I think we need a little break from all the Oscars nominees, so today I’d like to take a deep breath and take you to Japan for a little relaxing ride. If you liked Bridget Jones and her famous diaries but at the same time you have a more romantic side, then I’m sure you’ll enjoy “My Sweet Grappa Remedies”. We get to follow Yoshiko (Yasuko Matsuyuki), a single woman in her 40s who enjoys her rather simple and slow life. She works in an office, rides a bike, goes for walks and observes everything around her. Some may say it doesn’t seem like a perfect life, but to Yoshiko it’s enough. Although at some point she realises that there’s something missing in her uncomplicated way of living. That is why she tries to open up to the world, experience new things and also stop being such a loner. Or perhaps just limit it a bit. Things get even more exciting when Yoshiko meets a much younger guy at work, who doesn’t want to stay just colleagues with her. The man finds her fascinating and makes it clear that there should be something more between them than just a desk with a computer on it. Generally, if you’re looking for a film that lets you relax your brain and hugs you tight to make you feel comfortable – then that’s a title for you. It’s not anything fresh or surprising, but also not that much copy-pasted as most modern romantic comedies. There’s something charming in this production, which made me ignore all the stereotypical elements of this genre that you may spot there. At some point I felt like the main character – sipping on her beverage in peace, not bothered about anything, just me, my glass and the film. We need such sugar powder stories from time to time, right? Besides, I like the fact that more and more productions remind us to stay who we are despite the pressure from society. And to sometimes even break the “rules” to enjoy our life even more. As long as we stay happy with ourselves, we should follow our own rules. I’m afraid that not many of you might have heard of this film, so I’m glad to be writing about it and I hope it’ll make you feel good. About yourselves, your choices and your way of living. Cheers!
The fact that this film is not nominated to more Oscars says a lot about current Hollywood. If you haven’t seen “Babylon” yet, let me just say it’s a production that is way too honest for some cinema people to handle. Remember “La La Land”? It was showing the dark side of this industry, but comparing to “Babylon”, it was a cute little puppy. This time, Damien Chazelle takes us to the wonderful 1920s, which was a very important period in the history of cinema. It was back then when silent films were finally introduced to sound. For younger readers it may seem quite impossible to imagine films without sound, right? I mean, I’m not that old to remember 1920s, but I was raised watching some old productions with dialogues written on boards. It had its charm, I have to admit. Anyway, “Babylon” focuses on that period, showing how drastic the changes were, not only among producers, but also actors. I don’t want to spoil much, but you may see how much effort it took back then to actually let the audience hear their beloved actor speaking to them. Nowadays the technology is way more advanced so it’s for sure easier, yet I loved getting back in time and imagining the hard work all those crews had to go through to make even a simple romance in the 1930s. I do admit that I had huge expectations before seeing this film because I’m a fan of Chazelle’s style and I felt quite hyped about another “Hollywood-is-not-that-good” kind of film from him, and… I was slightly disappointed. I feel like the screenplay gets lost somewhere in the middle and there are some sub-plots which could have been omitted together with certain scenes which were simply pointless (the vomiting scene for example – I’m generally against vomiting/shitting/pissing scenes which are just added in some productions to make them more controversial/shocking – in this case, it was useless and also badly shot, in my opinion). Besides, I was also not sure whom to follow – there are too many leading characters, so perhaps I’d try to give that role to one or two, not several. But that’s me, Mr. Chazelle could have a different point of view. In the end, is it a film I enjoyed? Definitely. Is it a film that should have been nominated as the Best Picture? Considering the actual nominees, definitely. So why isn’t it? Well, the answer seems obvious, at least to me – Hollywood feels ashamed of what’s presented there. Constant parties, lack of responsibility, unlimited alcohol and drugs, getting jobs based on who you know and not what you can do – that’s just a classic Hollywood image. Everybody knows that. In fact, it’s not only common in the film industry – I bet you can name lots of people who got somewhere high just because they had good connections. That’s how our world works. In art world it’s a bit more complicated as people may be questioning whether someone is an actual artist or just a pretender hoping to earn money on the audience’s naivety. From my side I can say – let’s all grow up, shall we? Let’s stop pretending we do everything to “fulfil our dreams” and “make the world a better place” – we do want to earn money because we like food, we like feeling safe, we like feeling successful. Period. So to me, this film knifes Hollywood in its back, but I totally don’t mind it. Visually, it’s marvellous. The soundtrack? It’s been on repeat in my earphones since I watched the film. Besides – how is it possible that Margot Robbie hasn’t got a nomination? She was outstanding in her role of Nellie LaRoy. I generally believe that “Babylon” is one of the most underrated films of 2022 despite its few flaws, so I hope you’ll check it out and enjoy the whole 3 hours of it, especially the last minutes, which are a true nostalgia starter for cinephiles.
It’s not a long film so my post won’t be such either, yet I hope you’ll feel encouraged to see it because to me – it’s one of the best nominated productions this year. And I swear, it could have been nominated as the Best Picture among all those big titles and I’m guessing that would be my personal winner. We’re moving to Northern Ireland where two brothers – Turlough (Seamus O’Hara) and Lorcan (James Martin) – are trying to manage their new reality after just recently losing their mother. Lorcan wishes to stay at the family farm as he feels home there and cannot imagine leaving it behind, while his brother is not really willing to get back to rural life. Why don’t they just keep on living the way each wants? Well, the thing is that Lorcan has Down syndrome and, despite being very skilful and quite independent, he cannot be left on his own. So the two brothers have to agree on something, whether they want to or not. In the meantime, they get a list of things their mother wished to do before her death, but unfortunately didn’t have enough time for. Lorcan encourages his brother to experience all the things from the list together with the ashes of their mother, and then he’ll agree to follow Turlough wherever he’ll decide to go. This film is only 23 minutes long, yet it managed to melt my heart and put a smile on my face. I honestly wish more films were made so conscientiously. There’s everything there – a good story, great acting, well-written characters, engaging drama mixed with honestly amusing humour, spiced with a bit of sarcasm and with an adorable message coming at the end. Besides, technically it’s just beautiful. Quality editing definitely adds a lot to my experience while watching a film, so whenever there’s a smart camerawork and decent editing, I’m satisfied. And these 23 minutes are just perfect in my eyes. I was enjoying every second and I believe that this short film may have a huge impact on many people. If I was to tell you what it’s about in one word, I’d say “connection”. So no matter at what stage of your life you are right now, I believe you may take a moment after seeing it and reflect on yourself deeply. And if you’re a cinephile who appreciates meticulousness and aesthetic balance – this film will please you for sure. I guess I don’t need to add that it’s my winner as the Best Live Action Short Film? Well, I don’t. But I will. It is my winner. And let’s hope not only mine. I wish you good connections, my dear readers. And more of such perfect productions.
I wasn’t planning to write about this film as it didn’t amaze or leave me speechless while I was watching. But then, I started reading reviews and realised what a fire starter this production is. You may think Disney made a cute animation about a clumsy red panda, but in fact, it’s a film that may hit way too many people. First things first, the plot: we’re actually going back to 2002 – the times of Discmen and Tamagotchi (the first one I loved with my whole heart, the second I was afraid to buy because I knew I’d neglect it sooner or later. Anyway, good times). We get to know Mei (Rosalie Chiang), a 13-year-old girl living with her parents who are taking care of their family temple. Mei is no longer a little baby and she starts keeping some secrets from her parents, such as her admiration for a popular boyband or having a crush on a local guy. As much as her dad (Orion Lee) is rather easygoing, her mother (Sandra Oh) is highly overprotective and strict. One day, Mei wakes up and something is different – she’s transformed into a red panda. Yes, a red panda. Big fluffy red panda. Soon, Mei realises that it’s not for good – she turns into the animal only when feeling strong emotions, so as long as she stays calm, she doesn’t change. Apparently, all women in her family have had this ability and in order not to transform on a daily basis, Mei has to go through some mysterious ritual, thanks to which her red panda spirit will be hidden in a talisman. Seems like an adorable story for children? “Mulan” meets “The Emperor’s New Groove” and such? Not at all. This film is a drama starter, so if you like drama, get some popcorn and enjoy reading. So, first thing that comes to many people’s mind is that this transformation of Mei is actually an allusion to getting period. Well, could be, since Mei is 13 and period is red (as obvious as it can be, I swear). But what happens later in the film is quite illogical considering this theory. Yes, Mei is ashamed of turning into a red panda, but – SPOILER – she ends up feeling proud of her other form and wishes to keep it. So how is that anyhow real? Show me a girl who’s happy to be bleeding and suffering from a horrible pain every month? You may be trying to explain that, but in my opinion, this film isn’t about period. Period. What I personally see in this story is a spotlight on the toxicity of female-female relations. Some people say that Mei’s mother wants her to obey rules and be a good girl because that’s what years of patriarchy have done to her and other women in their family. And it might be true, indeed. But nowadays, Mei’s parents seem to have a lovely relationship where her dad is very supportive and caring, yet her mother keeps on feeling the need to behave in a specific way. I don’t want to analyse the reasons for her behaviour, but it is visible that she has high expectations towards Mei and wants the girl to follow her example, which means that Mei would have to stop being fully herself (including her goofy and clumsy red panda self). And, personally, that’s the message I get from this animation. It’s not about period, it’s about the fact that sometimes the biggest obstacle young women may find in their life is… other women. So obviously, we should learn our lesson, communicate with each other and share as much support as it’s possible. Even though this film is far from being memorable, at least to me, I’m glad such topic has been covered. Feel free to be your own red panda whenever you need to. Cheers!
I was waiting for this film for a long time, and collecting tears in order to let them go when I finally get to see it. I cried, not even once. But am I surprised the film hasn’t been nominated to more awards? Not really, which I’ll be happy to explain later in the text. Since I cannot really write this post without sharing some of its elements, I’m already warning – there will be SPOILERS, so it’s your decision whether you want to continue reading or not. In this story we’re following Charlie (Brendan Fraser), an English professor working online from home. He’s a true passionate and a very supportive person to his students, but he also has a secret that they don’t know about as he doesn’t use his webcam – Charlie is severely obese. The man has troubles standing up from the sofa and most everyday tasks are just impossible for him to do. Luckily, he has Liz (Hong Chau), a friendly nurse that regularly comes to his place to help him and also do small medical checkups since Charlie refuses to be taken to the hospital. Even when Liz tells him he might soon die of heart failure, he doesn’t want to change his mind and explains the decision with his lack of money for the treatment, which is a common problem in the US, by the way. However, being aware of his condition, he wants to reconnect with his teenage daughter, who’s been raised by her mother only. When Ellie (Sadie Sink) shows up at Charlie’s place, he offers her money for spending time with him. Otherwise, the angry girl wouldn’t even think of coming back as she hates Charlie for not being present in her life. And at this point it’s all you need to know before watching, so let’s move on to SPOILERS and my interpretation of the film, which may surprise you. So, according to many reviews and articles I’ve read, people consider redemption as the main theme, which is not wrong, as I believe no interpretation is wrong if that’s what we get from a particular production. Indeed, Charlie feels bad about leaving Ellie and hopes to make it up to her before death. However, for two days after seeing the film I was not focused on Charlie – I was analysing everyone else in the story. And all that made me realise that I see the film differently. I personally believe it’s a story about people who have been given up on. Think about it: Charlie – that’s pretty obvious, he’s struggling with grief after losing Alan (his partner who committed suicide – in case you haven’t seen the film but still decided to continue reading) and his eating disorder has led him to obesity. And he’s aware of the fact that in this condition people don’t want to have anything to do with him. Remember the pizza guy named Dan? He was so friendly, right? Asking whether Charlie’s fine and all that. Wonderful! But all he needed was to see Charlie in person at some point to feel disgusted, judge him in few seconds and… give up on him. Charlie was a lost case in his eyes. And not only his. Except – Liz. Liz is the only character who stands by Charlie and we may say she’s his real friend. But if you think about it, Liz was supporting Charlie to help herself as well. She lost a brother (Alan) and knowing that Charlie was an important person in his life, she feels attached to Charlie, which eases her own grief and trauma. The moment when Charlie is choking – she’s not only afraid of losing him, but also of losing some point in her life. And as I said before, Liz is also a person left behind – by her parents not supporting her decisions. What about the missionary boy – Thomas? He was rejected by his community and was also looking for acceptance. And Mary, Charlie’s ex-wife? An alcoholic, a single mother who, as she said, failed at raising her child, rejected by society – also a pretty common scenario. And finally, Ellie – an annoying, aggressive, grumpy, rude teenager. Who would care about such evil child, right? She hurts everyone around her, so why bothering? It’s much easier to give up on her. And here comes the beauty of Charlie’s character – he doesn’t give up on people. We may hear him saying “people are amazing” and consider him as a silly optimist, but is he really one? Or maybe we’re so used to giving up on people and living in a world full of hate that such Charlie seems ridiculous to us? This story really opens up minds and the reason why I cried watching it was because I was moved by this genuine concern Charlie was sharing with others. But to explain my opinion from the beginning of the post – I have to admit that the film could have been made in a slightly different form. The screenplay was written by Samuel D. Hunter who’s also the author of the theatrical play “The Whale”. And as much as I see his idea for the story to be played on stage, I’m not sure he was the best choice to write a film script. Besides, the ending, which should be the most emotional part, left me incredibly disappointed and I guess that’s why I see this film as a wasted potential. However, generally, it’s not a bad production, because it does touch your heart. When it comes to acting – it’s marvellous, not surprised why so many people admire Brendan Fraser as Charlie. Do I think he should be awarded? Yes, I do. But I’d also like to put a spotlight on Hong Chau, who did something incredible in this film. She had a seemingly simple role, but horribly complex if you think about it (or overthink about it). One of the best female performances of 2022, ladies and gentlemen. And despite my perhaps low rating for this film, consider it a must-see. Maybe it’ll remind you to check up on someone, to put that plate with food for the bird and to simply care a bit more.
Some people say it’s a really lame horror. Some others say it’s a disgusting production for feminists. Well, I think it’s a very intriguing film that you should definitely see and I hope that today’s post will encourage you to it. Before I move to the plot, I have to admit that the title made me chuckle a bit – a horror titled “Men”. Oh yeah, already creepy. But jokes aside, this film is actually some serious extension of that thought of mine. We get to know Harper (Jessie Buckley) who has recently lost her husband, James (Paapa Essiedu). The man committed suicide, which deeply impacted Harper. That is why she’s decided to rent a house in a tiny village and spend some holiday there clearing her mind. The situation is a bit more complex as Harper wanted to divorce James and they weren’t anyhow perfect together, so her grief is very specific. Would you miss a person who used to be your abuser? And that’s not the only difficult question that may come up during this film. Even though Harper is spending the holiday in the middle of nowhere, she still bumps into random local men. I’d like to say that they are strange, but if I think about it – most of them are just typical men you may meet everywhere. Perhaps just because the film itself creates this uncomfortable atmosphere you may have an impression that those guys are somehow overacted or unrealistic. And as I mentioned at the beginning – men can be a real horror we normally don’t notice. If you’re a man reading this post, let me just assure you that I do not blame only men for all the mess that happens in the world. However, this film is mainly focused on showing how sick and harmful patriarchy is. Each of the men that Harper meets in this story is different, yet all of them manage to use their power to manipulate and harm the female protagonist. I have to say that the ending wasn’t really my thing and I was hoping for something slightly different (although visually – it was disgustingly wonderful), but the whole production definitely caught my attention. I didn’t know what this story was actually about before watching, so I really enjoyed experiencing this patriarchal rollercoaster together with Harper. Well, “enjoyed”. After, I’ve read some reviews and I feel like this film is a real drama starter. Funny fact is that it’s not hated only by men or more conservative groups – lots of feminists disliked it in some way as well. From my side – I loved how fresh it was, meaning it wasn’t another copy-paste production that I won’t remember in a month. And no matter whether you agree or disagree with its messages, I guess you can admit it is quite original in its form. When it comes to the story… let me put it this way: been there, done that. What you see in this film isn’t surprising for women. Being treated as an object that belongs to a man? Check. Being manipulated by a man to make you feel like you’re the abuser although clearly you’re the victim? Check. Being ignored by men because they rarely take you seriously? Check. Being called a “bitch” just because you refuse something? Check. It’s not just a film screenplay, it’s reality of millions of women. Once again, I’m aware of the fact that women are not perfect either and they may maltreat another person as well, but explaining men’s, or anyone’s in fact, behaviour by saying “others do that too” is below shallow. If you’re a woman who sees herself in Harper, let me just send you a virtual hug right now. And if you’re a man who feels disgusted by the men presented in the film, let me just say “thank you for being”. But if you’re a man who doesn’t see anything wrong in this patriarchal picture, then I hope you find help and love one day. I’m not rating this film high because I did hope for something else at the end, but generally – it’s a great production to wake up our minds and I hope it’ll wake up yours as well. Let’s hope all those apples fall down eventually.
If you’re still in some Valentine’s Day mood but you’re not a fan of classic rom-com love stories, I’ve got something for you! I’d like to introduce you to an extraordinary couple that shared a lot of love towards each other, but also towards their common passion. Katia and Maurice Krafft were French volcanologists who didn’t think twice when it comes to exploring one of the most mysterious and dangerous creations of nature. I hope you won’t consider it a spoiler as it’s known from the very beginning of the film – both of them died, yet the tragedy is mentioned at the end, so that’s something I’m not revealing here. I was myself quite curious how this power couple lost their lives, especially since there were way too many occasions in their career. The documentary is very much based on their own footage as they were also recording their adventures and studies. I have to admit that I never heard of them before seeing this production, but apparently, they have made a significant impact in the world of science. They were going to places where most people would never even think of staying close to. They were bringing samples back to labs, providing scientists with more specific knowledge on the topic of volcanos. As we learn from the documentary, the couple weren’t wealthy or anyhow privileged, so they lived a rather simple life at home in order to spend the saved money on their next expeditions. I enjoyed learning about Katia and Maurice because they seemed to be a wonderful marriage, where both sides share a passion and support each other no matter what. During their trips, they were looking after each other and, as much as each of them was a very intelligent and brave individual, I’m sure they wouldn’t have done all that without the other person by their side. I believe that support of the other partner was crucial in their development process and I’m glad those two ran into each other at some point in their lives. Thanks to them, many people gained the access to more knowledge, video and paper educational materials, and perhaps also some inspiration to join them in exploring volcanos. It is also proved that thanks to the couple’s work many people were saved from the consequences of eruptions that had been estimated some time before. Besides, I don’t know if it’s because they spent too much time way too close to lava, but watching their interviews in the documentary I could feel this wonderful warmth from both of them. I really believe they were good people. And ambitious passionates. And dedicated partners. So if you want to learn something new and meet a real power couple, that’s a film for you to see.
Is it our favourite forced holiday? Yes, it is! Let’s buy heart-shaped cards, have some heart-shaped chocolates, drink overly sweet drinks in heart-shaped glasses (I bet there are such somewhere) and… learn the ugly truth. Today’s recommendation is a romantic comedy, but as much as I avoid romantic comedies (unless I’m in Bridget Jones mood), this one is my absolute favourite. We get to know Abby (Katherine Heigl), a morning show producer. She’s a very attractive woman, yet still single as she’s looking for her prince charming. Her dates are rather awkward because she takes compatibility very seriously – for example, ordering bottled water is already a red flag. Why? She’ll explain it several times in the film. One evening, Abby gets to see a TV show called “The Ugly Truth” where a man named Mike (Gerard Butler) talks about relations between men and women without a pinch of politeness or any kind of correctness. He also manages to burn Abby on-air. Can it get worse? Of course! Her TV station has hired Mike, hoping his way of being will improve the ratings. Even though Abby is a hopeless romantic and control freak, and Mike is a horny arrogant with too much confidence, at some point they decide to cooperate. Especially when Abby meets Colin (Eric Winter), a handsome surgeon who seems to be her prince charming that she’s always dreamed of. In order to catch his attention and make him fall in love with her, she asks Mike to help her in playing this male-female seduction game. I’ve rewatched this film many times because it’s really enjoyable and full of my kind of humour – a bit dark, sometimes dirty, spiced with sarcasm. I also adore the character of Mike who’s definitely not a man that we would see in a romantic comedy. He and Abby make a wonderful contrast that shows how differently we perceive relations. One side may want to hold hands, read poems on the terrace, drink wine by the fireplace, and the other side would screw anything that moves and never call back. And somehow we have to coexist in this world. I hope you won’t consider it a spoiler, but the point of this film is to show that there has to be balance everywhere, especially in relationships. There has to be some intimacy and love, but also some spice and fun. Otherwise, it’s not gonna work. And that’s exactly what I wish you – find a person that will help you balance your life. And if you’re taken, make sure you have this balance in your relationships. Quoting: “You have to be two people. The saint and the sinner. The librarian and the stripper.” And that, my dear readers, is the ugly truth.
Aye, aye, aye, today, I’m taking you to Ireland, my folks. It’s time to recommend you an Irish gem nominated in many categories by the Academy, including the Best Picture. Does it deserve the main Oscar, though? Here comes my honest opinion – not really. And if you feel furious right now, you have to read my post till the end (ha, gotcha!). The film is a black comedy/drama directed by Martin McDonagh, the one who also gave us “In Bruges” (2008) – and thank you very much for that, sir! This time, we’re moving to a fictional Irish island in the 1920s, during the Irish Civil War, which is not really that visible there, on Inisherin. The small community seems to be enjoying their slow and peaceful life, including two best friends – Pádraic and Colm (Colin Farrell & Brendan Gleeson). Until one day, when Calm decides to end their friendship and doesn’t want to share any single moment with Pádraic. At first, his friend thinks it’s just a bad period of time or a joke, but days are passing and Calm’s behaviour doesn’t change. Suddenly, the friendship break-up becomes an issue which involves the whole community of the island, as there are people who would like those two to be friends again, and such who enjoy this little twist in their life. So shortly speaking, it’s a film about two men having an argument. But the film is not that shallow at all, quite the opposite. It touches the topic of loneliness in a quite fresh way for the cinema, I’d say. Plus, Colm points out having lost the meaning of his life and how he wishes to become significant for the world, which isn’t really happening if he continues to daily drink and chat with his buddy. That one hit me the most, because I guess each one of us has a moment in life where we start questioning the point of doing what we do. And the point of even being here. Would the world lose much if we weren’t here? And as depressive as it sounds, the film actually shows us that there is a very important reason for us to stay, be present and be happy about our existence. But I cannot tell you why – it’s for you to learn this lesson from the film. I’ve also seen some people sharing that this film is an analogy to how ridiculous Irish Civil War (and any kind of war, as a matter of fact) was. Meaning that people who shared the land, the culture, the family and friends – suddenly became worst enemies. In the film, the conflict is perhaps less drastic and way funnier, but the idea is pretty much the same and the question screams at us from the screen – what is this for?! Just like I and hopefully many of you think of wars – what for? This film is definitely thought-provoking and makes you reflect a lot on numerous philosophical questions, but it’s also full of this absurd kind of humour that I personally like. So why don’t I see it as the winner? Well, I’m not sure. Perhaps it’s because I expected much more and at some points the film disappointed me. Also, it’s a film focused on talking – and I personally believe we should get back to making films, not podcasts with pretty visuals. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a film I’m definitely recommending, but I wouldn’t be that thrilled to see it represent 2022 as the Best Picture. But that’s just my opinion, so feel free to see it differently. However, an absolute Oscar from me goes to Barry Keoghan. Mamma mia! People are praising Farrell and Gleeson? Good, but look at this guy! He had only few moments to shine in this film and he caught my attention 120%. Marvellous performance and I really hope he’ll continue his acting career with a golden guy on his shelf. And remember – perhaps niceness doesn’t last, but it doesn’t mean it’s worthless.
As much as I know that Gaspar Noé is a very controversial filmmaker, I cannot stop adoring his work. Each of his films is an experience I’d love to immediately forget after finishing watching just so I can rewatch the film again and experience it one more time. And one more time. And one more. Today’s recommendation is for those who like experimental cinema and feel mentally and physically prepared for difficult pictures. Those who’ve seen “Memento” by Christopher Nolan might see some resemblance in the form, yet “Irréversbile” is, in my opinion, way easier to understand while watching it for the first time. I can’t believe I’ve just said that, but it is true that Nolan’s productions are very much complex and often illogical after the first screening. I feel like Noé’s style is not difficult to understand, yet you need to have a very open-mind and have your limits of all kinds rather flexible. Getting back to today’s recommendation – it’s unusual because of the way we have the story presented. It’s divided into several pieces and we watch them in reverse order, so we know what happens at the end and now, as viewers, we wish to learn about all the preceding steps. It seems quite strange for me to tell you what it’s about considering the fact that it’s the point of the film to keep such a secret, but here’s a small introduction: two men, Marcus and Pierre (Vincent Cassel & Albert Dupontel) get into trouble as they were trying to find the person that had hurt a woman they knew (played by Monica Bellucci). And that’s it, the rest is for you to see. However, since I do want to share my opinion about one scene, here’s a *SPOILER ALERT*. So, those who’ve seen the film may already know which scene I’m talking about – indeed, the rape scene. It’s one of the most horrifying scenes I’ve seen in my life. I’m speechless about how well Noé presented the horror of this act of crime. The scene lasts nine minutes and there’s no editing (only at the end). Just two actors, camera and… action. In fact, this particular scene was essentially directed by Bellucci herself, yet it was coherent with Noé vision. This one scene speaks louder than anything I’ve ever seen on the topic of rape. I hate saying that, especially since I obviously despise people who commit such crime and I sympathise with all the victims, but this scene is magnificent when it comes to acting, directing, visual effects and general impact it has on viewers. Chapeau bas. *END OF SPOILER* I also have to add that visually this production is stunning, but I guess it’s obvious when it comes to Noé’s style. He loves when his work is aesthetically shocking – and to me it’s pleasing. So much. I don’t want to scare you, but this film may cause the feeling of anxiety not only because of what you’ll see, but also what you will not hear. Let me explain – they used extremely low-frequency sound in the audio, which normally is not possible for us to hear, yet physically our body may response to it. Such sound may even cause nausea or dizziness, so if you’re watching the film with a quality sound system, better watch out. That is why he’s one of my beloved film directors; he doesn’t just make films – he creates pieces of art. I’m aware of the fact that he does “support” himself with substances that are, let’s say, not generally accepted – and I’m definitely not a person who would recommend you going this way – but I’m not here to judge him as a person. I want to see good cinema and he provides it. And that’s all I need to know. So if you’d like to take part in an artistic experience that may impact you a lot, you know what to watch now.
I have nothing to watch 