Change Your Image
joaosousapires
Reviews
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)
Art? What art?
I watched this film knowing nothing about its content, about other people's opinions nor reviews. I wanted to watch it just because I saw in the past some films by its director, films that I still enjoy like "21 grams", "biutiful" or "amores perros".
This "Birdman" was a huge disappointment. Very early in the film you'll understand that the whole picture consists of one (supposedly one) single single (which seems to be not true, as there are come cuts there), something not new, as Alexander Sokurov made the same with his "Russian Ark" in 2010 (although the Russian film seems to be truly one single shot film, with no CGI. And that's it.
Michael Keaton's performance is - in my opinion - above average, and there are some quite nice compositions here and there, but a film can NOT be just that. The plot is too simple, the soundtrack is annoying and the intrigue is not there at all. I see no "art" nor "artsy" substance in this film. I read some reviews where some people praise/mock its "artsy" approach, but besides some very few details the film follows the cliché pattern of most films present in the Oscars annual competition.
So my question stays: Art? What art? The annoying soundtrack for two hours on the back of a 2 hours apparent single shot?
Ossos (1997)
Emptiness
Before watching this film, and because of what I had been reading about it on the Internet, I thought it was an attempt to capture the feeling of decadence present in the city of Lisbon and its surroundings (if you have been there you know what I mean). But then I saw it. And understood that in a way I was right... it is an attempt, it does not mean that the director was capable of doing so.
The so called "slow movies" or "long shot sequences" cannot, alone, produce a film. "Ossos" seems to be just that, just a bunch of long shots filmed in an extremely slow pace trying to be - by itself - an art-movie. There is here no connection at all between form and content.
The feeling I got from watching this was that anyone could have made the film. No idea was needed, and no money for production I am sure. You just need to film a couple of people staring at the walls, with no script at all, with some shouting in the background.
It is almost impossible to debate this film as it is completely empty as a film. OK, we can discuss the content but as a representation of a piece of reality, leading us the a discussion about something independent from the movie itself. But the film is just that: a big ZERO.
Um Tiro no Escuro (2005)
Awful film
The film is awful, it tries to follow the Hollywood pattern not only with its simple and plain storyline (some people call it a "twist" in the end?! Howcome?!), but also with the placing of the camera, pace and in other acting/technical aspects. But it fails. It fails because the director is not capable here of creating any kind of drama, suspense nor it shows any kind of quality in the production. It really seems to be a film made with money but directed by the most amateur possible director.
Although weak, the acting is not the worst here. Some respectable performances by the lead male characters (the same I can not tell about the lead female actress, something went really wrong here, either with her or with the directing).
So in my opinion you should not waste your time here. There are good Portuguese films and there are bad Portuguese films. And then there are these films, the ones you should avoid because there is NOTHING new here, you will find only bad imitation and the most predictable storyline ever.