ilpanes

Right, but I've never heard of Mendes... maybe he declared it! I mean, he’s a respected theater director for a long time, he can't be the last of the idiots!

Poletti, sorry... but if a film has already used the trick of the dead person telling the story, can no one else do it anymore? If cinema worked that way, all themes would have been exhausted by the end of the silent era. 'Blade Runner' or 'Matrix' couldn't have existed, nor any film about war, not to mention comedies and dramas (after all, after 'Assunta Spina', any dramatic film about love tragedies wouldn't have added anything!). @boyintheocean: you know... I've thought a lot about the fact that the initial description would have weighed down the review, but in the end I included it to point out how the stylistic choices (direction/set design/costumes) in this film are anything but superficial. A personal curiosity: if 'American Beauty' is not just a critique of the vacuous American bourgeoisie, what else is it? Thanks to everyone, anyway: I love debates when they have substance ;-)

For heaven's sake. I'm not saying that Poletti doesn't know cinema; after all, I don't know him... it's just that it seems to me like a stance taken from the start just because the film has become (and I believe it wasn't born that way) a box-office hit. The fact that it deals with themes that have already been widely discussed is valid, but it doesn’t do so in a predictable way... absolutely not! There is a deliberate use of citationism, directed towards the aesthetics of Hollywood and American sitcoms, but it should be read critically in order to deepen the critique of the American system.

thank you elected, I knew we would understand each other ;-)

Here is my review, eletto1987, which is specifically written to counter those who think like Poletti (that is, the majority of the critics). Beyond my motivations, which I have extensively explained (mixed, sorry, but I needed space to clarify my position, this is not a Ciak review), I believe that saying this film is for those who have missed 40 years of cinema history is frankly an exaggeration.

eletto1987 let's say the same thing... I praised the film precisely because it wasn't shot in a transgressive-bourgeois way. perhaps you didn't understand what I meant.

why?

I decided to review the film even though it was reviewed a few days ago because I completely disagree with the other review ;-)

I decided to review the film even though it was reviewed a few days ago because I completely disagree with the other review ;-)

I don't understand why someone can't review an album that's already been reviewed. I mean, even if it has been reviewed 200 times, what the hell changes? STIPE felt like writing the two hundredth one and did it! Besides the fact that this album has been reviewed since the eighties (and therefore even those who wrote the first review on debaser definitely didn't perform such an original act), if you’re not interested in reading it, then don't read it! It's that simple... this way we avoid sending people to get fucked by any animal they want and peace will triumph in the world...