Even tough the deepness of its simple portrait is remarkable, it kind of let me down at moments, when you expect a wider range of reactions involving love to be expressed by the characters, The repetition of songs imply something at first, but then, as they repeat over and over, they feel disponsable. It's a nice film but I guess not one for the ages

As Quinton said, Style over substance. The good thing about Welles is the way he knows how to substitute the literary stuff with the cinematographic one. I knowWelles disliked to shot "easy" elements, such as deaths, accidents, sex; so I didn't actually felt bad when George had an accident and we didn't "saw" it, since the peaceful yet conclusive scene next, at the hospital fit pretty well.

I think its enjoyable as long as you follow the auteur and not the film itself. I loved it, but understand people finding it awkard or lacking of coherence. The moment it began, Mournful Indifference came to me. The camera over the top, lots of people on the street,lunatic characters and its apparent nonsensical dialogues; music as a suspicious presence; a true auteur who we must know and enjoy so we can enjoy Faust

A true mexican auteur whose characteristics refer to people idealizing people, people finding pleasure on hurting another. Rain, inner prisons, mesmerizing music. I would like to see in MUBI "Sweet Companies" which features one of the greatest mexican actors of all time: Roberto Cobo.

A great film about envy, rage, revenge and damnation, this last subject, quite characteristic from Gavaldón's filmography

Hola Armando, me encantó Un mundo raro, los diálogos me parecen verosímiles, simpáticos y exactos, y la trama muy urbana, mexicana, o sea, colindante con lo surreal, la historia de la abuelita y la receta de cocina es de mis monólogos favoritos, la verdad, una película muy auténtica en varios sentidos, ojalá pronto veamos algún otro proyecto tuyo por ahí, enhorabuena!

Alienation at its best. A guy whose job is to count people who enter a building, losing all kind of affection to substitute it with masturbation or a breakfast alone, and then trying to find himself as a human again, unable to believe his daughter is treated like any piece of garbage thrown somewhere. Very effective cinema

A great example of efficiency on film. The ending tells it all. An easy physical escape is forbidden by inner regret. Then comes the unbearable feeling of loneliness. Raw, but still fragile.

Bergman at her best. However, kind of let me down how every suspicious thing, the dissapearences, Boyer's intimidating attitude, where all about a bunch of diamonds, something they came out with just at the end. Boyer's presence as a villian is destroyed when he looks pathetic at the crucial time, hard to believe.

Zinneman lost his way on this one. When we are built up to believe his artistic bet was to face bravery from an old lonely marshal with general cowardice and its respective tension (trying to create a group around him with time vanishing), it becomes a straightforward battle with this man beating 4 "fearless" enemies getting his wife back. An easy and dissapointing resolution.

I disagree with this film not being revisionist, after all, diegetical music, wich is pretty fascist at times, helps the film get that "let's do it", "everything is lost" or "finally, justice has been made" feelings typical from action movies. Bridges, Hailee & the dialogues are great, but I wanted the film more Coen-like, sarcastic on structure & far from moral.

It's not about a plot but building an atmosphere, and i think this is what the film accomplishes. The mixture between realism and the fantastic joints are believable to say at least (music helps to give plausibility to the nightmares). Didn't like how tense moments pile up at the second half and of course, the bloody ending, which cancels the interior drama Darren wanted us to focus on the whole film.

Any time the arbitrary things come into a story, a plot may melt down, and so that happens when you let a lesbian fall in love with the donor. Even tough 2 people betray the others, they only forgive Moore, and as Tofana says, all of the sudden, it becomes an average drama with both a love traition & the not -so-child girl becoming an adult. Great acting, though.

Great storytelling. I find this film familiar with Grand Illusion in a sense that both portray mankind, fragility, even though there's an permanent intention on punishing the Nazi ideology. Anyways, I don't like elocuent stuff such as "In this country (Canada) freedom is respected, not in yours" kind of lines. Ironically, for instance, you start to emphatize with the germans being in a hurry, don't you?

Good cinematography, with odd angles but also with accurate decisions on visuals when needed. I'd add to Alysson's remarks, the bombing outside the hall, with Mark playing piano with all the noises and lights outside. For instance, SAmojlova's performance lacks the emotion required, or at least, I don't find the kind of innocence needed for empathy. Comparing to the principal characters on Ballad of a Soldier, for example, I'm not touched that much.

The best performance by a child. Gozzi's charm is a mixture between a little girl who loves playing and sort of a mature woman. On her dreams, she wants to give it all for Krueger. He, in response, becomes childish, forgetting memories of war, being an adult. Everything happens smoothly, as if they we're in a universe of their own, and everyone: a young boy, the nuns, Courcel and some others, conspirate against it.

At first, there feels a lack of development on how Auteuil and Beart fall in love, but at the end you believe in the characters, but it's a shame Auteuil and Dussollier don't seem to trust the script. In some cases, you expect Dussollier to care more about losing Camille (believable), and Auteuil speaking his mind.

Great acting by De Sica. You must fall in love with him whether he cheats, tries his luck, kisses germans shoes, and simply, with the way he moves in order to survive. Rossellini makes himself invisible, letting his characters speak for themselves, so you find the people who asks for their brothers and fathers simply heartbreaking. Maybe not the ultimate italian film, but one which tries the most extreme dilemmas.

I love the starting point of it: correspondence from one side to other and its synthesis, but it actually lasts a lot to develop: there's a lot of passion for books, but for instance, its plot is all about: "Do you have this book? Yes, I'll send it to you :) ". So when you start to actually feel something deep, such as Hanff's love for england, she just reaches Marks and company... and that's it

A good story about decay and finding away to to turn your way around. An actress choosing between staying in India or going to England, a film actor choosing between fame on film & true happiness on stage, a troupe choosing between accepting people masses not liking shakespeare anymore or returning home with a FAILURE sign on 'em. Beautiful cinematography, which makes it quite vivid.

I love the first hour, in which we are still in our way to learn what's happening, the aura of the doctor, Bambi's feelings about her couple, studies, friends, illness. After we discover the main goal the doctor has, the film starts going nude in a sterile way. Some promising moments become lost opportunities since some scenes finish or start the same way: Bambi going to sleep or waking up. The credibility of the film is damaged when some actions happen without most people realizing out. Lighting and settings help to create a great mood.

One of the main reason this film is great is not mentioned in the credits: cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa. his sense of the exact, the pictoric and the surprise lifts this western to another level. Some of the 50's main issues are there: mysoginy against an undeniable love for women as goddess. Lves on the edge for the name of pride. But cinematography compliments this themes (I must say the other way around). Just look at the nightmarish pale grey omnipresent sky and find out what I mean.

One film we mexicans must be proud of. An ode to nature. Not just the landscape which is huge and haunting, but also the nature of people. Both the kindness and craftiness of Don Plutarco are true to some old mexican people. The thoughness of Genaro and Lucio handling guerrilla stuff, fighting the regime and fighting for daily survival. The rude commander opening his heart to the musician he must fight. The dialogue is simple yet convincing. "The music is over" What a line!

I don't like the meaning Reygadas has for the word "contrast": there should be equilibrium, but when we find the beautiful, quiet, comfortable long shots, we have in both cases its "contrast". Surprise: it's hardcore sex! As if there was no other solution both contrasting and not necessarly grotesque. The pacific and the shocking next to another. I love Reygadas ideology (actually not his, but taken from neorealism) in its use of non-professional actors, but I think he risks the continuity of the film by not asking Marcos to speak more clearly. I had to repeat 3 or 4 times when he gave short answers. When Reygadas knows how to handle contrast more fluidly, I guess he's going to be great

Never goes under the surface of the story. I just don't feel Warren Beatty reaches the role. Even tough I find the acting lame I see some interesting stuff in the script related to the clash of both female and male characters, leadership, the discovery of sexuality. The ending is particulary disturbing, one of the ones I've enjoyed the most lately.

I would give this film 4 stars if it would showed its self-concioussness as a parody of those moralistic anti-drugs tales, or maybe as a critique to spectacle lifestyle. When watching the "problems" the characters had regarding marriage, fame, wigs, and the scenes that didn't bring any explanation (e.i. Sharon Tate's character rejecting being a french porn star, then having a breast issue, then suiciding, all three events happening within 4 minutes) I started to think when the director was going to tell us: "Hey, this is a joke, isn't it a great satyrical portrait?", unfortunately, it never happened.

I really loved this film. What I like the most is that the strenght of it relies on using the cinematographic devices at the point of not overshadowing the story. We actually feel the way the characters trust each other in the darkness of their kitchens. We believe in solidarity as a way to improve our society. Some funny moments here and there, but what is most enjoyable is the credibility their characters have, specially Peter Mullan. I wanted to find out more reviews on this film, but it has been actually dismissed by most people. It deserves to be viewed and commented.

There's a sense of purity, more than simple innocence on its character's behaviour related to sex, work, responsabilities, hard to find in other coming-of-age films. The ending has that rupture needed for any piece of art to avoid being geometrical. A step that filmmakers usually refuse to take.

Unbelievable. Parker spends two hours telling us how absent-minded Birdy is. The use of flashbacks wasn't worth at all. When the screenplay doesn't know where to go next, tries to sell us how terrible Vietnam was! It rejects the value of their own story. Didn't connect with Cage nor Modoni. Terrible ending, didn't fit La Bamba with two guys trying to escape..in a story which basically was from a man desiring to Fly!

Didn't like it that much. There are inconsistencies on its cinematographic ideology, e.i. dividing the screen on the first half of the film, then using that personal (i guess super16) camara. I Find repetitive and annoying all that TV show parody & the quick editing when people are doing drugs, not enough deep to touch us on the addiction issue. Moralistic when trying to show us that drugs lead us to punishment.