emofiliaco

Paolafrancesca: "In short, on this site nolan is liked, ok": oh my, looking at the comments it seems the opposite! Anyway, if you take "Matrix" as a reference (besides the fact that I like it too), I think it would be hard for me to discuss with you the directorial depth of whoever, said without controversy of course. @Dottor: thank you for giving PaolaFrancesca a reference well before "Matrix," but in my opinion, we can dig even deeper (what could I have meant? ;-D)

With the utmost respect ;-) for the Doctor, it seems to me that it sounds cooler to say the opposite (at least on this site): of course, this film is not a masterpiece (due to the various script flaws already pointed out), but it must also be said that Nolan confirms himself as a director of great depth (often forced to navigate through stories that are not always up to par), among the best of his generation. I'm not very much in agreement with the references to "Matrix" (because then we would have to dig much deeper into film history), but in a film, everyone sees what they want to see.

Enbar, my friend, it doesn't seem to me that my alter ego CaptainHowdy has commented on the review, or if he did, he temporarily left my body ;-)

@Psycho: those are tastes too: as far as I'm concerned, I agree (Y)1/2 Moreover, the group is also very far from my tastes.

Indeed, the first 5 lines of the review are a free translation from the link provided by Protone: then the review develops in the usual, and also beautiful, personal style of the reviewer, but it might have been more elegant to cite the source of those first lines. P.S. The Fugazi, it goes without saying, I don't like at all.

Interestingly, I was preparing a review of "Vajont: un'orazione civile" by Paolini, but I think I’ll wait to send it since it’s been mentioned so much: I wouldn’t want anyone to think I’m a vulture ;-)

@Bartle: You're right. I know it's irrelevant, but for some reason, your comment reminded me of a post from the MB directed at the great Vic Sorriso (I'm quoting it to do a bit of spam, after all, it's a review of The Punisher): "hey Vic my love, let's make a porn movie, come on come on. You, Tessio, Emanuele Fantoni, Zigghio, Mario - let's save on crew: one thinks of an intergalactic orgy and instead it's just you jerking off.
Name: MetallaroBionico | Date: 9/2/2006 |"

Furry pachyderms? Aside from the fact that the term pachyderm has been, almost, abolished, the ursids certainly didn’t fall into that category. Regards. I haven’t seen the movie, so I wouldn’t know what to say about the rest of the review.

400 pages? White like those of the book you reviewed some time ago? I can do it for you if you want.

Yes, I understand the parallel, but in my opinion, Lynch hasn’t ruined anything at all and I wouldn’t say that he gave “what his viewers wanted” but simply followed his “flow” as usual (which often runs parallel to that of his fans: he has cultivated them, not catered to them). Then you have to consider that TP was not a cinematic product (targeted at a very specific audience) but a television one (therefore with a potentially indescribable target), and Lynch was well aware of this and proved to be adaptable: in terms of timing (different from cinematic ones) and in its “borders.” "Twin Peaks" was a practically perfect product, so much so that it continues to be taken as a reference by those who want to tackle the "dark" genre through television. Then everyone is free to think what they want, of course, but that introduction placed there like this (especially when comparing two different artistic genres and two authors who, despite being cataloged in the same environment, are very different) seems rather out of place and rather forced to me. Bye.