Rating: 
Summary: FOR ALL ITS DAZZLE, IT DELIVERS
Review: Set against the vibrant background of Paris in the Spring of 1968, The Dreamers tells the story of three young film students, their lives, and, surprise surprise, their dreams. Despite the tumult and ferment taking-place on the streets, the movie's narrative centres around the complicated relationships between brother Theo (Louis Garrel), sister Isabelle (Eva Green) and their newfound American friend Matthew (Michael Pitt). When their English mother (Anna Chancellor) and rich poet father (Robin Renucci) leave them in charge of their comfortable middle-class home, the siblings invite Matthew to stay with them. Sensing a kindred spirit, they involve him in their re-enactments of classic film scripts, and increasingly bizarre mind games. Cocooned in their own little world, they are for the most part oblivious to the social upheaval going-on around them. Police sirens wail outside, whilst inside the self-styled cultural revolutionaries mouth slogans like they've been plucked from the script of a really cool film. The Dreamers blends several distinctive Bertolucci trademarks. The unabashed censor-baiting of Last Tango in Paris meets the sumptuous cinematography seen in Besieged. The sole defining characteristic of "The Dreamers" though is not the political subplots or the cinephile mindset, but the sexual content. Indeed, it is one of the few NC-17 rated films to see a sizable release in the last decade, Bertolucci is no stranger to sexually volatile subjects, and Dreamers returns the director to his blunt focus on the human body. Trouble is, as deeply erotic as the film is, is isn't hot at all. For all its flashy camerawork, often slick scripting and some fine performances, especially Garrel's, it somehow manages to disappoint, because the viewer is left wondering what the point of the exercise is. Maybe the lack of a point is the point, but I really can't be bothered trying to work it out. Perhaps an adventurous rental if you don't mind ambiguous semierotic takes from an Italian moviemaker.
Rating: 
Summary: No One's called it "The Worst Movie EVER" yet
Review: Thank goodness this film didn't get any media attention like "Lost in Translation" did, otherwise you'd have hoards of brain-dead children calling it "obscene" "gay" and "Anti-American" Could you imagine if the religious right became aware of it? You would have an overwhelming stench of conservative propganda on your hands; because this film represents everything they're against--morally, politically, and ethically. But this is a wonderful film, full of homages to cinema and to the kids who grew up with it as an art form and a revolution. It's also about the shattering of sexual taboos and how it may or may not lead to permanent change. I saw this on a college campus with a few squeamish kids. If you feel strongly against sexuality in general, I advise you to avoid this. If you're curious about it but prone to embarassment, then rent it and watch it alone. Do not watch this edited or else you'll lose the full scope of Bertolucci's work. Film buffs need not read the above statement. They already know better :)
Rating:
Summary: A Film That Plays Like Chamber Music
Review: THE DREAMERS has certainly polarized viewers: those who are devoted Bertolucci fans welcome this very unique work and those who object to viewing explicit youthful sensual exploration loathe it. Taken in the vein of Bertolucci's output, it is more a youthful version of his LAST TANGO IN PARIS and as such it is a rather quiet, elegiac exploration of the needs and desires of the disenfranchised youth of the 1960s. The love triangle here is played out by brother/sister Theo/Isabelle ( Louis Garrel and Eva Green) and the American student Matthew (Michael Pitt, in a role that is surprisingly well acted). How they interact, mixing their obsession with old movies with their need to act out their feelings in the 'self-imposed' repression of the isolation of a Parisian apartment when outside the real world is undergoing the Protest Period of the 1960s' disdain for the Vietnam War, etc, etc, is the crux of the ambiguous story. There is no real beginning or ending to this piece, just a glowing string of theme and variations that in Bertolucci's imaginative hands becomes moody chamber music. This is not a film for the squeamish, but it is an elegant cinematic achievement that leaves a strangely beautiful afterglow.
Rating:
Summary: An Incisive Criticism of the '60s and Hypocrisy
Review: The Dreamers is a new, primarily English-language film from the Italian king of cinematic controversy, Bernardo Bertolucci. If you've seen his past works, including 1900 and Last Tango in Paris, they provide a fairly clear idea of what to expect in this NC-17 foray into 1960's youth culture in France. The film is an extended analysis, really, of radicalism and some of the hypocrisies seemingly inherent in it. It forces us to confront the question of what truly is revolutionary, or conservative for that matter. The film answers that question in a way many of us will find unexpected.
Matthew (Michael Pitt) is an American student spending time abroad in France. He takes in the student protests with wide eyes, gazing in awe at the pure passion igniting these young people. Though the period is the '60s, Matthew still reflects the tucked-in conservatism of a decade past, wearing a jacket and tie almost as a shield from the craziness surrounding him. He soon meets two French siblings, Isabelle and Theo (Eva Green and Louis Garrel), both of whom are full of the revolutionary spirit. They are new and therefore attractive to Matthew, who shares a mutual love of movies with both. Not long after, he moves into the home of his two new friends, whose parents have gone away on an extended trip.
Now is the time audience members may begin to squirm. In between quoting movies to one another and acting out favorite scenes, Matthew begins to notice an unnaturally clingy relationship exists between Isa and Theo--they sleep and bathe together, and play sexually-laced games that often leave one in some state of undress. But this quasi-incest has a strange effect on Matthew, as slowly, the jacket and tie disappear, he begins to walk around barely dressed, and he starts to take part in the sex games, at first begrudgingly and then yearningly.
But as intoxicated as Matthew becomes with the lifestyle, he also is disturbed when Isa confides in him that she's never been on a date before. Harboring some genuine feelings for the young beauty, Matthew tries to lead her away from a life entirely dependent upon Theo and toward one of independence. In this way, the film draws a very interesting parallel. It really is conservatism--a resistance to change--that is keeping so-called radicals Isa and Theo in their exclusive relationship. The young innocent, Matthew, has become the revolutionary in trying to shatter what has become the comfortable tradition.
The film boasts three good, but not great performances. With stronger leading work, a good film could possibly have reached the next level. Gilbert Adair's screenplay, based on his own novel, is wonderfully subtle in weaving its critique of the radical movement, but is in fact so subtle that in some ways the film feels "small." Nevertheless, the film raises probing questions, particularly in the last scene, as a throng of protesters march down a street, all chanting in unison, not a single one distinguishable from the next. It begs the old question, "If a group of anarchists organize an anarchists' meeting, are they really anarchists anymore?"
Finally, credit must be heaped upon Fox Searchlight for not yielding to any suggestion that Bertolucci's vision be compromised by editing the film to achieve an R rating. Even without such censorship, it is disturbing enough that film footage of bare genitals and some sex is considered more damaging by the MPAA than, for example, the wholesale slaughter of recent horror offerings. In any case, when going to see The Dreamers, leave any prudish tendencies (or family members) at home. Final Grade: B
Rating:
Summary: All dreamers must eventually wake up
Review: There are two types of dreamers in "The Dreamers": the three main characters, who create their own interior world and prefer to view the outside world by watching classic 1930s cinema; and the socialist street revolutionaries of riot-torn 1968 Paris, who attempt to overthrow the political and economic power structure. "The Dreamers" focuses more on the former than the latter, and Bernardo Bertolucci is careful to leave his film open to interpretation, but ultimately the dream world of the three main characters is shattered by the realities of life. The film ends before resolving the outcome of the second set of dreamers, but we all know our history. Some may think it a shame that the dreamers fail, but others like myself will view it as something that has to happen, if the dream is unrealistic and unsustainable. The relationship between the three main characters is unlike anything that I've ever seen portrayed on film. The twins, Isabelle and Theo, are almost as close to each other in young adulthood as they were during the nine months they spent together in their mother's womb. Matthew, a U.S. student studying abroad in Paris, inserts himself into the middle, and when he receives early indications that portend the depth of the relationship between the twins, he does not run away. To me, this required too much suspension of disbelief, but I'm certainly aware that others have different proclivities. If Bertolucci's intent was to show a high degree of separation between his three dreamers and the rest of society, he certainly succeeded. The three dreamers have some, but ultimately too little, awareness of their separation from reality and the unsustainable nature of the world they create. While sympathizing with the revolutionaries in the street, they actually are the ultimate materialistic consumers: they produce nothing that they consume (neither food nor art), and when the money their parents provide runs out, and they've drained most of the wine cellar, the harsh realities of life set in. Rooting through trash heaps isn't the answer, and the choices that they leave themselves in the end (self-annihilation or nihilism), I believe, show just how flawed their ideal world is. My interpretation is that this lesson also applies to the other set of dreamers, the street revolutionaries, but those who even today sympathize with the views of those revolutionaries will reject this interpretation. "The Dreamers" is very voyeuristic, and Bertolucci puts his three leads through some incredibly intimate moments. All three leads are quite good, with Eva Green in particular deserving special notice for a completely uninhibited performance (at least the two male leads had each other's example to follow). It's hard to come up with an accurate overall rating for this film, because I think there will be a widespread variance in how different people react to both the storyline and the images. Read the reviews carefully, and if it sounds like something that interests and won't shock you, then give it a try. My middle-of-the-road rating is mainly due to my not being terribly interested in the type of relationship formed by the three main characters.
Rating: 
Summary: Le Testament Terrible.
Review: This film is a weak attempt to place Cocteau's "Les Enfants Terribles" into a new context, and sadly the result is total vulgarization and profanity. To everyone familiar with Cocteau's book, this is all so predictable and banal, in addition acting is poor and eroticism is primitive. There is lots of pretension, quoting Proust among other things, and all the references to TRUE masterpieces are the best parts, but this resulting cocktail is of a bad taste, in all respects. Weakness and impotence of thought are prevailing, and it is unbelievable that it came from the same director as Last Tango in Paris, which is full of dark passions. Here one sees some cheap sentimentality mixed with graphic scenes representing erotic dreams of an adolescent, but the overall impression is boredom and flaccidity. What a degradation...
Rating:
Summary: Great nudity, poor script and typical French slow pace film!
Review: While many have championed this film as a work of art, I found only the nudity to be interesting. Beyond that, what you have is a typical French film. That means you will get a poor script, very little meaningful dialogue, choppy scenes of random chaos thoughout the film, and long looks at non-moving objects (i.e. messy kitchen) that add nothing to the overall film. While the characters are good-looking, and the nude scenes are great, the film is quite boring and moves too slow for me. The ending is also typical of the French: a dud. The writers and producers of this film fail to tie in for me the life of these young adults and the riots of Paris. I fail to connect their hedonistic lifestyle with the general theme of the outside violence raging through the streets. I didn't hate the film, but it clearly lacked a common thread and smooth transitionary form from scene to scene. I can only give it 3 stars, at best.
Rating:
Summary: What can I say...
Review: You either like it or hate it. The only thing I liked about the movie was the naked pretty girl. That is all. It had no real redeeming characters. It was about youth who are self-indulgent at the expense of everything else in life. Come to think of it, the typical American liberal between 17 and 35 should love it, but no one else should waste their time on it. Tripe! Bertolucci is so much better than this material. Why he made it is a mystery!
|
