23 of 86 people found the following review helpful
This is not a love song,
This review is from: Blue Is the Warmest Colour [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)
If there wasn't so much enthusiasm about this movie, I might be less critical;but it strikes me as absurd-to say the least-to see everybody find this Andel story the masterpiece of the year(the fuzz started in Cannes when among the masterpieces that were in competition there-and I have seen two:Venus in furs and Only god forgives-they chose this for the grand prize).To start with the good news, I admit that Blue is the warmest colour follows the tradition of a cinema that is supposed to center on the reality of real people(some believe that this is enough to guarantee ART), from Cassavetes to the Dardin brothers, and it does so with a script that can be considered an achievement, as it fills three hours of a film with small casual talks that nevertheless define the plot.For the first hour I could even say I was watching with some interest, as the microcosmos of Adel was unfolding.But-the bad news start-as the film goes on, the repetition-of Adel's face, for example-and the shallowness of the movie made me real angry, so angry that I could hardly bear keep watching.This is a story that could be easily laughed at if it wasn't for the homosexual content that grants the movie an applause for its boldness and if it wasn't for the artistic alibi with which it presents itself, copying the much admired these days aesthetic of this-is-real.Shaken camera, centering on faces(to catch the facial expessions?), casuality, raw erotic scenes, to hide a melodrama you might encounter in the worst of pulp fiction.This is the kind of movie I despise;pretentious, trivial and yet passing for great without having anything to say.Blue is the warmest colour, in my opinion, is worthless, and its promotion by everyone can only be considered as a symptom.This is not reality folks, just supposed seriousness that is most annoying;and of course this review is certainly not a love song!
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 48 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 1 Dec 2013 22:38:11 GMT
M. Bongiovanni says:
I don't think we watched the same movies. Abdel Kechiche is one of the most important director of the new millennium All his movie (La Faute à Voltaire, Games of Love and Chance Couscous) are excellent except one (Black Venus). Blue Is the Warmest Colour is probably his best movie in terms of style and storytelling. In contemporary cinema is now rare that you find yourself wondering what will happen to the protagonists, in this case to Adèle, after she has turned the corner of the street, a bit like when Antoine Doinel, at the end of "The 400 Blows" , looking at us, even invoking our intervention, then we would like to reach Adèle, embrace it, and tell her that she has to leave something behind in order to get ahead.
Posted on 22 Jan 2014 01:21:56 GMT
Jersey Sucks says:
Posted on 27 Jan 2014 14:24:06 GMT
Like "Ledra"'s 1-Star Review, Mr Oikonomidis seems to be producing false and unnecessary criticism.
You say: "If there wasn't so much enthusiasm about this movie, I might be less critical; but it strikes me as absurd-to say the least-to see everybody find this Andel story the masterpiece of the year(the fuzz started in Cannes when among the masterpieces that were in competition there-and I have seen two:Venus in furs and Only god forgives-they chose this for the grand prize)."
Firstly, what the hell's an "Andel story"?! Secondly, the fact you have seen two other "masterpieces" is irrelevant, but I know of many people who would say that ONLY GOD FORGIVES was far from being a masterpiece, let alone even being a good film. Thirdly, you claim "everybody" thought BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOUR was a masterpiece, as if everyone ascribes to that view, and you are the odd-one-out. That's a great way to start a review.
By your own admittance, if a film had had no critical reception or appreciation at all, you'd be kinder to it? But because it's been celebrated and praised, that justifies your own damnation of it?! Hmmm. That sounds fishy to me. Sounds much like a certain (now-deceased) film critic, who used to slate any film made after 1970, and praise any film made before it. (It was Leslie Halliwell, in case anyone was wondering.)
You go on to say: "But-the bad news start-as the film goes on, the repetition-of Adel's face, for example-and the shallowness of the movie made me real angry, so angry that I could hardly bear keep watching."
So, again, by your own admission, if Adele's (her name has an "e" on the end of it!) face had been more expressive and less repetitious, that would have allowed you to give the film a better rating. Wow! You really know how to review film's, don't you?!
Continuing on: "This is a story that could be easily laughed at if it wasn't for the homosexual content that grants the movie an applause for its boldness (snip)"
Oh dear, oh dear. You really do sound like you know nothing about what you are talking about. So what if the film had strong (homo)sexual content? Yes, that's bold and novel, but - by your slightly skewed viewpoint - without such content, the film would be laughable. Umm, no, it wouldn't. It would just be less sexually explicit.
"Shaken camera, centering on faces(to catch the facial expessions?), casuality, raw erotic scenes, to hide a melodrama you might encounter in the worst of pulp fiction."
So, tell me, what achievements have you made in your life, that aren't "pretentious, trivial or passing passing for great without having anything to say" as you so aptly describe it?! I suspect very few, if any. I hate to break it to you, Mr Oikonomidis, but most people's lives, are pretty uneventful and dull. We sleep. We eat. We Work. We play. Repeat ad infinitum. Only occasionally, do we do/see/accomplish something of note; of real meaning and value to the world.
This was not a film about achievements, accomplishments, or purpose. It was a film about ordinary people, leading relatively ordinary lives. It was a film about two people, both slightly damaged, both slightly wounded, seeking fulfillment in each other, despite society attacking them and condemning them. It was a film about a young couple in amour-fou, not fully comprehending why they felt the way they did, nor attempting to understand that love. They were, living very much "in the moment", so-to-speak.
You then said: "Blue is the warmest colour, in my opinion, is worthless, and its promotion by everyone can only be considered as a symptom". Slating a film, because you don't like it I can accept. Slating a film, and slating those who also like it, is both heartless and shows-up a distinct lack of skills in your film-reviewing capabilities. You're very much like the Daily Mail, in that you criticise that which you don't understand, and slate that which others find much enjoyment in.
Like Ledra, who also wrote a meaningless 1-Star review, you have failed to understand the film's themes. You've also failed to write anything more meaningful than: "The film is crap. I hate the film. Therefore the film, and people who liked it, are crap."! That's not a review. That's the penmanship and mental understanding of a six-year-old!
You ended with the trite "This is not reality folks". Well, no kidding. And here was me thinking this fictional film, based on a fictional graphic novel, was really a seering treatise and condemning indictment of the French treatment of lesbian women, all based entirely on facts. Stone the crows, who'd have thought it! And then you write "this review is certainly not a love song!"! Oooh, look everyone. Mr Oikonomidis has writen a nod to the opening lyrics of a Public Image Ltd song, recently famously used in two other more intellectual films, namely WALTZ WITH BASHIR and CARLOS THE JACKAL. Give the man a big-hand for shoe-horning that into his review... not!
Like the Greek economy, your review is flatlining badly, and needs a major kick in the boonies to get it back up to speed. I'd expect this kind of flacid nonsense from a tabloid hack. Alas, you seem happy to claim your cinematic prowess by shoe-horning in other well-known and "superior" names and titles, whilst simultaneously saying nothing actually worth reading.
I fear that you've gone to see the film for the wrong reasons, and now that the film has failed to live up to those reasons, you feel you have the right to condemn it. So be it.
It still doesn't mean any of what you wrote was correct.
Posted on 30 Jan 2014 00:58:01 GMT
N. Maync-Matsumoto says:
I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it. I found it great.
In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2014 12:52:29 GMT
Nikolaos Oikonomidis says:
thanks for the polite response
In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2014 13:24:39 GMT
Nikolaos Oikonomidis says:
I empathise with the rage you're expressing at someone who was so negative towards something you've loved;usually I feel the urge to write something when I 'm very happy or very unhappy with a movie or something, and I have to admit that it is in the former cases I feel most justified in having done so(although I agree that even then I am often taken away by emotions and not focusing in what an interesting review might be, but try to defend what I have loved by all means).In the case of Adele(thanks for the correction), it just happened to fall in a certain category of movies whose aesthetic I don't approve, as they try to produce a certain feeling of reality through certain ways, which I do not find convincing or satisfying at all;my response had to do with the general applause this kind of filming receives, and it had to do mainly with figures of authority who promote such a choice of aesthetic and with my tendency to defend my point of view passionately(and the movies I like also);of course there are all the people who happened to be touched by the movie, as I found out afterwards and for me this is something I respect.Without having changed opinion at all(this could be an option, as I'm not always stuck on first impreessions), I'd like to say that I'm on the side of the passion, therefore on your side and on the other spectators' that loved the movie, when I see you coming in defense of it the way I would do for something else.There are points in your response with which I don't agree and to which I could answer in some way, but that was not the reason I'm writing this.I don't even feel the need to be apologetic as my review had certain reasons to be that way at the moment.It's been some time now, so I feel rather distant, yet I saw your response and others' and it made me think a little;I think taste is a personal matter and I consider it sacred.As for style, I think it is vital to accompany any meaningful content, but even style is a matter of taste as well.So...
In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2014 10:09:09 GMT
Nothing annoys me so much as the sort of comment made by M.Bongiovanni when, in defence of Blue is the Warmest Colour , he remarks that Abdel Kechiche is one of the most important directors of the new millennium. So what? This does not make any film made by him good by default. I have experienced this sort of remark myself;once commenting on what I thought was a load of pretentious drivel, I was told ' but it's by director X' Sorry, but a currently 'in' director does not guarantee a good film
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Feb 2014 04:00:24 GMT
Robert Blenheim says:
And you pointing out that saying so-and-so "is one of the most important directors" doesn't mean a film is good doesn't mean that the film referred to is bad by default. Your point is also meaningless.
Nothing annoys me so much as someone who says "Nothing annoys me so much...".
Some of us think M. Bongiovanni made a more valid point than you did. So sue us.
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Feb 2014 17:19:20 GMT
J. E. Holmes says:
the French have been making soft-porn drivel disguised as Art-film for decades.
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Feb 2014 17:22:16 GMT
Robert Blenheim says:
3 hours of great acting with only about 12 minutes of it with sexual activity. A pretty low percentage for a 'porn' film!!!
Methinks if you watch it only for its sex you're going to be greatly disappointed. If you want a great film with superb acting, you should get a rewarding film experience.