Adele - The most insipid vapid character ever
I just couldn't connect with her. There was no emotion there, or was that the point?
No emotion in Adele? Did you not notice the many, many times she cried, how she was literally red in the scene where her "friends" are grilling her, her big smile?
shareI didnt believe it though. It looked forced and her face was still monotonous even while she was crying!
shareI disagree. I thought "Adele" was the movie's big strength. I think the script itself had a lot of flaws. And while I don't think (because of those flaws) the movie was the masterwork a lot of people are making it out to be, Adele was a compelling enough character, (and the actress gave a compelling enough performance), to successfully carry the movie (despite those script flaws), and have me grade the movie a solid "B".
shareMay I ask you what flaws you think the script had? I'm just curious.
What's truth got to do with anything?
I thought the script had a lot of "fat"; in both unnecessary scenes, and a lot of scenes going on longer then they needed to. It was as though the filmmaker couldn't bear the thought of taking a needed scapel to his work
I also thought some of the conversations between the characters were rather tedious slogs to witness. And I thought some of the movie's early scenes were clumsy, or forced. And I also thought that for a movie, that apparently takes place over the course of a number of years, the movie conveys very little sense of that length of time passing. If it wasn't for the fact that Adele goes from high school student, to teacher, I could have easily thought this story takes places over the course of just a few months.
But despite all that, I thought the movie was successfully carried by the performances/characters. Particularly "Adele" who I thought was very well acted. She brought me into the story, and made me care, despite the flaws of the script. I didn't find Emma to be quite as compelling a character, but she was solid enough. I also thought the movie was carried by the overall
Adele/Emma relationship, and the overall story that was being told, and an undercurrent of raw emotion that ran through the film.
Thank you for your response.
I agree some scenes went on far too long, but I think that has a lot more to with editing than the script.
I didn't find the dialogue forced at all, maybe because it was in French and I had no reason to question the delivery.
I sort of agree with the amount of time passing not being clear. But I figured that the majority of viewers would know that she'd be in a college at least 3 years to get her degree and then she'd be a teacher straight off the bat. A movie I have a huge issue with the passage of time being unclear in is 12 Years a Slave. That drove me CRAZY.
I didn't find Emma that compelling at first, but after a lot of reflection I would love to see her side - I'd love to see a film from her point of view.
What's truth got to do with anything?
I though Adele's character actually showed a lot of emotion. I felt a sympathy/empathy for her at many points during the film. As for the dislodge I thought it was brilliant, any more 'wittier' and the whole thing would come across as extremely scripted.
I agree with kennegis. The problems were "unnecessary scenes, and a lot of scenes going on longer then they needed to." as well as the lack of feeling of time (I got slightly confused as to what point she moves out of her parents house, how long she spends with Emma, how she suddenly goes from the Nursery to the Primary School Teacher). 'Time' wasn't well portrayed.
Of course, I respect your opinion. However, I get an itch to respond with my own (counter) opinion whenever I see someone complain about how parts of a movie are "unnecessary" or "too long". Sometimes, there's certainly something to it, but more often, to me, it seems that movies tend not to have enough unnecessary scenes. This is what I like about the "slice of life" or, as is perhaps more the case here, "life" movies. They show a bit more; it doesn't all have to fit neatly into a plot that moves at a predefined pace. It doesn't require the viewer to worry about how a character that is introduced is "important later on" or some such, instead allowing the character to have their importance in the moment itself. Same with events, locations, settings, themes.
If (certain types of) movies are supposed to portray (aspects of) life, it only makes sense: not everything in life is equally important or salient or profound, but it all serves to paint a picture of a life in total. Just my two cents.
It was a bit sudden when jumps in time occurred, and it wasn't always clear, that's true enough. However, it probably would have broken the style of the movie a bit to have some kind of transitional scene, or some text on screen saying how much time had gone by, or some such. Each scene was pretty much an honest, direct representation of some aspect of the main character's life... so I understood the choice they made in that regard.
---
My vote history: http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=13037287
I think the script itself had a lot of flaws.
Here's a fun fact: the film was almost completely unscripted. There was a script, but the director had the actresses read it only once. Much of the on-screen dialogue was, in fact, improvised. The director wanted this to achieve the utmost realism of everyday life. I agree that sometimes it seems tedious and clumsy, but then again, real life conversations tend to do the same thing, right? share
I agree that sometimes it seems tedious and clumsy, but then again, real life conversations tend to do the same thing, right?
Indeed, I much prefer the realism of improvised dialogue... just need to get the vibe going and understand the circumstances.
Hitler had the right idea share
Totally agree. She had the most believable performance I saw in years. Maybe the most believable one, she really seems like a real person.
shareNah, I disagree. I had heard a lot about both actresses ever since last year's Palme d'Or and I was blown away by Adèle, and even though I do not like Lea Seydoux from the little I've read of her in interviews I thought she was amazing too. Adèle was simply incredible. As in, very, completely credible.
shareIt looked forced and her face was still monotonous even while she was crying
Exactly my thoughts. The acting was pretty bad in general. share
Glad someone agrees!
shareCompletely disagree. The acting was fenomenal. It seemed monotnous because we are used to everything being exagerated and over-emotional and they were going for realism instead of theatrics. The way people act in films and series is mostly not at all how we actually behave and react in real life. The fact that most of this film was improvised tells us that they didn't know what the other was going to say and had to come up with a reaction on the spot. Making it an actual reaction and less acting. So calling it bad acting is a bit silly, because they were not acting most of the time.
shareInteresting. Thanks man.
My 100 favorite movies http://www.imdb.com/list/Uvw_F2_GMx8/
What are your favorites?