Posts by Amanda Nguyen5

Arthur Garcia59 said:The heavy hitters here are stuff like "Moscow, Belgium" and "Drummer." I’ve already got my eye on "Desert of Souls"—it looks incredible—and people are buzzing about that Ozpetek flick ("Saturn in Opposition") and some amazing rumba movie too.

Sadly, I haven't had the chance to catch anything yet. Still, I'm glad I aimed for the top tier this time. Last year was a disaster—I watched basically everything and most of it was total junk.

And a quick shoutout to 🙏 northerncrane4 regarding those dice predictions.

redowl90, how's the word on Kaufman's distribution situation?

Jerry Martin19 said:Well, looks like I accidentally hit on that autobiographical connection with Bergman. What I meant was more about how the characters experience their adventures. You can view a Bergman character from multiple perspectives, whereas with a Fellini character, you're pretty much stuck seeing everything through the lens of the character himself...

It’s interesting because Bergman absolutely loved Fellini and used to visit him in Italy quite often. He wasn't exactly big on anything outside of his cold Sweden, but Fellini was one of those rare guys he could truly feed off of. He resonated with that Mediterranean playfulness and optimism. Fellini, on the other hand, used to get a bit fed up since Bergman could be pretty intense, eventually leading to him being told to stay away for a while... 🤣

Three days per guest is plenty 😁

offtopic: I was just about to reply to your DM, but I think I'll make you wait a bit 😬

edit:

That's what I was thinking—I was just messing around a bit, with us, with myself 😁

I have to admit, I'm actually enjoying this tutorial 🙂

You can never have too many tutorials, especially when you're just starting out. Seriously, they're lifesavers.

Look, I’ve basically mastered Fellini thanks to Central Park, Kezich, and Bondanelli. So, if you ever hit a wall, just reach out to me. Honestly, I can help you out—and I'm not alone. Joseph Lee3 and northerncrane4 are more than happy to jump in too.

Hey, did you actually get a chance to read that PDF?

bluestag7 said:From my perspective? 😕

I read the book a few years back, so I was just wondering if they could actually turn it into a fun movie. 🙂

I was talking about the title. The movie is called "129.90," and since you titled it "129.99," it's a bit overrated from your point of view.

Michael Newman50 said:nisidanas:
Desert of the Soul is actually pretty solid, even if it’s a bit of a slog to sit through.

Bordwell raved about it on his blog ages ago, so it was basically my only "must-see" from the main lineup. Sadly, I didn't make it, so nothing to report.
But hey, I trust Bordwell. 😉

By the way, can someone tell me why my post got yanked? There wasn't a single swear word or insult in there. Seriously, what gives? Who did that?

Jerry Martin19 said:Why didn't I start this thread myself? Because honestly, if you’re gonna kick off a discussion about a movie or a filmmaker, you should actually say something meaningful in the opening post instead of just asking "Have you seen La Dolce Vita? Let me know what you think." Especially when we're talking about movies that aren't even out yet—that's one thing. But when it comes to stuff that's already been released, particularly classics like this, they deserve way more than a couple of lazy sentences to get things moving...

Thanks for the links. I was already familiar with The Guardian and Roger Ebert, but these others will definitely come in handy. 🙂

Just keep typing away. But honestly, the absolute best stuff is in that PDF text—I just need a little more time to get through it.

Look, I'm telling you again—most of the good stuff is still in the books. If you’re actually serious about getting into Fellini, you really ought to go hunting for those.

bluestag7 said:What's the deal with sinegdoha and $43?

The second one is definitely overrated, at least if you ask me. 😉

What an opening... Professor Gillis... 😂😂...absolute madness
What else can you say, mladoturk?

By the way, Jerry Martin19, I’m posting this here, but we really need to move this to its own dedicated "Dolac Vita" thread. For some reason, you didn't start one, but I'm sure a mod will open it soon enough.

Honestly? It was incredibly boring. Sure, it’s beautiful, directed perfectly, and that Bergmanesque vibe is just sexy—everything about it is great—but man, it is tedious. Easily the most boring Felliniesque film I've ever seen, even though I've only sat through it once.

As for deep dives, I’ve read Bondanelli and Kezich, and there isn't a ton of stuff online either. The Wikipedia entry is actually top-tier (unlike most movies), covering everything from production to all the juicy details. Still, I went on a bit of a hunting spree online and uploaded a more serious—and maybe slightly tougher—PDF for you in the "Fellini" folder.😉

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...401010336/1023
http://brattleblog.brattlefilm.org/?p=42
http://bronze.ucok.edu/passport/ital...ger/dolce.html
http://www.rufuspollock.org/nonficti...olce_vita.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/...es.worldcinema

+

http://rapidshare.com/files/15641231...iardi.pdf.html

Hope this helps you out.

goldenhound32 said:Heh. Someone already pointed out there's just no money in it here, and frankly, they're right.

Thank God for streaming services; at least those actually interested can go watch it on their own time.

there was way less money made on much worse projects, too.
aha, if I'm watching for Deakins, I'd rather kiss my own palm.

redowl90 said:Look, can we please just get some decent movies made? Something that isn't just pure misery, rage, or suffering... Give us happy people, fun plots, actual jokes... Not just constant tragedy and depression. I've had enough of it, seriously!

And here I go again. Ana Hušman - "Lunch".

It played at tons of festivals, won a DHF, got all the press coverage, and still—absolutely nobody watched it. 🤷

Chloe Nguyen said:A truly magnificent piece of cinema.
I was fully aware that the pacing would be deliberate and slow, so I made sure to clear my schedule in advance to give it the attention it required. Those who go in expecting a standard, fast-paced Western are likely to be quite surprised.

The acting is nothing short of superb. Brad Pitt delivers a compelling performance as Jesse James—he manages to be quite vicious, yet simultaneously appears profoundly unlucky and deeply isolated. That said, I suppose Casey Affleck actually steals the entire show; his portrayal of a complete and utter creep is so convincing that his Oscar nomination feels entirely earned. I am perhaps not entirely certain if he outshines Bardem, but I certainly wouldn't complain if he were to take home the prize.

Kudos to Nick Cave; the score is an absolute triumph. However, I found myself plagued by this nagging sensation throughout the runtime that the music sounded hauntingly familiar, though I couldn't quite place it. It wasn't until later that I realized the melodies were reminiscent of The Fountain.

Ultimately, it is a genuine shame that the film passed by almost unnoticed by American audiences—though, in my estimation, that is largely due to the studio's failings, as the movie deserved much more aggressive promotion.

Look, the movie didn't just go "unnoticed"—it was basically invisible because it wasn't even playing in theaters, despite all the hype! So, goldenhound32, don't act surprised that hardly anyone saw it.

northerncrane4 said:No clue.

Do you mean "I don't know" because you haven't seen it, or "I don't know" as your take on what you actually watched?

northerncrane4 said:Honestly, I’m just gutted they didn't make room for that brilliant seven-minute gem, "Where the Penguin Flies" by Kristina Kumric and Davor Kanjir. 😢😢😢

Got a link or something?

What about "Lunch"?

northerncrane4 said:That’s exactly what I thought last year, and man, it left me feeling totally depressed because those little indie flicks were just so weak.

Yeah, I get it😁. I still remember how annoyed and bummed out you were by them, so I take your word for it even though I haven't watched anything yet. Still, it feels weird that Devic's movie turned out to be a dud too, right?

Anyway, this is a tiny bit off-topic, but did you catch "Lunch" by Husmanica? To me, it felt super fresh and really solid, so I'm curious if that one let you down as well?

About this year's indie lineup—just a quick thought—"Reciklus" is getting praised on basically every major stage, while some other directors... well, you know. Even if most of this hype is just subjective stuff from people who think they know best, maybe I'll actually go see how they hold up in practice, since they certainly talk a big game.

Arthur Garcia59 said:Look, if "The Process" is playing at 35mm, honestly, just go see that and call it a day. 😁

Bad news. Just heard that nothing from "Film@Cro" or "My First Movie" is actually running on film. It’s all just DVDs, except for Ustinov's "Falcon," which is being projected from a beta tape.
Such an incredible lineup, wasted on such crappy media.

Whatever. We'll just catch Piero at Tuškanac and Leigh over at Cinestar. 😉

feralwalker said:I’ve been hunting for a thread about this specific event, but I can’t find anything. I feel like I saw it somewhere on here before... If it already exists, mods, please feel free to move this post to the right topic.

Anyway, here’s what I wanted to ask—every year there’s this one movie that basically defines the festival. Like, two years ago it was Borrati, last year it was Control, so I figured I’d ask you guys: what should we be looking out for at the upcoming edition?

Thanks in advance.

Neither "Borrati" nor "Control"—and definitely not "Choke," which neonmaker10 mentioned—are really the movies that put this festival on the map.
All those titles were part of the "matinee" program. That just means they were already bought up and were essentially just a sneak peek before hitting regular theaters. Honestly, they're the least stressful parts of the lineup.
Same goes for "Elite squad," so don't get ahead of yourself.

If you want to talk about what truly defines this festival, it could easily be Kaufman if he doesn't hit the mainstream theaters. It would be like that situation with Dukic at MFF, where everyone was talking about how "Kamikaze Pizzeria" was coming to theaters, so people actually skipped it thinking they'd see it later, only for it to win some big award and bypass theaters and DVD entirely. If something like that happens with Kaufman and he's only shown at ZFF, that's probably how the festival will be remembered.

What do we recommend? Well, it might be worth giving "Wave" a shot, and for pure entertainment, maybe "129,90." Also, check out the whole "My First Movie" and "Film@Cro" programs. I bet there will be a few solid gems in the indie categories too. As for the main stuff, "Moscow, Belgium" and "Drummer" look pretty good. Personally, I think "Desert of Souls" looks amazing, and people are saying great things about Ozpetek ("Saturn in Opposition") and "Rumba."

Seems like a solid lineup.

ps if "The Trial" is playing at the 35th, just go see that and you're set.😁

Ryan Roberts2 said:...but since I'm a massive fan of anything the Apatow crew touches..

Yeah, true, but here's the thing: the "Apatow crew" is starting to feel less like it's just about Apatow and more like just a random group of people.

???

It’s got some solid laughs, but man, those last 40 minutes are a total train wreck.
Better than your typical mindless comedy, but definitely not high-brow stuff.

Ugh. Just watched it for the second time today.

Look, the movie is nothing short of genius. Period.

I’m not sure if I subconsciously steered my own perspective since I already knew the story, but Daisy felt like she was in the background this time around. My focus shifted to everything happening *around* her instead. It made the whole thing feel way deeper, more critical, and honestly even more subversive than it seemed on first watch.

You've got violence, racial tension, social issues—all that stuff. I noticed it all the first time, too, but maybe that Daisy-esque optimism rubbed off on me? I think I managed to shield myself from the harshness just like she did, which definitely wasn't the case this time.

It’s funny how much you catch on a rewatch. So many new details:

Like, when her eyes wander over a bookshelf, she spots "The road to reality" (or maybe it was "Back to reality," I can't recall exactly) and mutters, "I don't want to go there." Then, the second she steps out of the bookstore, reality hits her like a freight train—her bike is stolen. But unlike most people, she doesn't lose it. She doesn't scream, she doesn't hunt someone down, she doesn't cry. She actually sticks to what she said earlier, even if she looks totally helpless against the world at first glance.

And then there’s that beautiful, long one-take shot at the end where she clearly says, "We have a long way to go," which ties so painfully and simply into the society they showed us. But even after that, she follows up with: "You keep on rowin', and I'll keep on smilin'." Despite that cold, serious look on her face after the driving instructor's violent outburst, she clings to that optimism. And yeah, call me cheesy, but she clings to the hope of a better tomorrow.

Still, my favorite shot is still the one where you only see her head and hands while she's jumping on the trampoline in slight slow-motion. Pure magic.

Extra points for Leigh, extra points for Hawkins-esque vibes. Between this and Lumet-esque "until the devil finds out he is dead," this is easily the best film I've seen in American theaters in months.

If I get the chance, a third viewing is definitely on the table.

redlynx11 said:Forgive me, but both you and Stalin are talking nonsense. When that idiot claims U2 lacks charisma even under candlelight, he isn't offering a critique; he's just admitting he doesn't like U2, which is evident from the rest of his writing. Furthermore, I have to wonder where you were sitting in the theater. For 3D, seating matters differently than it does for 2D. The optimal experience is found in the first half of the auditorium. I have confirmed this in every city where I viewed it: Denver, Budapest, and Chicago. In Denver, it was rows 5 or 6; I can't recall the specific row in Budapest without digging up a ticket, but in Chicago, it was also around the 5th or 6th row. When a friend and I saw it for the first time, we thought it was incredible—we actually went straight back for the next showing. It seems you aren't much of a U2 fan, because they are decent, but the group I watched the film with travels the world for them, and they called the film phenomenal. They even compared the IMAX experience to being at a live concert. One must consider that the core purpose of this film is to present a 3D concert experience, not some standard documentary about U2.

I won't ramble on.
All that stuff about whether I'm a "real" U2 fan, or how your buddies travel the globe for them and think the movie is amazing... none of that actually matters when it comes to judging the quality of the film itself. It's irrelevant.

Just enjoy yourself.

Amanda Nguyen5 said:A total disaster. Honestly, one of the worst things I’ve ever sat through in my entire life.

It’s not even just about overusing the slow-mo effect—it’s that there isn't a single frame where they aren't messing with the footage. The directors lean on slow motion so much, and they mix it in such a clumsy way, that it feels less like a movie and more like a glorified music video. Compare that to how Marty McFly handled things in "Shine a Light"—that was a genuine concert experience.
And don't even get me started on the 3D. It’s basically useless. The glasses just get in the way; it would have been way better in 2D.

The songs and the band themselves kind of saved the day, but despite the killer music, walking out of the theater left me feeling totally miserable.
I actually planned on seeing this at least five times because U2 is one of my all-time favorite bands, but this is such a train wreck that I’d rather watch a live set or just listen to an album than deal with this crap ever again.

Even the expert Radić shared his take in his latest review here: . I’m actually relieved he agrees with me. He points out the exact same issue—the film is way too stylized—though he's a bit gentler about it than I am. He did give Marty credit for the finesse, though.

wanderingcanyon3 said:So, can you actually explain why the movie is so incredible? Or are you just totally missing why my friend didn't get it?

Anyway, let me know if you want to dig deeper into anything else.