desade

In his genre, Fincher never misses; the film didn’t convince me, but the review did.

Amused review / entertaining, I’d happily see the group live and frankly, I don’t understand all this wrinkling of the nose.

You talked about the damned who, in a literary context (as the aforementioned page aims to be), refers to a specific group of authors. Even if it is just a footnote to a review, it would be appropriate to be precise (not overly precise!!!). You could have spoken from the beginning of "millions of people," which would have spared us certain itchy misunderstandings!!!!!...Well...

oh well... it remains published in '15

I just finished "The Winter of Our Discontent," this is missing but I will provide it. Generally, reviews of "established" authors tend to be quite bland, but this one is brief, intelligent, and intense. Well done/said.

Having already expressed myself in a very different "Metamorphosis" ;) @Nevruz: "a brick. but it has inspired millions of damned"... but if it's maybe 60 pages?! But it was published in 1915?!

I too wrote illo tempore (I’m adapting to the atmosphere, you know how it is) a page for this section, "The Idiot" by Dostoevsky; I wrote it with the intention of honoring one of the giants of world literature who taught me how to really read. I promised myself I would never do it again (Please forgive the lack of an accent, but the accented "u" has disappeared from my keyboard). The fact is that reviewing a classic of literature on a site like Debaser, and dedicating just a page and a half of Word to it, not only seems rather reductive but risks producing a homework assignment somewhere between a review, an essay, and a poorly written paper. Just like my page, one of the few that I wish I had never published. As fate would have it, today, right after an intensive afternoon of studying for an exam in Latin literature, I see a "review" of the "Metamorphoses" popping up on the homepage. I admit I felt a deep sense of boredom noticing the length of the piece, but I forced myself to read it thoroughly. I regret to point out a couple of observations. Apuleius is not among the last authors of pagan Latin literature: the "De concubitu Martis et Veneris" by Reposianus or the "Pervigilium Veneris" by Tiberian date from around the 4th century AD, and since Apuleius, as correctly noted, lived in the 2nd century, it is evident that pagan literature still had two hundred years of life ahead. Secondly, we have the complete text of Apuleius for a very specific reason: in the years of its publication, "The Metamorphoses" became a "bestseller," like a modern Dan Brown novel, so there exist dozens of copies and a rich manuscript tradition. On the other hand, the work is overly favorable to Christianity: pagan deities are ridiculed in an exaggerated and grotesque humanity, as the review states. It is painful to note that in all this discourse about Apuleius's religiosity and his relationship with pagan religion, there is no mention of the "Fabula Milesiae" and the central theme of the work: "improspera curiositas," the unfruitful curiosity that leads Lucius to undergo endless adventures and that we find mirrored in the "story," as I read above, of Love and Psyche. To make a long story short, better to abstain from voting. What is the point of a 2 on a review that, without a doubt, had the simple intention of sharing a discovery, an interest? What is the point of a 5 on an immeasurable masterpiece?

As soon as it was released, the controversy that Redford embodies was also raging in Europe at the time. A film that comes at just the right moment, it recaps what we already knew (or could have imagined) about the conflicts in the Middle East, before leaving it up to the viewer to choose between interventionism and pacifism. I find it hard to believe that Redford, a director and actor certainly not inexperienced, opted for the open ending for purely artistic and stylistic reasons. The result is an inconclusive film, and in the theater, one feels like a student forced by the teacher to write their "personal reflection" on a perpetually elusive topic. What’s worse, it doesn’t spare the usual perspective of the cynical and hypocritical man of power, the truth-seeking journalist, and the people who always bear the brunt.
The film is watchable; if nothing else, it has the merit of addressing the theme through a "common language," but Redford has certainly done better.
The review is, on the other hand, passionately on point. :)

Oh my God... the scene where Winslet sings "Sono andati" by Puccini struck me as pathetic (not to be taken in a purely negative sense, but as a desire to emphasize on a narrow level a feeling of loss and dispersion that, after all, runs through the entire film).

@Tomgil: so as soon as you see it, come back and let me know;)))