Beginning to end, I thought of Seinfeld's definite parody, "Rochelle, Rochelle," ("a young girl's erotic adventures from Moscow to Minsk?") I always suspected that the recurring parody was about some real-life art film. Now I know. What a crock of crap, written by an old man to get a starlet naked, any starlet.
The trilogy was pretentious, but not risibly so. This was.
i didn't like but didn't hate it either
the movie really doesn't have any ingredients that would make you despise it
so many movies, so little time
"What a crock of crap, written by an old man to get a starlet naked, any starlet."
My thoughts exactly.
And "despise" is the word I was going to put in my subject line too. Also "pretentious," "ludicrous," "waste of perfectly good film stock," and "crap."
The director is now long gone, but I've just watched this film so it's fresh to me. And rubs me so very wrong.
Except for the lingering views of Ms Jacob's fine breasts (in gratuitous sex scenes), this film had absolutely no redeeming value whatever. I can easily accept the attempts of the young that fall short. Not so easily when a "master" has nothing to say and then tries to impress us with his cleverness.
This film stinks so badly.
---------------
After writing the above, I looked to see what professional reviewers I respect thought of the film. Roger Ebert loved it as much as I did not. From his review: "The last thing you want to do after a Kieslowski film is 'unravel' the plot. It can't be done." Indeed.
Ebert didn't know the meaning of the shoe string or the flasher either. Just more "genius" we mere mortals are incapable of comprehending.
I stand by my opinion, except to add that the cinematography was quite good, if in a quite bad film.
No. I loved it. My number one movie of all time. I won't take the time to explain why to you though.
shareTroll takes time out to find a section for lovers of a film to trash it shocker
Grow up, maybe you have, its been seven years !
The film is an absolute masterpiece.