supersoul

She is a great INTERPRETER of American folk and Dylan, not a singer-songwriter as some other review has awkwardly made her out to be...
@ecioso: Kristofferson is a singer-songwriter as well as an actor (maybe you've seen him in Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid or in Convoy by Peckinpah...perhaps you're confusing him with Gerry Mulligan, ahahaha).

@dedoluz, what do you mean by the commune episode "they show that not all the criticisms directed at him are wrong"? Do you mean to say it’s an outdated and obsolete film? But don't you realize that this episode already goes BEYOND the hippy idea of the commune? Wyatt and Billy are not hippies; that episode indicates that only those who have estranged themselves from reality, like the inhabitants of the commune, can survive against that kind of "arrogant and fascist civilization," but at what cost? Depersonalized in a role without prospects and unproductive. I don't know if you remember the scene where they plant in a sandy and therefore barren field.

I saw it on TV a billion years ago; it's an incredibly trippy film that honestly doesn't seem like a Comencini work at all. The message is dire; the poor can't just take it up the ass like the beaten dog Sordi, they have to react with violence to get what they rightfully deserve. But why do some reviewers not include the release date of the film? Who knows...

I couldn't say which is Miles' best, but dear morningstar, to say that one can't bear to see Kind of Blue mentioned—you should have at least listened to it, or else... remain silent.

I saw it years ago at a showcase and I have no idea how to get my hands on it. The setting is still that of a circus; let’s just say it’s the story of a knife thrower (with his feet) who has his arms amputated because he’s in love with a psychologically disturbed girl who was terrified of being hugged by a man. Clearly, it ends badly, just like in Freaks. "Horror" sado-masochistic in its purest form.

@leonid in my opinion, it's not so much a matter of a good god and a bad god, but rather the demonstration that the wickedness of human nature resides both in a perfect matter and in a horrible one. In the end, the freaks that we all mourned throughout the film as unfortunate children turn out to be "spiritually" similar to the normal bad ones.

@odradek, I understand your reluctance to "classify" this film as horror, but let’s leave behind our speculations born from years and years of cinema. At the time, Browning was a director blessed with great commercial success and specialized in the horror genre with his favorite actor, Lon Chaney. In my opinion, he was the David Cronenberg of his time, and for me, considering Cronenberg a horror director is limiting, but films like Rabid, Brood, and Scanners are horror. Chaney was in "competition" with James Whale, but unlike him, he was much more refined and attentive to the psychopathic nature of the characters. Freaks is proof of this, but don't forget that a whole section was cut that showed the torture of the trapeze artist and the castration of her lover. I don’t know if you’ve seen "The Unknown," the silent film he made in '27 with Chaney and Joan Crawford; it’s shocking. Anyone who loves Lynch should know where to do their shopping....

If there ever was an archetype of a cursed film, I think this is it, and I welcome two, five, ten reviews that can offer their perspective, their feelings about the scene of the chase with the trapeze artist, shot at the level of the freaks, amidst the mud, the rain, and the caravans. No, it's not incorrect to call it horror, and that was precisely Browning's intention, as he was quite the cunning one. Some of the freaks who participated in the film even claimed that the director mocked their "category," and Browning eventually stepped away from directing, convinced that the world wasn't ready for his imagination. Years later, as purpulan rightly points out, it would be his contemporary colleagues who would rehabilitate and pay tribute to him. Regarding the closure of Punisher, I would say it's as harmless as those "artists" who pose as deviant, strange, or drug-addled because they're just clowns constructed by the media; those who truly are or were extreme (GG Allin? Darby Crash?) have been pushed to the margins. We want to be ridiculed and not truly disturbed. And this film truly disturbs.

but what the fuck does it mean a film with content? and above all, that a film without content cannot be a good film? I can find content in one film and not in another, while you see it in one and not in the other. If then you say they are films to be considered indispensable classics, then Gone with the Wind can be considered an indispensable classic... but regardless of what? who gives the assessment? The "historically proven" that poletti talked about so distressingly?

I wouldn't want to stir up controversy; I absolutely don't think you're an idiot, but you give me the impression of Colonel Kurtz going into the indigenous village (debaser?), takes a look around, puts himself above God, and decides how war should be waged, how justice should be administered, how morality should be established, etc., etc. I definitely don't want to be Captain Willard, and I don't hesitate to think I could end up being humiliated in a matter of minutes—but not by you. Poletti.