ajejebrazorf

What motivation would a 6.5 deserve? To me, it's a nice film, but I've already said that no Allen film is a masterpiece for me (he's a great joke writer, but often he's not an exceptional director, plus the fact that he produces practically one film a year means that the quality can't always be excellent), and if it makes me laugh little as well, here's my rating explained.

It's not that the point is that it doesn't just make me laugh: for example, Crimes and Misdemeanors, which doesn't make me laugh, I like a lot. This doesn't drive me crazy.

What motivation would a 6.5 deserve? For me, it's a nice film, but I’ve already said that none of Allen's films are masterpieces (he’s a great one-liner, but often a not-so-exceptional director, and given that he practically produces a film every year, the quality can’t always be excellent), and if it makes me laugh little, then that explains my rating.

Certo! Inviami il testo che desideri tradurre e provvederò a farlo.

I recently saw it again; I remembered it being much better. In my opinion, it's not among Allen's best.

No, you didn't explain anything, you just threw out a few unsubstantiated statements: <<<One of the smartest films ever, mocked by critics and praised by the audience. The success is due to a relentless marketing campaign,>>> and on this, one could agree, but then you come out with <<< but this horror for unsophisticated teens is a piece of junk of epic proportions, with long (and often nonsensical) dialogues, scenes that go nowhere, and, worse still, it doesn't even manage to instill a shred of fear for even a minute. >>> Here's the thing: what you wrote means nothing; the dialogues are not deep, and thank goodness for that, it's a realistic film, see above what I wrote (but why, in a masterpiece like don't open that door, are there exceptional dialogues?), and secondly, but this is subjective, this film gave me tension, anguish, and fear. Something that has never happened to me with Shining, with don't open that door, and with most of the so-called major horrors. So there’s nothing left of your critique: the fact that the dialogues are insignificant is a naive criticism because, even more so, they contribute to the realism, and as for the fear, well, that speaks for you, but I have seen quite a few horror films, and this is one of those that instills the most tension of all.

I didn't recognize anything at all; for me, it's original, and if it takes the idea of the subjective from Cannibal, it uses it in a completely different way. The shaky footage? Thank goodness; I'd like to see the naivety of making a film that tries to seem realistic in a technically perfect way. It's practically a punk film, and this is not a detail; creating a film while deliberately disregarding technique (but not ignoring it—quite the opposite: for example, in the type of film and representation, even the choice of digital, which still does not match the quality of film, proves to be winning and appropriate). As for whether the choice not to show anything is deliberate or made out of necessity, it doesn’t matter; what counts is that, in any case, it works much better than blood or the monster.

Uhm, maybe I'm just easy to please, but I find that modern horror has made a remarkable leap in its ability to scare the pants off you. I haven't seen the original Japanese version yet (which I know is now unanimously considered a cornerstone of the genre), but I found this one very unsettling as well.

I wouldn't know how to vote for it because I saw it a long time ago. However, I believe it was definitely the film that made me laugh the most ever :)