Well, everyone knows that nowadays all this kind of wannabee independent-fashion festivals i.e. Cannes, San Sebastián, etc. are quite a lot of *beep* There are a lot of commercial interests, etc. But still, now is a bit too much. Are they trying to say that this is the best movie of the year? please, come on. It's just a good documentary.
shareSure, and there is no commercial interests in Hollywood.
This movie didn't win cause it was the best movie of the year but because the more interesting, the more experimental. That's usually Cannes' criteria.
Of course, in hollywood Oscars there's also a lot of business interest, nobody (with a bit of brain) believes they give the best movie oscar to the actually best movie, but there was a time it was. And festivals like Cannes, San Sebastian or Venice where very interesting festivals showing independent and little budget movies. Now is not like this anymore.
I'm just saying that in my opinion, this movie it's just an ok movie and nothing else. For me it doesnt deserve any special prizes. Interesting? Experimental? I don't see the experimental side anywhere. And about interesting I think everybody knows how is in this kind of schools in some places of the outskirts of big cities. There's nothing new of being a teacher having problems with some kind of kids making trouble in the classroom and not being adapted in the society.... don't you think so?
Thanks.
The big difference with "Cannes" is not that they judge movies from a different point of view. It's not that they prefer aesthetic or non commercial criteria. They're just acustomed to different kind of movies, different code for calling a movie "good". What I can think of : evanescent plot, slow paced, nice shots ...
The script is an allegory concerning famous Austrians and Souleymane/Süleyman. It was written for snobs as is so stated in the script.
shareI'd consider it one of 10 best movies from last year. I have no objection to it winning. It was amazing, and a breath of fresh air. I loved it's style.
---
I know what gold does to men's souls.
I'll say it again, NOT a documentary, that's what makes it a splendid achievement. You obviously didn't get that.
Your poetry will now be written with blood
If it's a documentary or not, it doesn't matter. But I agree with your "Please, come on!!!". 4/10.
shareMost of the students were real except the character Sullyman but all other cast members were professional actors.
Thus it cannot be labeled a documentary PERIOD
AS for style and content, it was refreshing and I loved the script which took you on a journey and hopefully you learned something. IF you didn't, it's your loss!
It's very fine film. It is interesting and well acted. But, for me, it did not rise to the level of extraordinariness that should be requisite for a prize such as the Palme d'Or.
There was very little plot. The movie was mainly exposition. There was little character growth, and we learned very little about the characters during the movie. I had expected to find out what was going on with Khoumba. Maybe we would learn more about their home or even interior lives. I did not expect "un happy end a l'americaine", but I did expect some movement or progression, not just a series of episodes. Also, the cinematography was fine, but not exceptional or innovative.
I was left wondering whether the granting of the Palme d'Or to this film was a bit of French (or Francophone) self-congratulations for "daring" to put the underside of their society on film or for touting the new, multicultural, immigrant-based, yet still troubled France. Perhaps it was a comment on the use of first-time/amateur actors, which was innovative.
But, even so, I was left wondering, why did this movie really win a Palme d'Or.
I liked the idea, but it got bogged down in the editing. 6/10.
The teacher was cute, though. But i did think he was gay, right off the bat.
I hate people who judge every film with the standards of american cinema in the 1950s. You've completely missed the point of the movie. This movie did not call for character growth. There's a reason it's called Entre les Murs (Between walls, or behind walls) : in school, by demanding full obedience and discipline from the students, it's like the system is asking the children to disconnect with their real life. It's a film about how the educational system understands very little about the children upon which they want to impose their rules, and how it's impossible and uneffective to compartimentalize and separate life from school and school from life. Therefore, it would be illogical to present us with facts about the character's private lives, since the film is precisely about being caught in a system who disregards it.
I think the cinematography is quite good and adapted. I admired the almost exclusive use of long-angle lens to recreate the suffocating feeling of being trapped in a classroom full of people.
Later that day, after tea... I died, suddenly.
Why would the opinion of 'wannabee independent-fashion festivals' concern you? On the face, you may perceive this film as average but if you look beneath and study the film, you would gain a better understanding of what the film was trying to do. And I would know, I studied this film for my A Level Media Studies exam all last year.