Asta asa, ca sa va reamintesc, recentilor, ca s-au facut filme si inainte sa deschideti voi televizoarele. Si ca Henry Hathaway reprezinta un nume poate chiar mai mare in istoria filmului decit fratii Cohen.
Ridem, glumim, apreciem maretzili realizari ale contemporaneitatii, dar nu uitam de unde a plecat totul, da? Si care sint numele cu adevarat importante in film, da?
Mama noastra de recenti, care nu mai stim sa citim cifre dinainte de 1990 si de Die Hard II.
:wink:
PS: O cronica a lui Roger Ebert privind remake-ul recent al fratilor Cohen, aici.
What strikes me is that I'm describing the story and the film as if it were simply, if admirably, a good Western. That's a surprise to me, because this is a film by the Coen Brothers, and this is the first straight genre exercise in their career. It's a loving one. Their craftsmanship is a wonder. Their casting is always inspired and exact. The cinematography by Roger Deakins reminds us of the glory that was, and can still be, the Western.
But this isn't a Coen Brothers film in the sense that we usually use those words. It's not eccentric, quirky, wry or flaky. It's as if these two men, who have devised some of the most original films of our time, reached a point where they decided to coast on the sheer pleasure of good old straightforward artistry. This is like Iggy Pop singing “My Funny Valentine,” which he does very well. So let me praise it for what it is, a splendid Western. The Coens having demonstrated their mastery of many notes, including many not heard before, now show they can play in tune.
Situația la zi – joi, șaptenov
Acum 2 ore
3 comentarii:
Si mai bine cititi cartea lui Charles Portis ;-)
Cine mai citeste carti in ziua de azi cind se faci filme atit de mishteaux?
Filmul fratilor Cohen chiar e o bijutierie.
E printre foarte putinele dati cand remake-ul e mai bun decat originalul. Dar si cand il asculti pe Jeff Bridges, auzi accentul Ducelui ;-)
Trimiteți un comentariu