Reviews

Roma deserves all the praise it gets. The cinematography in particular is stunning, like nothing I've seen before. And it's one of those films that, the more you watch it, the more you notice. I've watched it 3 times, and one tiny detail which I spotted was in the martial arts scene with the instructor. When he does his blindfold one-leg performance, and everyone else tries and fails, there is just one person who succeeds, namely Cleo. There's no close-up, and you wouldn't notice if you weren't looking carefully, but it must be deliberate and telling us something about Cleo's character. A truly magnificent film which will undoubtedly become a classic.

This is one of those films that come along every few years destined to be counted among the all-time greats, like Citizen Kane and The Godfather. The most stunning aspect is the cinematography and the choreography of crowd scenes, and the overall look of the film is breathtaking. The totally sympathetic character Cleo is at the centre of the film, incredible for someone who has never acted before. Two or three set-piece scenes will touch even the hardest heart, and the single 5-minute take of the beach and sea scene is almost unbelievable considering there was no cgi or editing. On third viewing I spotted one tiny detail which I assume deliberate: during the martial-arts training, when the "Professor" demonstrates his sense of balance and everybody tries to emulate him, there is just one spectator who manages it. See if you can spot who it is!

A third brilliant film by this brilliant director. For me, Andrei Zvyagintsev cannot put a foot wrong, and the only living director to rival him is Terrence Malick. This slow burning and powerful domestic drama is a devastating indictment of Russia today (and not just Russia of course). Elena is a long-suffering and basically good woman who allows herself to become corrupted by the selfishness of those around her, and pays the price right at the end. The long scenes of Elena doing housework (shades of Umberto D and Jeanne Dielman) may seem irrelevant to some, but they are in fact essential to the story. Everyone should see this film, just as they should see his previous two, The Return and The Banishment.

With the possible exception of Malick's The Tree of Life, this is the best new film I have seen for several years (after three viewings). It certainly grows on one enormously. It is a very contemplative meditation on mortality; most of the conversations concern that in one way or another. And the characters are really changed after the night's events. The film is stunning to watch, with strong echoes of the Iranian films of Kiarostami (the fruit rolling downhill, the long-shots of winding hillside roads, etc.). Echoes also of Tarkovsky (whom Ceylan admires, and has quoted in earlier films). Strongly recommended for anyone with reasonable attention-spans.

This film is an elaborate joke, a satire on those oh-so-earnest analyses of films one sometimes comes across. Tins of baking powder which show it is a movie about the American Indian? A German typewriter (a make which I also used to use), plus a supposed Hitler moustache in the final shot, shows it is a holocaust movie? Kubrick's face in a cloud formation? Significance in running the film backwards superimposed on running it forwards? A minor character played by an actor who also played Pontius Pilate? I would go so far as to say that The Shining itself is an elaborate joke. An enjoyable one all the same. As is Room 237. But don't take it seriously!

This film seems to have divided people like no other. To lay my cards on the table: I think it will come to be seen as ranking alongside the likes of Citizen Kane and The Godfather as the "Great American Movie". I've only seen it once (it's only just opened in the UK) so may well revise that opinion after 1 or 2 more viewings, but I doubt it. It is intensely autobiographical; Malick's own brother died at the brother's age in the film, which is set in the town where Malick grew up. The much-criticised "history of the universe" section is Malick's illustration of God's answer to Job: "where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?" with Sean Penn in the Job role. As for those who found it "boring", why on earth did they go to a film which they must have known wasn't their kind of film? I enjoy EVERY film I see, simply because I carefully select which to see in the first place, having read up about them.

Having now seen it twice - what a terrific film! Arta Dobroshi is literally on screen for every single scene, and for all but a few seconds of the film: an amazing performance. When will we see more of her? The subject-matter is pretty grim, and not for those who like only romcoms and the like. I love all the Dardenne brothers films: Rosetta, The Son, and The Child, which rivals Lorna for their best in my view. Their usual trademarks are here, hand-held cameras following the characters round, usually in close-up; drab industrial surroundings (the town of Liege I believe); characters on the margins of society, including here a dodgy Russian with his interpreter. A great movie.