The Punisher

Poletti: but then you're an idiot... DON'T MISUNDERSTAND the things that are said to serve your own interests. The 2 or 3 stars do NOT go to Tutto-Fellini, but ONLY to this film (follow the lip movement: SO - LO!)... damn it. Do you want to understand this or should we keep generalizing everything?!?!

what does "oh god nooo" mean?! don't you like reggae? don't you like the Pink? don't you like this review? don't you like GOD?! explain yourself

Yes... in fact, it was a double oversight. Oh well, I apologize... as long as it’s understood.

One must distinguish between the purely "technical" level and the "narrator" level; Fellini excelled at the latter. As for technique, it left something to be desired... for him, the camera was merely a "witness" and not an "expressive medium in itself," as it is with other directors (think Q. Tarantino or Oliver Stone). I haven't criticized Fellini as a director in general (I’ve even said I LOVE him and adore many of his films). I have ONLY criticized this film. Period... don’t put words in my mouth that I did not say.

One must distinguish between the purely "technical" level and the "narrator" level; Fellini excelled at the latter. As for technique, it left something to be desired... for him, the camera was merely a "witness" and not an "expressive medium in itself," as it is with other directors (think Q. Tarantino or Oliver Stone). I haven't criticized Fellini as a director in general (I’ve even said I LOVE him and adore many of his films). I have ONLY criticized this film. Period... don’t put words in my mouth that I did not say.

One must distinguish between the purely "technical" level and the "narrator" level; Fellini excelled at the latter. As for technique, it left something to be desired... for him, the camera was merely a "witness" and not an "expressive medium in itself," as it is with other directors (think Q. Tarantino or Oliver Stone). I haven't criticized Fellini as a director in general (I’ve even said I LOVE him and adore many of his films). I have ONLY criticized this film. Period... don’t put words in my mouth that I did not say.

It is necessary to distinguish between the purely "technical" level and the "narrator" level; Fellini excelled in the latter. As for technique, he left something to be desired... for him, the camera was merely a "witness" and not an "expressive means in itself" as happens with other directors (see Q. Tarantino or Oliver Stone). I did not criticize Fellini as a director (I also said I LOVE him and adore many of his films). I only criticized THIS film. Period... don’t put words in my mouth that I did not say.

I repeat Poletti: in my opinion, this film LACKS pomposity, balance, WRITING, improvisation, gaps in the screenplay, excessive length, and arrogance in presenting frankly cliché and already overused arguments. Not to mention the "scarcity of cinematography" or the "directorial technique" which, as in other films, has never been the hallmark of this director.

I repeat Poletti: in my opinion, this film LACKS pomposity, balance, WRITING, improvisation, gaps in the screenplay, excessive length, and arrogance in presenting frankly cliché and already overused arguments. Not to mention the "scarcity of cinematography" or the "directorial technique" which, as in other films, has never been the hallmark of this director.

In "dancer in the dark" I also cried, here I was bored to death. The difference in stars is all there.