MovieChat Forums > Love (2015) Discussion > Just saw it, and it was mediocre.

Just saw it, and it was mediocre.

posted 10 years ago by Marjeez
24 replies | jump to latest

Really disappointed. Story was minimal. 3D was a gimmick. Entire movie felt like a gimmick, and didn't distinguish itself enough from regular porn. The story was just not good enough to justify making this film, and the entire film felt like it needed some fine tuning. There was a shot of sperm coming towards the audience that was.. weird.. and kind of funny, but it just didn't fit with the film. As a whole, Noe could've made a statement here, bridging the gap between cinema and porn, but at the end it just felt amateurish and unintentionally comedic.

~RANKING 2015 FILMS~
www.imdb.com/list/ls073654147/
Last seen: Mad Max Fury Road (8/10)

[–] t-w-stechnij 10 years ago

How depressing. Differentiating it from porn was obviously the biggest obstacle that this film had to face. How was the audience reception after the film? Boos/ovation?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Marjeez 10 years ago

Yup, you get to see everything here.

~RANKING 2015 FILMS~
www.imdb.com/list/ls073654147/
Last seen: Mad Max Fury Road (8/10)

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Marjeez 10 years ago

Mostly ovation, but it was more jokingly so.

~RANKING 2015 FILMS~
www.imdb.com/list/ls073654147/
Last seen: Mad Max Fury Road (8/10)

[–] TheZoolooMaster 10 years ago

Well Gaspar Noé has attained cult status in France (and abroad) after his two masterpieces, Irreversible and Enter the Void. Judging from the Cannes live feed of the première this was perhaps the most anticipated film of the festival and had the largest attendance of any première (or at least of the midnight ones). In that light I imagine the audience was a particularly sympathetic one.

It's my understanding that Gaspar has wanted to make this film for a while now, at least 5 years. Don't know what took him so long...

[–] Atheist_Dude 10 years ago

Don't know what took him so long...

Perhaps finding actors who would f_ck on camera?

[–] TheZoolooMaster 10 years ago

Trust me; judging by the interviews he gave, this was not a major problem. Tonnes of professional actors and actresses looking for a big break would do anything to appear in an Gaspar Noé film. These three, though, are not professional, and were mostly chance encounters with the director or his acquaintances. Only Glusman had acted before apparently.

[–] kit-sung 10 years ago

Yeah, because being in a Gaspar Noe film is a straight way to fame, after all that guy who stared in Enter the Void is super famous..whats his name again....?

The girls in Love are such bad actresses that they managed to make the awful dialogue even worse...

[–] Atheist_Dude 10 years ago

If professional actors were ready to f_ck on screen, why did he cast non-actors then?

I don't think actors are that comfortable with having sex on camera apart from the porn industry. That is why it is rare in mainstream cinema.

[–] TheZoolooMaster 10 years ago

He says why right here during the Cannes press conference:
https://youtu.be/zH0MBcwerxI?t=31m20s
He doesn't like casting agencies, and he says:
"I like to stop people in the street, or go into a bar and see a guy and say, why don't you do a character in one of my films."

[–] kidjay83 10 years ago

bridging the gap between cinema and porn, but at the end it just felt amateurish and unintentionally comedic.

Every time there's and attempt to bridge the gap between mainstream cinema and porn it just winds up falling apart .Trial and error for years and it'll continue to be that way .

Humankind cannot bear very much reality

[–] Marjeez 10 years ago

Nymphomaniac kind of did that. The scenes weren't as graphic as Love but it had a great story in my opinion.

~RANKING 2015 FILMS~
www.imdb.com/list/ls073654147/
Last seen: Mad Max Fury Road (8/10)

[–] DCMarvelRules 10 years ago

is this a "porno" with actual sex acts in it ?

[–] nostalgicsickness 10 years ago

Ye the actors all have sex on camera.

[–] kit-sung 10 years ago

No they dont...theres no penetration and you see no vagina...

[–] Atheist_Dude 10 years ago

Are you sure? Reviews stated that penetration is shown multiple times and even money shots.

[–] kit-sung 10 years ago

Yeah, I'm sure..there are two or three cumshots but definitely no penetration...

To compare this with porn is absurd. Whoever writes that is either dumb, a puritan or has never seen porn.

[–] Atheist_Dude 10 years ago

The director himself has called it porn.

But this isn't a porn film of course. It is an actual film with hardcore unstimulated sex scenes. That doesn't make it porn but the director wanted to provoke and hence it was publicized as such.

[–] zarathustra2k1 9 years ago

There is penetration - when she's cowgirling him, for one...

The Adventures of The Man With No Penis: http://tinyurl.com/8ezrkh

[–] lwzupl 9 years ago

The movie is shot too make it look like there's penetration but there isn't any. The oral sex is real though!

[–] ZaubererDerZweite 10 years ago

IS everything porn sized?

---
Trist on

[–] jjmn 10 years ago

There was a shot of sperm coming towards the audience that was.. weird.. and kind of funny



So that's really it? A porno directed by Gaspar Noe?

[–] terrytsilvester 9 years ago

I read a very average review in The Guardian. Shame really, i think Noe is too good of a filmmaker to make gimmicky film.