leads are allowed to make moments.
Cast: Bibi Andersson, Liv Ullman, Margaretha Krook, Gunnar Bjornstrand
A young nurse, Alma, is put in charge of Elisabeth Vogler: an actress who is seemingly healthy in all respects, but will not talk. As they spend time together, Alma speaks to Elisabeth constantly, never receiving any answer. Alma eventually confesses her secrets to a seemingly sympathetic Elisabeth and finds that her own personality is being submerged into Elisabeth’s persona.
A recent watch for the first time and out of the 3 I have seen, my Favorite Ingmar Bergman film.. So far.
For me a truly perfect film. Believe the hype. Even though it surpasses it.
A movie I probably would not have even given a second to watching what I was younger I like line I like to think that my Taste has matured overtime, truly appreciate films such as these and discovering them so later in life allows to look a bit deeper into the film and notice as well as study different aspects of the film and the film making as well as a bit of the filmmaker too
Plus, for such a legendary epic film, it’s kind of short by today’s standards, which I’m finding happens with quite a few foreign classic films. Maybe that should be a lesson to some filmmakers that you can say all you need to say and don’t need a three-hour running time, the irony here is that I am long-winded usually myself, and most things
It’s a film taught and shown in film schools and art appreciation courses. Some Look at it as an achievement, Some look at it as work. few have the same Opinion of what it is truly about
Made to seem so easy and seamless, no one really knows the work that went into it
this is one of those striking films where it’s been analyzed numerous times, and you can’t help but try to make sense of it once you finally see it
That’s hard to give a proper review without putting a little bit of your own mindset or interpretation into it. You can tell people the basics, but it doesn’t do the film justice.
as it’s a film, some people might find boring pretensions or too Artsy, but watch it. It’s revolutionary and revelatory to the senses just the way the stories told and filmed and acted that have one meaning as a viewer, but also another meaning, watching the characters and the performances.
it’s way of telling a story, but also each character story from their own point of view in a connection is that they have that slowly comes into focus the way which story is told not to mention not expecting the way it’s filmed the way it’s edited and the way it all comes together it’s a daring experimental style that might have been imitated but been done sufficiently or clearly as it is done here
it reminds you when cinema for the most part was not only more experimental, but also more willing to challenge the audience and maybe even the artist itself like most artist Director has their own style and here you get that Egmar Bergman loves characters more than anything even stories or plots but also to a certain degree it feels like a Director analyzed like David Lynch
where people tend to put meaning onto certain things in the film that might actually not have as much significance as they think, and might have actually just been a mistake, or just how things went in there, not really meant to at least Bergman is or was, more vocal than David Lynch has been in interviews
This is a film that, if you are a film fan, and especially if you want to get into film in any way, shape or form, you must see. I saw it recently for the first time and truly appreciate it as it is now one of my favorite films of all time, but also might be out of the previous few films of Ingmar Bergman. I’ve seen my favorite. Maybe I’m jumping on a bandwagon or just with fans
As it says so much, not only back then, but still, what film can be what cinema can be what writing can be what acting can be what characters can be so it’s very inspiring as you amazement.
there’s nothing quite like this film, except what a shock to the system or disorienting it might be at times that the beauty of it is that everything is so subtle and compose given to you in a manner and which most films try to disorient and jar you to get the same feeling here it feels a little more elegant, calm, and simple
this is supposedly the film where Igmar Bergman fell in love with one of the stars liv Ullmann even though from the beginning, it seems like actress Bibi Andersson is doing all the work while live omen is in insane but or in the background and listening, but as the film goes on, it’s more Andersson occupies the first half of the film and Liv Ullman takes over or they switch rules and away so that then it becomes live once. Though Ullman is it quiet and still has developments in the second half of the film, she more or less shrinks so the other can grow.
The beauty of the film is that even though I was majorly hyped as a classic, it still doesn’t prepare you for how much you’re going to like the film or how good the film is. It still comes across as a surprise by the time you finish watching the film, how far you’ve come, it seems like you’re in the same place
even the camera work, lighting, editing, and film production are just so composed. It’s an art form in itself. Not to mention, of course, the acting, writing and directing.
not to mention filming it in black-and-white, as I’ve always said if the film is truly good or great, it makes it timeless in itself, as it’s obvious around what time the film is taking place or the years that the film is taking place. A story that could still be told at any time and still have the same meaning as these characters, will always be identifiable to the audience, if not for themselves, they know somebody similar, as well as seeming like they know these characters from somewhere, might even have the same issues.
Sometimes you should believe the hype as even the hype doesn’t do it justice. It’s a film that manages to make so much out of what looks like very little.
At times we all need to take a break from the world, I watch or try to watch classic films, and classic foreign films to me. It’s the cinematic equivalent of reading the classics seeing what inspired or seeing if these films are worth the hype usually they are full of so much depth And amazed that they still hold up and are better some of the modern offerings there’s a deep to them and it’s not only because with black-and-white they come across as timeless manages to do so much and say so much and under 90 minutes that some films can’t even muster with an over two hours of the revolutionary time, but even-still while watching it
Sometimes you want to get lost in their worlds, even if just for a few moments, not necessarily fees, but a certain beauty and amazement
Happy I took my time and finally watched it and experienced it at the right time when I could more appreciate it as if I had seen it when I was younger. I might’ve even liked it, but it wouldn’t have made as much of an impact on me. I don’t believe, as I might not have had the patience or recognized certain identifiable aspects of the film
This is an excellent movie, another one to add to my favorites of all time, definitely a must-see for any film lover or film student, as well as a writer.
Either way you shouldn’t be reading this until after you’ve watched the film
François, a young carpenter, lives a happy, uncomplicated life with his wife Thérèse, and their two small children. One day he meets Emilie, a clerk in the local post office.
There is no way I can talk about this film without spoiling it, so if you haven’t seen it, check it out first and then come back for the review.
This is one of those films where I could give you a simple review, but this film wasn’t made for that if you want the simple review, it’s good watching, though I’m not sure a lot of people will appreciate it or like it, but in a long-term sense.
This is one of those films that’s meant to be experienced, but also discussed as different people will see different things in it, and have different opinions about and touch subjects that most of us have experienced or have witnessed, and have definite opinions from our point of view that might not match the film’s
First off, this is my first Agnes Varda film, the celebrated late Director, so I wasn’t exactly sure what I would get.
Most of this film is a happy-go-lucky movie, but as you get towards the end, that is when the films seem to present itself.
This is a tricky Film where everything no matter what happens seems happy though there’s a subversive current going through it as we see this man who is perfectly happy just starting fair and fall in love so easily with another woman, even though he’s in a supposedly happy marriage and we never see any signs of stress or boredom within it he is willing to give everything to his mistress who doesn’t seem upset that he’s actually married.
After we watch how he functions with his wife and his marriage, and then this affair starts and then around the end of the second act, he finally tells his questionable wife, consequences that we are never 100% sure of as it is sad that she has drowned, seems rather questionable as to maybe she decided to end her life, especially after he has informed her of his affair and then expects her to be OK with it and makes love with her and Field, like his actions were a mere Infraction that he will Keep Doing but the story goes along.
Even though he told his wife that he loved the woman and her both, he is willing to end the affair and just be with her, but if she truly loved him, she would let him continue as he can still love both of them equally as long as they love him.
This would seem like a film made by a misogynistic man who wants to come across as romantic and sympathetic, but actually made by a female Director, trying to present this with a bow, but also expose the hypocrisy involved becomes all the more disturbing and basically replaces his late white with his mistress and everything seems to go back the same, and he never pays any consequences.
Never seems to show any sorrow and gets exactly what he wants, and there’s no confrontation. There’s no real drama, which gives the film a kind of sarcasm, as the film seems to just let this man get away with everything and never pay any consequences.
which was a reality at the time, and unfortunately might still be in most cases, but also the fact that it seems to be having a commentary on how romantic films of this type played under the male gaze, where the woman always suffers, in the man gets exactly what he wants here. It feels like you should feel outraged over this, but unfortunately, there are no real problems for the character and it feels like an injustice.
Cast: Danilo Micheli, Andrea Massarelli, Anna Bruna Cazzato, Mirella Venturini, Valerio Isidori, Antonio Mea, Alea Armani
Stefano Vicinelli and his girlfriend Diana fall two weeks behind on their hotel rent and face having their luggage and car impounded until they can pay the bill. Conveniently for them, a distraught woman in the room right above theirs leaps to her death from the window. Using that as a distraction, the lovebirds sneak out and take off. Running low on money, they pool what little cash they do have and go to the racetrack. Stefano encounters a crazed woman wearing sunglasses who demands he give her a key so she can unlock a door. After she calms down, she proposes a deal with him: She’ll help him win money in the horse race if he’ll help her “get past the gate.” Having no clue what she’s even talking about, Stefano reluctantly agrees and bets on her suggestion. After the horse wins and he collects, he feels obliged to accompany the strange woman – who introduces herself as Countess Angela – back to her home.
The film has a misleading title that seems used to get an audience interested. Sure, it’s an erotic movie that doesn’t actually show or revolve around the sexual act in particular. It hints at the act once.
Though it is more like a softcore erotic movie with a supernatural plot that isn’t too convoluted but leads to erotic interludes. So that it literally feels like a porno with a plot and professional production values. That never goes in the direction of being a full hardcore adult film, but also barely has any direction.
As it never quite comes across as a believable supernatural thriller either. Though the eroticism is the only thing that makes the film entertaining
Strangely enough, the film takes itself too seriously instead of going full steam into a more cultural exploitation experience.
There is of course plenty of nudity as well as softcore sex of all kinds, with a love story thrown in. The film feels heavily edited to make sure the action doesn’t go too far into more hardcore territory.
The film’s plot really makes no sense. Though the movie tries to hypnotize the audience with surreal imagery. That feels more like arthouse pretensions with hippie philosophy and astrology thrown in for plenty of ceremonies.
No, the grade isn’t because it doesn’t live up to the title, but at least if the filmmakers had just decided to go with a more out-and-out pornographic movie. Maybe the audience wouldn’t;t have been so let down by a title that seems more meant to shock, but ultimately becomes more a gimmick
Cut To The Chase 