I watched it based on a prior review on IMDB to the one that's currently posted. The prior review was 10 Stars and very long. I didn't bother to read the whole review because it was so long, but figured pretty much anything that got 10 Stars had to be worth a watch, lol.
I have to say the current review is more accurate, although I didn't read more than the first paragraph of it, either. While the movie isn't any disaster, it's certainly not 10 stars, either. I think it moves way too slowly in an attempt to be more "artsy" than it's capable of being... way too much time spent with "the lone man" just lying on his bed, staring out windows, staring at his espresso, etc. This movie could have been cut to 90 minutes and been a better film, I think.
I liked the roles played by a totally unrecognizeable Tilda Swinton, John Hurt and Bill Murray playing pretty much against type... and of course the eye candy presented by Paz de la Heurta was no problem, either. It might have also been nice, however, to have some idea of the who and why, though -- at least at the end. I realize the final comment made by "the lone man" may be the film's POINT, in which case what I just said is irrelevant, but I'd still have liked to have known.
One thing I'll say for it -- although this was an "American film" made in Europe, it was certainly as strange as any true European film, many of which are like this, leaving you wondering what kind of weird dream you just woke up from.
Jeff
reply
share