When I tried to watch this kinzo a few years ago, I couldn’t stand it at all, I was angry at the fact that for 15 minutes it showed absolutely nothing, it seemed like an empty TRUMP of slackers. Just go back and forth vegetables and goundats, and none of their words have anything to do with the plot. The director somehow believed that people should look at the furniture for 15 minutes, waiting for a tie. Nope. The work must be captured immediately.
After 6 years, for some reason, I returned to this film and squandered all this garbage, having done his work for the editor. The rest of the movie was 130%. This is the only way he begins to be perceived. Was I fascinated this time? Of course not.
- Hero is over 40. At the same time, he is infantile, he does not know how to solve and even notice his problems, he glows before someone else’s authority, and still whose. He was asked several times for his opinion, but he could not say a word. This is a charmed little boy, who decided to take a ride on meetings with a bunch of historical personalities. You know how in Western cartoons, in which for one single child rolled educational representation of genius, elements and gods. Who exactly are you?
- Throughout the film, the eyes did not detach from the penis that Owen Wilson had instead of a nose. Moreover, his later films show that the picture is progressing, and by old age his nose has already fragmented into two: the upper bone and lower gallows. Man, do you want to see a surgeon? You seem to have the money.
- Why would Adriana want to stay in the 1890s? She is about 35 (as an actress) and at the same time her time is in the 1920s. That means she was already in that era, not that long ago, and she's going to live to be in her 20s again. What's the point?
- To get into the past, you need to sit in a special car, but going back in time occurs by itself during a night walk. Then why didn't the hired detective come back the same way?
- But the worst thing about the movie is the character relationship. The groom, who dreams of cheating on the bride, steals her earrings to give her a mistress who has been dragging along with every second man in this film, and the next day throws this very bride a scandal about the fact that she is cheating on him, and at the same time she admits and does not see this as any obstacle to further relations. You know, that could be in comedy with secondary characters. But not with the main character.
The only thing I liked was that the hero was working on his novel. This is not a motivational rabble that a person from the bottom can immediately jump to the very top. The environment did not tell him that the novel was bad or good. He was given edits, he thought about them, worked, rewrote them. That's the right message. That’s why I gave 2 points, not 1.
The director absolutely failed to blow the dust in my eyes with the bloated charm of Paris, although this is the whole bet. As a normal spectator, I always look forward to the story and only the story. She's hardly here. And vegetables with their love squabbles caused real disgust.
A quote from a description on one of the sites is striking: The film received the highest ratings of film criticism. In addition to the “Oscar” and “Golden Globe” scenario, it is considered first-class almost everything: high-quality directing, excellent acting, operator work, video, soundtrack. Funny.