Close-up

Rating:
Summary: A Simple Film...
Review: Elegant, mystifying, sad, beautful, these are just some of the words and feelings which come to mind having watched Close Up. The mixing of genres; is it fact, is it fiction etc. all leave you wondering afterwards, asking yourself what is reality, what is fiction?

That a movie as deceptively simple as this one has the power to stimulate one's mind in such a profound way is a great tribute to the filmaker. It also goes to show that there is a part of our brains, by-passed by almost all contemporary, Western cinema, which is open to simple stories about humble humanity and it's wayard dreams.

If all this sounds a little bit o.t.t., then watch the movie for yourself, allow it wash over you and I guarantee you will get an itch somewhere deep in your head, the part which actually makes you human.

Rating:
Summary: A Simple Film...
Review: Elegant, mystifying, sad, beautful, these are just some of the words and feelings which come to mind having watched Close Up. The mixing of genres; is it fact, is it fiction etc. all leave you wondering afterwards, asking yourself what is reality, what is fiction?

That a movie as deceptively simple as this one has the power to stimulate one's mind in such a profound way is a great tribute to the filmaker. It also goes to show that there is a part of our brains, by-passed by almost all contemporary, Western cinema, which is open to simple stories about humble humanity and it's wayard dreams.

If all this sounds a little bit o.t.t., then watch the movie for yourself, allow it wash over you and I guarantee you will get an itch somewhere deep in your head, the part which actually makes you human.

Rating:
Summary: This movie will get you snoozing faster than ..........l
Review: I have attempted to watch this movie more than 5 times in the last 6 months, only to find myself bored beyond belief within the first 15 minutes.

In fact, just to be fair, on several occasions I even invited friends and family to watch the movie with me.... Only to find myself bombarded by derogatory remarks.

This movie is 100 times worst than the "Taste of Cherry".

Don't waste your money on this movie, because it's not even worth the price of a "rental"

Rating:
Summary: "There's nothing about this case that's worth filming."
Review: Nothing less than a narrative nesting-doll of reality informing illusion that's based on reality that might be illusion, etc. etc. This legendary film from Abbas Kiarostami concerns itself with a true-life case in Iran involving an imposter who -- for no real motive other than a "love for cinema" -- presents himself to a well-to-do Tehran family as the famous Iranian director and Kiarostami colleague Mohsen Makhmalbaf. The movie begins with the apprehension of the imposter from the family's gated residence. It then becomes quite documentary-like: Kiarostami, with back turned toward the camera, interviews the suspect in jail, asks permission of the local bureaucrat assigned to adjudicate the case if the trial may be filmed (to which the bureaucrat replies bemusedly, "There's nothing about this case that's worth filming"), and then finally sits in on the actual trial itself, which is shot in an inferior film stock that would seem to indicate that we're watching the proceedings as they're happening rather than watching an actual movie. This whole "is-it-live-or-is-it-Memorex" feel continues on to the meeting between the actual Makhmalbaf and his imposter. During this scene, you can hear Kiarostami griping to his sound man in the background as the pair exchange hugs. Then the sound starts cutting out as the camera crew follows the pair through Tehran on a motorbike. (Don't get mad at your DVD -- it's on purpose.) All this would seem to tip the scales towards actual documentary, but perhaps Kiarostami is simply having a bit of postmodernist fun with us. The film has a happy resolution, but questions remain: WHY did the imposter pretend he was a famous director? "Love of cinema" doesn't seem to quite cut the mustard as a motive. WHY, once he ingratiated himself into this wealthy family's daily life (he claims to be making a new film and wants the young adult son, who's a Makhmalbaf fan, to be the star of the picture), didn't he burglarize their home? Clearly, money wasn't the motive. Perhaps he did it for fame . . . which brings up the final haunting question: is the imposter being genuine in this movie, or is he once again playing a role, this time as the guy who was playing Makhmalbaf to a credulous family? In either case, the imposter got the fame he perhaps wanted. It goes without saying that this endlessly subtle film, rippling with layers of widening significance like a lake on a windy day, has only added to Kiarostami's fame.

Rating:
Summary: MASTERPIECE
Review: Quintessential cinema from the master Iranian filmmaker Abbas Kiarostami, it weaves dramatic reconstruction and documentary reportage in the actual story of a man - Hossain Sabzian - who is charged with fraud and impersonation, when he ingratiates himself into the midst of a well off Tehran family, who take him for the famed Iranian director Mohsen Makhmalbaf. Against the background of the real court case, Kiarostami examines the relativities of truth and untruth, playing with the fabricated artiface of film, and evolving ultimately a celebration of the human spirit and imagination, and of cinema itself.

Rating:
Summary: Perhaps Kiarostami's best work -- but you have to be patient
Review: The basic story has been summed up by other reviewers, so I won't repeat that now. What I do want to give is a personal account of my experience with this film, that I hope will motivate a few to take a look -- and to be patient. The film doesn't work its magic right away -- and in fact the beginning can be somewhat disorienting.

I'll admit, I'm biased. I've become fascinated by the work of Kiarostami in the past few years. Plus, I am very much drawn to films where reality and fiction intersect and overlap in interesting ways. Still, I'm convinced that with a bit of patience -- if you just give yourself the time to let the film work on you without bringing to it expectations that it won't fulfil -- anyone would be overwhelmed by the marvelous simplicity of this film.

Kiarostami has a way of finding the fantastic in the mundane. Somehow, he sets up his films in such a way that I can find myself for the most part merely interested wondering what it is all about, and then suddenly surprised to find myself overwhelmed, surprised by an emotional response that was not manipulated from me with music but somehow, mysteriously. This happened to me while watching ABC Africa, and even more powerfully during this film. His style, the way he achieves this, can almost be thought of as an anti-style -- I know that may not make a lot of sense, but it would take longer than I have here to make clear what I am thinking when I say this. It seems like he is doing very little, but the effect is (in my experience) magical, unexplainable and overwhelming. (For those familiar with Paul Schrader's exceptional work on transcendental style in Bresson, Ozu and Dreyer, I'd suggest Kiarostami as another who works in this vein -- but whose work is quite distinct from these three).