Recensioni di francescabalzani-26183

"The place beyond the pines" is the gripping story of two families, whose destinies intermingle in the most painful of ways. Each character shows a faulty side that seems to overcome any other positive aspect, in a continuous personal fight against the temptations of wickedness.

Luke Glanton (Ryan Gosling) is a shady motor-racer, who appears lost and disinchanted. One day his ex lover Romina (Eva Mendes) shows up and he discovers he has a son with her, Jason. As a consequence, he tries to provide for them, choosing the worst of ways, that is robbing banks. His life path is crossed with the life of policeman Avery Cross (Bradley Cooper), who is later crowned as a hero for his brave work, in spite of hiding his true grim colours. His ambition makes him report the corrupted deeds carried out by his collegues. Even though this may seem as a remarkable act, it is actually yet another step to quench his thirst for power and fame.

The last part of the film focuses on the toxic relationship between the two main characters' sons, Jason and AJ, who have inherted the sins commited by their own fathers.

This film is extremely intense and it touches upon some important issues, such as pain, corruption, ambition, broken human relationships. The photography itself seems to mimic the intense emotions created by the devastating storyline of the film. All the characters are faulty and negative, as they are victims of their human weaknesses. This is made visible thanks to the amazing performances of all the main characters.

A must watch, when you are feeling strong enough!

The Vow is based on a true story and it narrates the relationship between Paige (Rachel McAdams) and Leo (Channing Tatum), a happily married couple whose love bond is deep and intense. Their relationship has brought immense success to their careers too, thanks to their support for one another: Paige is a blossoming artist and Leo has managed to open his own recording studio.

Everything changes when one night they are in a car crash and Paige wakes up with severe memory loss, she cannot remember the last years and she cannot recognise her husband either. Leo will do anything possible to get her back, but the task is an almost impossible one.

What I enjoyed the most is Rachel McAdams, she is charmingly sparkling. Also there are some scenes which are quite funny and bizarre. The portrayal of how their relationship changed, even in their phisicality, is spot on.

However, I didn't like Channing Tatum very much, he seems expressionless throughout the film and most of the time he appears naked to show off his wonderful bodyshape... I felt it was a bit too much.

I didn't quite get the ending either, as it seemed very quick and sudden, especially considering everything that had happened before.

A simple favor is supposed to be a catchy thriller, taking the form of a dark comedy. Unfortunately the real mistery behind this film is the enigma regarding what it really is: a thriller or a comedy? Neither of them, but rather a terrible mix.

The "friendship" between the two main characters, Stephanie, an awkward perfectionist and Emily, a stunning mum suffering from some sort of psychological disorder, is just disturbing and completely unrealistic. Their actions don't make sense, in the same way as the plot itself doesn't.

What I found the most incomprehensible was the subplot regarding Stephanie's relationship with her half-brother: it is completely misplaced and it does not have any connection with the rest of the film. On top of that their scandalous dynamics are just hinted at... there is no depth.

There are far too many things, twists, problems that clash with apparent perfect looks and life styles. It is seriously too much and it just makes the film as a whole grotesque.

Furthermore all the characters are off-putting, I couldn't sympathise with anyone, as I felt they were all fake and annoying.

In 19th century Northern England Katherine (Florence Pugh) has been forced to marry a much older man, Mr Lester (Paul Hilton). At the beginning Katherine appears as a victim: she is in a loveless marriage, mistreated by her husband and by her father-in-law, used as an object by her husband, who gives himself pleasure looking at her, but is not interested in consuming the marriage. Katherine's days go by slowly, she is stuck in a cold mansion and is not allowed to go out.

When her husband leaves on business, Kathereine starts behaving in a completely different way. One day she hears her servant Anna screaming and she finds her in the stable, as she is being abused by other servants. Even though she saves her, a form of wicked lust starts showing. She is attracted by Sebastian (Cosmo Jarvis), a servant who was abusing and humiliating Anna. They start an intense affair, without any restraints, letting free of their impulses. This is just the beginnning of a mischievous trend that will lead Katherine to commit shocking crimes.

The main focus of the film is the way in which a victim can turn into an evil predator, with the sole intent of feeding her own greed for power and lust, just as Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth did. Florence Pugh gives a brilliant performance, her physical appearance gets modified in a chamaleontic way too.

Silence plays an important role as well, since in that very silence we can perceive how the human mind can prevail, to the point that reality and fiction are blended in one single entity. The photography is stunning and it is a means of psychological research.

Violence and subjucation play an extremely important role: the oppression of women (possessions) carried out by men (possessors). The mistreatment of the upper classes against the lower classes, seen as inferior beings. The whole film explores the thirst of power that consumes human beings, ready to do anything just to quench that very thirst.

A must see.

Art (Mike Faist) and Patrick (Josh O'Connor) have been friends for a long time, they both play tennis and their relationship is rather intense, a mix betwwen brotherly love and a repressed sexual tension.

One day they meet Tashi (Zendaya), another tennis player, who is a sort of mythological figure, she is a goddess who manages to make the relationship between the two friends even more intense.

The film does not follow a chronological order, but it is made out of a series of flashbacks which help get a slow understanding of the characters, as if each scene unveiled some of their secrets.

I liked the chemistry between the three main characters and I really appreciated their acting, my favourite was Josh O'Connor, there is something extremely magnetic about him.

I was skeptical at the beginning because I am not very much into sports, but the film and the great ability of Guadagnino make the tennis scenes in this movie something more than just a game, it is the symbol of the sexual tension between the three characters, their intense drive and obsession with winning. This is also thanks to a great soundtrack, which is incredibly catchy and perfect for this. The two hours flew by very quickly. A definetely good watch!

I seriously cannot express the frustration I feel after watching this nonsensical film.

It is supposed to be a romantic comedy, instead what I saw was a complete lack of love and laughs. In other words it didn't make me laugh nor it gave me any positive feelings.

The plot itself does not make much sense: Tank is an apparently mean guy who helps boys get back with her exes by taking them on the most horrible dates ever. One day he goes on a date with Alexis, his "best" friend's love interest, and falls in love with her too.

The characters seem prototypes, rather than human beings: the mean guy, the clumsy one, the wonderfully impossible-to-get blondie. I did not sympathise with any of them, rather I thought they were all void and annoying.

The worst part is the script: I have never heard such a sequence of vulgar jokes. The whole film is a continuous reference to sex, but in such a disturbing way that it is not funny. I think the worst character in this respect is Dank's father: his description of the sexual intercourse he had with his secretary just made me feel sick.

A horrible film, really really bad, pathetic and boorish, a definite NO!

"Love and other disasters" could be considered a disaster itself, not excellent acting, quite dull comedy and a pretty ridiculous storyline.

Emily (Brittany Murphy) is a pretty young girl looking for love and working in fashion. Her life is surreal, in the same way as her personality is. She shares a flat with her beloved gay friend Peter (Matthew Rhys), who is also looking for love, but is too shy and clumsy. Their supposedly strong bond feels weird and not realistic. I spent the whole film expecting a development, which never happened.

Apart from the non-convincing love triangle and final solution, I really disliked the characters: Emily is fakely perfect, seems rather superficial and her attitude is just annoying. On top of that her accent and some of the expressions she uses are just ridiculous, for example the fact she calls her friend "babies". Peter is dull, so so dull. Their friend Tallulah (Catherine Tate) is funny at times, but also a cliché character: a frustrated woman obsessed with sex and young men.

I did not laugh much and I didn't feel moved by any of the love stories, so it's a no for me!

The zone of interest is a masterpiece, a magnificent work of art, whose strength lies in the ability to shock the audience without showing any violent or distressing scenes.

The story revolves around the real life events of a Nazi commander, Rudolf Höss, and his family during WWII. They lived next to Auschwitz concentration camp and, despite the horrors happening next to them, Rudolf and Hedwig, his wife, create a sort of "dream house", where they lead an apparently ordinary life, with the comfort of the riches taken from the people exterminated in the camp and the creation of an idyllic garden.

The extraordinary power of this film is due to the skilled use of images and sound: the colours are vivid and many scenes carry an extremely symbolic meaning. At the same time the psychedelic use of sounds, which is terribly evocative and even disturbing at times, makes the audience participate in the story, thanks to the continuous use of sensory stimuli.

Disturbingly beautiful and utterly shocking.

This 2004 version is a remake of the 1966 film of the same name. I cannot compare it to the previous version as I haven't seen it, so my view is definetely limited. Nonetheless I found the whole film pretty annoying.

Alfie is a British womanizer living in New York, city chosen especially to find the greatest number of women to sleep with. Everything carries on fine for Alfie until he starts realizing that his actions can hurt people around him and the ones he "cares for" (does he really care for anybody?).

First of all I didn't like the fact that the main character frequently talked to the camera, it created a strange hybrid I could not understand. Alfie's Londoner accent makes the whole situation even odder.

Then I couldn't sympathise with any of the characters: Alfie is terribly narcissistic and vain, seeking pleausure obsessively, but the same is true for most of the women he sleeps with. Shallow relationships and complete absence of any form of human empathy.

The saddest part is that I do not believe Alfie redeemed himself at the end, it feels fake and ridiculous.

This thriller did not keep tense, it did not give me the chills, it was excessive in its use of technology and, at times, ridiculous.

Grace and June are a mother and a daughter who have apparently suffered a terrible loss. As a consequence of that Grace is overprotective and June feels oppressed. When her mum leaves for a holiday and disappears, June starts looking for her and for answers, using technology in an impeccable way.

Even though the story is interesting, even intriguing at times, something did not click for me: this excessive use of technology is not realistic, especially considering a teenager seems to have better investigation skills than the FBI. Some twists are just a bit too much and some character relationships seem a bit ridiculous, for example the one between June and Javier, a Colombian cleaner hired to help with the investigation.

The idea is interesting, but there should be some limits... otherwise the feeling you get from watching this film is not the tension typically given by a thriller, but rather the sense of dismay caused by sci-fi films.

Eva and Matteo are two young people who are struggling with life: Eva is a law student who is feeling a lot of pressure to do well, but does not like the path she has taken. Matteo is an anti-social cartoonist: he is extremely gifted, but also very depressed and not able to socialise with people in a normal way. They meet unconventionally and find that actually they can help each other feel better.

This film is very sweet in its simplicity, it deals with hard topics in a soft way. I really loved the setting and the photography. Despite this something is missing, the story is rather absurd at times and the dialogues seem a bit surreal.

As it is an independent film I really recommend watching it: it is definetely not a masterpiece, but it is very sweet and it makes the audience feel good.

There is something extremely eerie about this film, and it isn't just because it is a sci-fi horror. You can sense a culture behind it, a time of great tension and of imposed silences.

Set in the 80s, The Superdeep tells the story of a scientific research that takes place in remote Russia, in a lab built kilometres underground. Following some strange events that occured in the lab, the team summons an epidemiologist, Anna Federova (Milena Radulovic), to understand what is happening.

The rest of the film is a slow but relentless discovery of a new disease which could kill humanity.

Even though the film is really intriguing, in its own creepy kind of way, some bits are not completely convincing. There is also a great resemblance with "The thing", with the main difference that the monster in this film is much more disgusting, because of the very way it is formed.

The end is open to different opinions, as we do not really understand whether the outcome is positive or negative.

Over all I think the film is worth watching, since the idea around the story and the subtext behind it are really interesting. I also liked the main actress: she manages to create a character who is stern and strong, but at the same time deeply unsettling, in the same way as the whole atmosphere is.

Whenever I see a film starring Saoirse Ronan I am immediately attracted to it. She is a fiery chamaleon, capable of giving convincing life to any character. She manages to create something beautiful in this film too, also thanks to the work she shares with Paul Mescal, a vibrant and emotional actor.

The main problem is that the great abilities of these two actors cannot sustain the mere lack of sense in the story.

The film is set in a dystopian future in which the Earth is not habitable anymore (have you ever heard anything similar?). Hen and Junior (even their names feel a bit ridiculous!) live in a remote part of the Australian outback, struggling with the hardship such a living entails. One night a strange figure, Terrance, turns up at their door announcing that Junior has been selected to go to space for some time, in order to find another solution for human life. He will be replaced by a sort of robot identical to him, so that his wife won't be left alone.

In spite of the initial hint at space we do not get to see any travelling through the stars, but rather the exploration of the relationship between humans and artificial intelligence.

Despite a wonderful photography and a great actor interpretation, the story does not make sense, it drags for such a long time in a nonsensical psychological exploration and a final twist which just makes it worse...

This is one of those films that linger in a viewer's mind after watching them.

The story revolves around the difficult relationship between two brothers: Rocco, played by Fabio De Luigi and Guido, played by Stefano Accorsi. After decates apart they reunite at their father's (Alessandro Haber) funeral. They decide to take their father's ashes to their mother's grave, which is far from where they are, so they set off on a wonderful journey, riding two old-fashioned scooters.

This film manages to combine some great laughs with a widespread sense of melancholia, which can be perceived in the timeless landscapes, in all the little details that rimind us of the '80s, but especially in the beauty of a brotherly bond which comes to life again. The journey is the real protagonist, as it is the symbol of something much deeper and more profound.

The photography is magnificent and it is a tribute to the setting, the Emilia-Romagna region. The soundtrack evokes times of youth which are still relevant today.

De Luigi and Accorsi portray the difficulties of brotherhood perfectly, the pain of losing somebody you love and the joy of finding them again after years, realising they are the exact same people.

I highly recommend this film, it is a great little gem!

Unfortunately I haven't read the book and so my perspective is rather limited. I put off watching this film as I had the feeling it was going to be painful, and it was, very much.

The story revolves around the two protagonists (Swede and Dawn), a beautiful couple who seem to have it all, until their daughter (Merry) starts manifesting signs of psychological struggle and extreme anger. One of the main problems is that there are holes in the storyline: why does Merry get transformed like that? Why does she decide to lead such a life? Why do Swede and Dawn keep on being together? There aren't many explanations provided, but just a sad sequence of events.

I liked Dakota Fanning's performance, she gave me goosebumps and I also think Jennifer Connelly did a great job, her character is unbearably annoying and troubled. I am not sure about McGregor: he is the real omnipresent protagonist, but something is missing, there is a sort of restraint in his performance which makes it difficult to understand him.

Ultimately I really don't know what to think of it, after days I am still feeling confused and I think that is the worst part...

I shall start by saying that "less is more" and this film proves it in the opposite way. I think there should be a limit for comedies too, a limit of decency and a limit in an endless sequence of clichés and sexual jokes. I think so not because I am a prude, but just because it is not funny, it does not make you laugh if repeated over and over again.

This film is the exact repetition of the previous ones, just with two more kids included. The rest of it is the exact sequence of family stereotypes, religious stereotypes and sexual stereotypes. The characters are void of any identity, they are just symbolic figures used for the storyline:

• the crazy father-in-law married to a sweetly patient beauty queen
• the daughter suffering from oedipal syndrome
• the weak and clumsy son-in-law/husband
• the embarassing Jewish parents.

It is just ridiculous and it is such a pity as the cast speaks for itself, but nothing can overcome the triteness of it all.

This delicately beautiful fairytale tells the story of two young teenagers, Margaret and Mark, who happen to find each other in a time loop. The same day gets repeated over and over again, but nobody is aware of this apart from the two of them. Even if they enjoy an initial exploration of this strange phenomenon, after some time Mark wants to find a solution to make time go forwards again, but Margaret does not agree with him for some reason.

They are highly intellectual individuals who share the same sense of non-belonging, the same curiosity, the same humour and poetic look at things. The whole film is very beautiful thanks to its unique perception on life and on the little things that make it wonderful. It is a long overview of stunning tiny details.

The four points I have given to the film go to Jason Segel, the only real source of comedy in the whole film. The rest of it is just watery and senseless.

Peter and Zooey are engaged, everything seems perfect: great relationship, great house, great careers, great friend support on her side. The only thing that makes Zooey skeptical is the fact that her boyfriend has no friends. He overhears her and being such a good soul, he makes it his mission to find one. He meets Sydney by chance and the two of them hit it off immediately. Is it going to be too much though?

I think the story is ridiculous and the majority of the characters are even worse. Zooey is just spoilt and unbearable, her friends are nymphomaniacs, Peter is such a weak and plain character. I really don't know what happened to Paul Rudd in this film, I normally like him, but he did not communicate much and everything felt akward.

The only laughs come from Segel, who is utterly hilarious as usual, apart from the bits where he has to be cheesy too.