I saw a screening at the AFI Dallas film festival, and as you can probably guess, this is an experimental movie that people will have highly subjective feelings about.
I don't hate soccer, and I enjoy abstract art, but this just didn't work for me. I agree with the earlier comment which said that Zidane's actions on the field had no context and no gravity or importance because we had no idea how they fit in to the rest of the game. Where was he on the field when he dribbled past defenders? Was he making a rush towards the goal, or just relieving pressure from the opposing team? When he sent a pass down the field, who was he passing to? Worst of all, when he is given a red card and thrown out of the game, why did he feel the need to go after the opposing player? It seems like to really appreciate the movie, you have to have a strong working knowledge of Zidane that I don't have and this movie doesn't give you. Without that, it's watch Zidane run, watch Zidane stand around, watch Zidane spit, watch Zidane not say much of anything that we can hear (by the way, how can you spring for 20 cameras and not put a microphone on him too?)
And at times, the cinematography is actually too tight on Zidane. In the second half, he makes a fantastic play, rushing up the left side and making a gorgeous cross for a tap-in goal at the right post. But we barely see the result of his great work.
To me, this movie is a lot like the short films Andy Warhol made where he would point the camera at a person and let it run for a few minutes while they stared into the lens and did nothing. Some people will find deeper meaning and some will really enjoy it, but many others will find it self-indulgent, dull, and pointless. I wonder how it would work if it were done with another sport where a player has more individual impact. Imagine this movie being tried with basketball, where the cameras focus on Kobe Bryant or Steve Nash or Kevin Garnett for a whole game.
At least I made it to the end - one lady a few seats down from me left the theater entirely, went across the street to Borders, bought some books, and then came back.
I don't hate soccer, and I enjoy abstract art, but this just didn't work for me. I agree with the earlier comment which said that Zidane's actions on the field had no context and no gravity or importance because we had no idea how they fit in to the rest of the game. Where was he on the field when he dribbled past defenders? Was he making a rush towards the goal, or just relieving pressure from the opposing team? When he sent a pass down the field, who was he passing to? Worst of all, when he is given a red card and thrown out of the game, why did he feel the need to go after the opposing player? It seems like to really appreciate the movie, you have to have a strong working knowledge of Zidane that I don't have and this movie doesn't give you. Without that, it's watch Zidane run, watch Zidane stand around, watch Zidane spit, watch Zidane not say much of anything that we can hear (by the way, how can you spring for 20 cameras and not put a microphone on him too?)
And at times, the cinematography is actually too tight on Zidane. In the second half, he makes a fantastic play, rushing up the left side and making a gorgeous cross for a tap-in goal at the right post. But we barely see the result of his great work.
To me, this movie is a lot like the short films Andy Warhol made where he would point the camera at a person and let it run for a few minutes while they stared into the lens and did nothing. Some people will find deeper meaning and some will really enjoy it, but many others will find it self-indulgent, dull, and pointless. I wonder how it would work if it were done with another sport where a player has more individual impact. Imagine this movie being tried with basketball, where the cameras focus on Kobe Bryant or Steve Nash or Kevin Garnett for a whole game.
At least I made it to the end - one lady a few seats down from me left the theater entirely, went across the street to Borders, bought some books, and then came back.