A washed up actor, famous for portraying an iconic superhero, struggles to mount a Broadway play. In the days leading up to opening night, he battles his ego and attempts to recover his family, his career, and himself.
Film ini tidak sedang tayang di MUBI, tetapi ada 30 film bagus lainnya.
Lubezki, an uncommonly gifted director of photography who has established himself as one of the major figures of contemporary international cinema, was an essential influence on the film. Iñarritu’s legitimate claim to being the creative father of Birdman aside, and whatever Keaton or its screenwriters brought to the project, Birdman feels, from start to finish, like an Emmanuel Lubezki film.
I’ve never cared much for González Iñárritu’s films; they always seem too close to their influences. Still, Birdman seems to me a fascinating example of how traditions can be revisited, or at least repackaged. I can also appreciate the skill with which the whole affair has been brought off.
Iñárritu has taken his cinematic nightmare to the Great White Way, illuminated it with Broadway footlights, located the pathos—and the hilarity—in the New York stage, and given us a cast of nuanced and beautifully acted minor characters.
Why does it begin as a mass-media and art criticism and then becomes a blockbuster? The last half hour is so bad it made me feel like rating this one star. I give it one for the atmosphere and one for Naomi Watts. But the flying scene... oh my god the flying scene. It's as bad as the final one, with Emma Stone emulating Spidey. This is not poetic vision, it's super-hero turned into "cool american hit".
Oscar — He who dreamed of theatre. Facing all the rejection a fragile little golden boy could take. About to give in, he discovers poor and destitute FILM! And with IT he conqures his city, his country, the world.
Too much talking, all of it verbal masturbation; too much "ACTING;" hated the color palate; the drums got on my nerves after a point; didn't like any of the characters. I got the film's gist, but it bored me to the point that I started doing a crossword puzzle as the movie wore on.
It has quite an interesting juxtaposition of fake v.s real, and engaging the viewer with it's continuous shot. It has it's moments and the dark humor makes up for it's lack of plot structure. Is it a "great" film? no, is it a bad film? I don't think so. There was just so much hype built into it that I expected more from this film plot wise.
Interesting...and I'm still not sure I've made enough sense of it to provide much insight here. Aside from the "big questions" that people have been trying to answer from this one, the performances are all around solid and Lubezki remains my favorite individual in filmmaking today.
An exploration of the role of a creator. When art becomes so popular and so many people can connect to it, it often feels as though it could never feel personal. However Gonzalez Iñarritu tackles the issue, probing as deep as Bergman once did.
It's somewhat of a mystery why Hollywood (and to some extent Broadway) keeps associating "quality" acting with high volume conniption fits. But certainly this would make a fine telenovela (with a tad less exhibitionism on the part of "technique").
Hopefully he'll grow out of this juvenile worldview and grow the fuck up. Self righteous self-pitying bullshit. AGI criticizes everyone for conforming to populist trends (superhero movies) but all he does is conform to a new conformity (theater) and delves into cliches and platitudes. His narrative is threadbare and his drama is bombastic and often doubles back on itself. The very definition of pretension.