Reviews
American Beauty (1999)
Hello! It's not sexist!
Oversimplifying it as a sexist film is a big mistake. This film is not that easy to label.
First, not all 'women are viewed as nothing more than the object of male desire'. Jane is so not an object! (Actually Angela, who is more like an 'object', was kinda criticized in the end by Ricky. )
Second, there is almost no 'good guy' and 'bad guy' in the film.
(I don't think Carolyn or Colonel Fitts is wicked; they are just human.) Therefore, EVEN IF the male characters do treat women as 'objects', it does not mean that the director agrees nor is he propagandising this idea. He just tells a story of reality and leaves the audience to think and make their own decision.
So I think jonie v.'s criticism (5 October 1999) is unfair, and, if one views the film this way, he will miss so much in it.
Cabaret (1972)
Well
Everybody talks about Liza Minnelli. Yes. She acted greatly. But I think there are more in this film.
Unlike the other 'Nazi films', it's implicit. You will see NO Nazi violence in this film (except the killing of Natalie's dog). The director even doesn't show how Michael York was beaten up by the two Nazis. And we don't know what would happen to the Jew couple. (But we can imagine, can't we?)
No violence, but it's even more forceful, right? The singing young Nazi boy is even more unforgettable than the concentration camps or war scenes. It tells how horrible Nazi was, better than the Nazi war-crime-film cliche does.
Needless to say, the very last shot, Nazis' faces reflected on a metal surface, in absolute silence, is breath-taking.
Michael is the 'hero' in this film. Michael knew what Nazi was very well and he criticised. But he's not so 'heroic', he has his weakness. It makes me remember Tomas in the unbearable lightness of being.
The film shows no serious Nazi crimes directly, instead, it shows how decadent, happy ppl lived before Hitler. But just becoz it's implicit, it's even more forceful.
Una pura formalità (1994)
a simple story mystified
Well, my first language is neither French nor English, so I d better make it simple. Technically, it's good. The shooting, the gaffer, the performance of the actors... all of them are good. The film does tell the story that the director wants to tell and it also creates the suspended atmosphere successfully. But should we expect more from a film? A great film must have not only good techniques but also ample contents.
Yes, the film's good, but you won't be able to remember anything about Onoff after u see the film. The characters are just too hallow and obscure. Coz it's too empty, the director must deliberately mystify the film. I believe many viewers will be misled at first and will think it as some kinda detective story.
Or, as the literature critics' cliche, its contents is its form?