This film was nominated for Best Foreign Film (Oscar) and was warmly received at Cannes last year. Therefore, the lead singer Renate Reinswe received the prize for Best Actress. I really liked the movie. He is alive, whole, strong in the visual sense, Trier's techniques are clearly visible and they are good in terms of the game. Emphasizing accents in the tape. A film about doubt, about the way to yourself, about mistakes. Friends, there is one dialogue that most accurately reflects the thread of the story and the essence of the story of this film: - Let me ask you something, Yang. Why haven't you tried the prosthetic yet? - It's true! Any Atlas device in our region is a rarity. Not to mention the money spent on its delivery. Don’t you think this is a subtle hint from all those people who wish you a speedy return? Well, I'm afraid. Everyone wants to see me bounce back. I appreciate it, but... that’s my norm right now. I just need time to recover. Norm will be what you choose for yourself. - What do you mean by that? So I can take it like nothing happened? I lost a part of myself. Forever. You can't fix it. You're right, you can't get that piece back. But why should it keep you from being who you wanted to be? You are Yang Xiao Long, My little sun dragon. No one has ever stopped you from being yourself. So when you stop souring and want to get back on the saddle, I'll push you. Quote from the cartoon "Red, White, Black, Yellow" The film with a linear narrative is very well placed now on a soulful and deep reflection on the meaning of life in our society. difficult time. Such a "nuclear" release of acidic emotions through the screen. I'll make a note for anyone who wants to watch. Trier is as sincere and straightforward as in his work “Louder than bombs”... in the film Isabelle Huppert plays Very heartfelt, there's one moment, very personal, where the camera takes a long shot on the face of the heroine Hupper, excellent. The director's idea! In this scene, Isabelle's eyes speak. Therefore, it is important to understand here that "the worst man in the world" - "notebook". with a sharpened pencil about people.” The ending is open and logical, because life goes on. 10/ 10.👩 Review written: April 4, 2022, Olya Grinevskaya (Alenushka).
A Norwegian movie about a 30-year-old saleswoman. It would seem that boredom is mortal, but this is not quite so. Yes, in the script and in the main character there is nothing interesting. But filmed qualitatively, the entire film crew worked on 5 points and the puzzle was formed. The film does not cause irritation, you can watch, although there is nothing special about it, just the boring life of an average fool from a rich country who is mad with fat. But it accurately reflects modern social trends. Work in the service sector, which does not create additional material values, the minimum wage for life is enough and well, the eternal search for yourself. Such a European stagnation.
I will say right away - the film is not for everyone, but it is mandatory to watch.
In the era of Marvel (I love them, too, but still) and the worn-out cliches of acting and problems, this film really turned out to be something new for me.
I'll start with the first one. The acting is incredible. I did not leave the feeling that I was spying on someone’s life, ONLY emotions, non-standard (for cinema) dialogues and situations were individual.
Unbroken problems. How many times have you seen self-determination in your life? How many times have you read or watched conflicting relationships between fathers and children or partners who want different things out of life? All this is repeated in the film and not repeated at the same time. A new perspective on finding purpose in life (who said finding the perfect partner and having a baby is the key to happiness?) is, of course, the highlight.
It is also worth discussing the “unpleasant moments”. Obscene humor, nudity, discussion of indecent. In the film itself, one of the characters actually justifies all this with the phrase “Art should not be pleasant, it should be exciting.” And I agree with him.
And finally, the feeling, the ending and the meaning of the whole movie. Most of all, the film helped me personally with a certain awareness of how unpredictable and different it can be. The main thing is to just start doing something and it will spill out somewhere. It is better to try and quit, to love and to part than to live with memories or permanence.
Usually, the death of some characters always adds an even greater fear of doing something and wasting time without giving birth to a child. But in this film, the ending exceeded my expectations, and the stamp 'In the end she gave birth, got married, settled down and they lived happily ever after' was finally destroyed.
I took a full breath with the heroine and this once again proves the literacy of the disclosure of the main character.
A sad movie about ordinary people A film about a generation of infantils. The characters are faded, stupid and too emotional. Everyone in life has enough money to live beautifully, no responsibility and because of this they become spineless and without initiative, realizing it, but not able to do anything. And if reading the synopsis you think that this is an interesting situation, from which the main character can interestingly come out, revealing to us an original view of life, then I will disappoint you. After more than 2 hours, we see the same people with the same problems, equally insecure and so useless to society. On the one hand, the film is definitely about my generation and I have to feel connected with the main characters. And reading the synopsis, it was, but on the other hand, at the end of the viewing, instead of understanding, I had only mute questions. Is it normal in Europe to be so untalented and spineless? A bookstore saleswoman in her 30s can really lead such an idle life? Apart from romantic relationships and the need to have children, do they really care about anything else? And the entire two-hour film only shows how stupid these people are, as if hinting that they have no hope. And for some, it's probably true when you live in a super-rich country with a well-developed social group and rich parents. It is a pity that the author does not look a couple of decades ahead, when these unique snowflakes finally begin to reap the benefits of their stupid life decisions and will die not from cancer in an expensive clinic with friends, but from hunger in the ditch. 2 out of 10 Original
Every time after the next Academy Awards, I look through the long list, looking for the very nuggets that were blindly bypassed by the commission. And every time I get upset, since sincerity and vitality no longer wins at the present time. And this time my search was successful, I managed to find gold. Anyway, Joachim Trier was able to shed light on the problems of millennials and give food for reflection on his life, on a new level, without his usual romanticization.
This film is about a nature prone to changeability. In the center of the plot, Julia, who is on the verge of the third decade, is disappointed in her choice of profession. She starts to move from side to side in defining herself. At some point, she gets bored. Photography was replaced by mediocre writing. Writing by jumping into bed. So, why does she run, because we do not see her unsolvable problems. In the face of only carefree life, with a supportive mother and a supporting young man. But at the same time, she wants more than work in a bookstore, but her desire for this does not deviate from her chair surrounded by books and a new love. To moderate the fervor of the main character on a little help relationships. Time passes and another reflection begins, another desire to achieve more, which of course does not mean throwing yourself into bed with the first person you meet. Oops...
Sometimes it seemed like you were watching nonsense. It seems that the picture is pleasant aesthetically, but at the same time cats with gynal holes, a treatise on the topic of oral sex, coping with need at the first meeting repels. But at one point you realize it's all done with all the oneers. And how else to convey the mental state of the heroine, inside which the same thing happens?
The color scheme of the picture so accurately conveys reality that you forget that you are in front of a film, and not the life of a neighbor in the apartment. If we talk about Yokin’s love of romanticization, it is not in the case of the visual. The visual here is routine to ingenious simplicity. Sometimes it is breathtaking from the work done by the operator and editor: a game with a frozen time, which is so uncharacteristic for our main character, but still it strives for it that you can clearly read with your eyes; an abundance of juicy close-ups; interspersed at the right moment of associative editing. According to the color edging and the work of the production artists, it resembles Scenes from married life, only unlike the series here the actors are alive, with not played emotions and the picture breathes, and does not weigh on the wall. Therefore, for fans of this series it must watch, I hope not offended.
The actors, regardless of the number of phrases spoken, were given complete freedom of emotion. Emotions that are unfettered are naively sincere. Renate Reinswe and Anders Danielsen Lieu were able to carry through their roles the bright vitality and sensuality of their heroes. It is difficult to draw a line between the main and secondary characters, in maintaining the mood of pressing problems, it simply does not exist. Even people flashing a few minutes in the frame, maintain the overall tone of the narrative in the pan on a quiet fire.
I saw myself in this film, always fascinated by nature and the problem is very close to me. And everything is shown here is not hyperbolized, but alive. And, hurrah, a film about adults who rush, not about teenagers. If directors take up the image of rushing natures, it comes out most often banal and with a lot of ultra-modern labels, because not by age. It’s a long shot of what the director doesn’t understand. But not here. Joachim Trier was able to come closest to the problems of millennials, making this picture a manifesto.
Joakim’s film “The Worst Man in the World” is a realistic parable about the efforts of each person to realize their dreams, while trying to justify someone’s desires. And yet, in each life, one of these sides will prevail. Prepare for the fact that in one of the “worst characters”, you can meet yourself, and this acquaintance is not always pleasant, but necessary, like going to a therapist.
A dull pseudo-drama with a claim to a parable (due to a rather pleasant voice behind the scenes, by the way, the only thing that can really please in this film). This film would be more suited to the title of the most useless or worthless person in the world.
The film is empty to the ears. Even atmospheric shots and bold erotic scenes do not animate him. It remains a deep mystery how he managed to get such a high award (which is why I actually watched it).
The main character is empty and ridiculous, like a Chinese vase of 2020 with an antique cut. Deprived of empathy, she is essentially a social zombie, even when she came to her friend’s hospital, she did so solely because of animal fear and uncertainty about her pregnancy. In the infinite & #39; search for yourself & #39; she is already at the start, because there is nothing to look for there. It is cold and infertile in every sense of the word. She is constantly bored and dreary, she has no talents, no matter how she tries to convince herself of this, so she sticks so much to creative or bright personalities, being in the energy field of which she feels at least some part in the creative resource.
I don’t recommend watching it, never from the word. If you want to watch a dull, but at least sometimes funny movie, then this is the twin brother of this - the Triangle of Sorrow.
I'll pick your head, Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
The problems of the zero and eighteenth movies are often about those who are afraid to change something. Bravo, maybe that's how we moved to a new stage. The number of liabilities has decreased, but here is another problem: if you act, then in what attractive direction from the gogolion? if something changes, then for what?
There is intention and resources, and the cock cracks processing large amounts of data.
What we see here is not the dynamics of the character, but the movie itself. Growing up, strongholds, crises, self-digging in order to find the meaning of life.
It is not a calming soul, but a life in the flesh itself (well, as far as this genre is concerned). Her goals are dynamic, any controversial topic is subject to revision, not postponed, and she will not rest until she is sure that now she is definitely happy, will not be content with small things, will not accept something that on a daily basis stagnates her own assessment. Reflection by God.
The heroine is reasonable, intelligent, joking, sociable, sweet. It cannot be accused of weakness or inertia when confronted with doubts or mental metamorphoses, it sinks into them and makes the final decision with a cold head. However, her personality is so multifaceted that often no choice can satisfy her completely, because one thing can not play on all the strings of the soul.
Vital? Let's go see it, then!
Julia is a young Norwegian who wants to find herself. Some initiatives are replaced by others, and not fixed in life. Neither family nor society prevents her from testing, but rather supports her. In a developed society, there is a gap for trial and error, and work in a book or bakery allows you to cover bills and live in pleasure.
The world's your oyster, and that's Julia's problem. Freedom of choice does not always bring freedom in life, especially in a world of opportunity. In search of herself, the girl can not understand what she wants from life. Fear of missing makes her delay important life choices: profession, relationship development.
Every choice is accompanied by responsibility. Over the course of her life, the heroine accumulates baggage of responsibility, realizing that a series of elections and their consequences affect the fate of loved ones, and vice versa. That's how you make a man. It is averaged at one point, making a choice: not good and not bad – your own.
Julia's life is ordinary. Like our lives, it consists of a series of choices. This is what makes every life special.
Watch out, spoilers! —----------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------- Once watched the film by the Norwegian director Joakim Trier “Oslo, August 31”, it seems even liked, it was a free adaptation of the same novel by Pierre Drø La Rochelle, which was staged the film by Louis Malle “The Fading Fire”. And now there is a new film J. Trier “Worst man in the world” / Verdens verste menneske, 2021, which many like and which is widely discussed, besides in Cannes, the lead singer Renate Reinswe received the prize for best actress. Lives in the world smart and pretty Norwegian girl Julia, perfectly studying, first she is going to become a doctor, then suddenly decides that she is more attracted not to surgery, but what people have in their heads, and she goes to study psychology, but again misses, she suddenly gets carried away with photography, and also tries to write something, theme is also in the spirit of the time – her essay is called “Oral sex in the era of MeToo”. In the meantime, she works in a bookstore. Her mother supports her in all her endeavors, but her father is not interested in her at all, he has long divorced his mother Julia and is much more interested in his new family and the second daughter growing up in her. Her search for not only a profession, but, if I may say so, love, finally, she seems to fall in love with a person much older than herself - she is about 30, he is 44, Axel (Anders Danielsen Lieu) - a famous artist who draws comics. However, her restless nature and then lets her down, she at some point begins to be burdened with these relationships, they are too stable for her, especially since Axel wants children, but she does not want, and spontaneously meets a new guy, his peer Eyvind (Herbert Nordram), to whom he eventually leaves, although he is a simple barista in a cafe, he leaves his girlfriend for her, also a very extraordinary person, fixated on the search for identity (she discovered the presence of Sami genes), yoga and ecology. At first, the story of Yulia and her entourage does not seem particularly fascinating, a rather ordinary story of “search for yourself”, about which many films have already been shot, then, however, the tragic component is added, the colors thicken somewhat, the arguments about death and love that Axel shares with her, who suddenly contracted cancer and dies, but the end is open and not gloomy, she is again alone and completely free, while she is again engaged in photography, but who knows, perhaps somewhere in her head a new plan ripens? The film is not bad, you can also note good acting work, indeed Renate Reinswe plays her role well, she looks very organic in it, and other actors are good. The story is quite relevant for modern times, when an increasing number of young people in their 30s can not decide on their life choices, can not decide who they want to live with, are not sure that they want to have children, maybe their choice is too wide and they are too self-centered and selfish? In addition, these are people who do not face the acute question of earning a living, they come from quite wealthy families.
I approached the film as an example of modern cinema with a black-faced analysis of current social problems in the Scandinavian style - well, you understood that after watching - the feeling of soap in your mouth and an acute desire to hang yourself.
It turned out quite differently and this is the obvious shock of watching. The main shock is the ordinaryity of evil, its transparent and understandable idleness. Your seemingly banal mistakes in relationships resonate strongly on the lives of people around you, and you may not even notice it. Like the main character.
There are no dramas with inflated degrees. Just ordinary people, normal meetings, sex, relationships. All this 'gray'. And the main character, like Jesus (may they forgive me for such a comparison), walking on water. I mean, she's not wearing any. And the death of her ex, and the child in the relationship of another she perceives somehow 'normal' - well, it happens, God.
Some people will say, what’s to worry about? And, really, the main thing - ' I am a favorite '. So that nothing touched me, did not spoil my psychological health and overall well-being. I may be wrong, but it seems that this is the main principle of life of the ordinary European, who now desperately knocks on the window.
Great performance of the main actress and everyone around, despite the fact that all the actors are absolutely unknown. This is ' Hero of our time' performed by Joaquim Trier (chief director).
I started watching the film with the expectation of reflection, and got it full. The movie is clearly not for everyone. I didn’t understand the whole movie the first time.
Julia, like the rest of our generation, faced an overabundance of choice in everything. Studying or working. Getting married or having fun. A doctor, a photographer, a writer – all this is interesting and boring at the same time. Everything is available, just reach out. Do you need it? I'll deal with it later. The whole film she tries to understand life, asks questions. What is love? Happiness? Loyalty? Do you need loyalty? And happiness? And love?
She, like the rest of us, questions all allegations. I'm sure she's the smartest. Was she right in the end? The film does not show the future, breaks in our present.
Axel, though shown as a man from a more stable generation who already knows everything about life, is faced with the fact that he does not understand whether he did everything right. He loves her for all that is in him, but hidden under deep prohibitions. He thinks everything is good, just like everyone else. He quickly gets used to Julia and thinks it's mutual. Does not understand that another person can think differently, does not understand that no one belongs to anyone. He knows what is right and doesn’t want to hear other opinions.
Alvin is a passerby, with whom everything is as you want, at first glance, everything is so. More liberated, young, ambitious. You can be yourself with him. Boredom is gone, happiness and love are here. Or did it all appear?
I watched almost the entire movie with wet eyes, recognizing myself in all the characters. Other generations found it easier, as if they had instructions for life at birth. Did we have one? It probably should have been, but maybe we just flipped through it and forgot, because we already know everything best.
This film consists of complete nonsense: hobbies, mistakes, reservations, random likes, unfair offenses, failed betrayals, incorrect interpretations and senseless hobbies. Moreover, for a good 40 minutes at the beginning of the film, Joachim Trier faithfully fools the viewer, passing off his picture as an existential drama Is it easy to be European in the 21st century? Just as you come to terms with spending the next two hours delving into the agonizing issues of gender, social, national, cultural identity of 30-year-old Oslo resident Yulia, Joakim Trier winks a little: a discussion of an essay written by Yulia on the burning topic of “Oral sex in the era of #metoo” is joined by a father and grandmother. There's no banter or mockery in this twist. Even the irony is light and light. Suddenly, the cinema will soar above all the agonizing questions about gender, global warming, yoga, dependence on social networks, childbearing and upbringing, national, family and tribal roots, journalistic trolling, mass culture and art house. When will real life begin? At 30, many people do that. The Worst Man in the World is a film born out of the redundancy of modern consumer society. The excess of material and spiritual possibilities, the choice of style, direction in life inevitably gives rise to what Milan Kundera aptly called “the unbearable ease of being”. All right. But the choice is painful. And every decision is wrong. And everything is right.
“The Worst Man in the World” rhymes with many films, which at one time were labeled “small family”, but decades later it turned out that these tapes most accurately convey the air of time. In a light flutter around the Norwegian capital Julia, then Moscow of the “July Rain”, then Tbilisi from “The Songbird Lived”, then Allenovsky “Manhattan”, then Atalanta” by Jean Vigo will backfire.
The poetry of everyday life is not new, but extremely complex. As semi-meaningless, devoid of will, chaotic actions and movements weave into a single canvas, so that it does not break, so that the pattern turns out to be harmonious and meaningful. Joachim Trier also deliberately complicated his task. He periodically violates the linear structure of his narrative with a flashback, then a fantasy with frozen time, then a cartoon insert, then a visual drug trip, then a satirical attraction on the theme of a “typical TV show”, then a photo film. And each of these methods he resorts only once. Why does this not cause a sense of style failure and bad taste? Why don’t all these directorial benefits become an in-house play on the margins? How do these very different visual and rhythmic episodes complement the picture of the tape?
Joachim Trier uses two components as cement: the light and the face of actress Renata Reinswe. Only in one episode: a picnic in the country house of Yulia's friends, the frame pours bright sunlight. Not for long. Unsurprisingly, this episode belongs to the Others chapter (the film is generally divided into 12 episodes, a prologue and an epilogue). Others, not Julia, have marriage and children. Duties and worries. They have noon with a bright, shadowless light. Both the joys and sorrows of this certainty are obvious and highlighted. The rest of the screen time for Worst Man in the World is Norwegian summer nights. A time of uncertainty and uncertainty, is it late evening or early morning? Does the day begin, or does it begin? Everything is blurry and muted. Nothing's clear. “It’s like I’m watching my own life,” she said. And we watch the observer, which, as you know, is the most interesting.
Renata Reinswe's face is like a river. She's the same. But it's different every second. Julia, like a May day, will light up with a sunny smile, then almost frosty cold will roll over. To live this thrill of “unbearable lightness”, so that the eye can not be taken away – mind-blowingly difficult. But only unknown to me until now the name of the actress, I will never forget. Even in the very first episodes, when the director has not yet opened all the cards, you are held in the hall by the simple but hypnotically perfect face of Renata Reinswe. Her long pass through the evening of Oslo, when nothing happens in the frame, I want to extend and extend. It was just a tram ride. Just blew a breeze off the fjord. It was just dusk. Julia is just a few minutes older. But those moments you live with her. In a world where nothing happens. And everything happens - you get older.
Turning, the main events of life occur in the situation ' when nothing foreshadowed ' Pregnancy is not on time and a fatal diagnosis. The birth of a new life, the finish line of another. However, birth is not destined to take place. And not by the will of Julia, which this pregnancy is completely inappropriate. A higher will will will intervene to prevent a new being from being born. Meanwhile, by the age of Julia, her mother was already raising a daughter, her grandmother had several children, and her great-grandmother, having given several lives, had already left this world by the age of 30. The average age of a woman’s life was 35. Each generation has its own trials. Testing the redundancy of opportunities is not the worst. Or maybe it is.
Millennial longing or the anthem of the new thirty-year-olds - open any review and "Worst Man" will be called that. Add references to Bergman, who lost masculinity and the obligatory attention to the division of the film into chapters. All of this is important, but more interestingly, in the context of Worst Man, we have a new (relative to the age of the movie itself as a medium) ability to identify ourselves with less than the best characters. Here it is not in the notorious voyeurism, the essence of the Lacan stage of the mirror, when in another you know yourself.
Julia (Renate Reinswe) is not bad or good, relatable on 8/10, rather bland and not distinguished. Someone perceives this in bayonets and writes about how alias she straightens her bangs from a high forehead; someone is satisfied and the type of girl from the next desk (necessarily a brunette, light-skinned and with brown eyes, because blue-eyed blondes are something about “walking”) returns to the cinema with seven-mile steps.
Julia will change her specialty, buy a camera with student money, but she will not remove anything. According to Trier, she should not.
Canonical attributions to her “eternal search for herself”, although in fact they stop at the first chapter (there are twelve in total), look amusing. And it’s not about falling in love, a relationship or sharing an apartment, it’s just that Julia became comfortable working in a bookstore and not allowing the idea that she, like Axel (Anders Danielsen Lee), can be really devoted to something. Attempts to justify this by the age difference fail: a soulful monologue on the verge of death causes, if not attacks of yawning, then at least new questions - the difference in ten years does not carry the semantic load that it will be given; Julia becomes an orange from Eternal Sunshine of the Pure Mind (2004), although she does not dye her hair orange.
It’s not that she has a choice she can’t make. The fact is that Julia has no intention to make a choice. And if in the first half an hour of the film it works, then Trier becomes not enough: flirting with the camera in slowo, psilocybin glitches, breaking the fourth wall (where without it in thirty?), oncology. The Norwegian director, alas, does not know that all millennials at one time watched “The Fault in the Stars” (2014), especially skimmed – “Good Children Don’t Cry” (2012), and therefore cancer in any of its manifestations (a) no longer touches; (b) looks pathetic; (c) does not work as a plot engine. And there's nowhere to move it because "Worst Man" starts to fall apart in the fortieth minute. The collage sketch, successfully posing as a whole for almost half of the timekeeping, crumbles as our ability to identify ourselves with Julia. It flickers somewhere on the periphery as hints of authenticity return to the film. If in the first part they were enough: arguments about children and menstruation, the only success in the form of an article about feminism and oral sex, constant silence (Yulia does not voice her thoughts (if she has them), voiceover does not help her in this), then in the second single a-ha experience occurs almost in the final scene. When Yulia sees the family of her ex, who did not really want a child, but they could succeed.
“The worst man in the world” could have done it too. But Trier was short of life and decided to add drama.
Norway is the same Europe and they are susceptible to the same contagion. This contagion is reflection!
“What does a feminist feel when she puts it in her mouth?” Or this one. “Is it cheating to smell the sweat of a stranger you like or to watch him pee if you’re in a relationship?” These are just two of the highlights of this film. The rest looks more philistine and does not cause confusion.
Do not jump to conclusions about the picture on those two examples. The film is very well shot, presenting information in a way that you can think about. I would even call it an imposition of thought. Modern man has already been forced to thinkless consumption of various products, now they are trying to impose reflection. You need to think about what is able to move you, or, if you take the Marxist concept, humanity forward. Now it is not recommended to think, but it is recommended to think, and absolutely about insignificant things.
What's wrong with reflection? In small quantities, nothing, but when the meaning of the film is based on this bacterium, it is a symptom of stagnation. In the world of cinema, there is nothing to shoot about, because nothing happens in the real world, and if it does, it is not the most pleasant. From this, “not the most pleasant”, modern cinema is abstracted because of censorship, which, as we know, does not exist in the Western world, and therefore modern authors today increasingly began to pay attention to the ethics and morality of the permissible, making them a central problem in the film, raising the question: are they permissible?
Reflection is self-examination. It's self-justification for doing nothing. This year there was already a reflective film that loudly declared itself - "Everything, everywhere and at once." True, his presentation was different, more spectacular, but this does not change the essence. The world is stagnating and there is nothing good about it. This movie demonstrates reality well, but the question arises: did the author want to show this reality or is he himself infected with reflection?
What exactly will you read about the film yourself, if ' thought '
7 out of 10
Twelve chapters, a film anamnesis by Joachim Trier, in which he diagnoses the problems of millennials through the chamber history of the main character, Julia.
The first and main technique of this film: a sense of familiarity. Through him, the film tries to make friends with us.
Grainy, warm image, problems of choosing a profession, disputes about feminism, dialogues with relatives, jazz, funk, crushing someone else’s wealth and other people’s weddings and the good old irrational destruction of the established.
Associations fall on us at once: the confusion of “Sweet Frances”, the growing up of “Lady Bird”, more tragic, went beyond the University of Humanities.
Unsophisticated with a sense of familiarity, we move on. And we end up in an amazingly unfinished movie. Julia is still a secondary character for us. Her own thoughts are often replaced by a voiceover, alienating us even further from her. Her emotions are not verbalized, not embodied.
The main thoughts sewn into the film are spoken by Axel. He reflects on their separation, he talks a lot and vulnerablely about his relationship with Julia, about their life, gives her advice, admires her.
Watching Julia, I couldn't understand. Where's her feeling? Where's her mind? She's slipping away. Passes the border.
At the border, however, elusively, there are attempts to social themes, designation of the themes of death and time (and in fact in the theme of time the film really tries, this is clearly seen through the intentional shooting of static figures in the scene where the heroine runs to a new lover, who can be characterized as not Axel).
Behind the enveloping feeling of familiarity, there are no other experiences.
The film carefully outlines the themes, so not falling into them entirely.
After seeing this picture, I had a question: who is the “worst man in the world”? An open, frivolous person, or a person who uses affirmation as an excuse for his frivolous actions?
The main character, probably, as in the film “Amelie”, as a result of indifference to her from her father, grew up with a twist. The pathological desire to change the situation, the fear of becoming an ordinary unit of society (child, family) bring the heroine to thirty years without any achievements. I agree that everyone has their own way of life, however, in order for the path of life to be formed without constant throwing with subsequent psychological consequences regarding self-realization, parents serve as a guide. But if a child after more than twenty decides to radically change his or her guidelines, then again and again, and the parent spreads his or her hands and only encourages the choice of a daughter, then this suggests that the parent is “on the drum” (after all, you could at least advise psychiatry as an alternative to psychology), and this in turn leads to dissonance.
It is dissonant, because in the film these scenes are shown, but no morality is attached, just as the scenes of the initial “fast hobbies” of the heroine. Do the conclusion yourself, but do the right thing. But some lighting after the film tells me that I should encourage it against the backdrop of modern upbringing, individualization and respect for choice.
As a result, an adult hurts himself and his loved ones, but justifies himself as if everything happens by itself. Please note that in the film Julia absolutely accurately gives account of her actions, and nothing happens by chance (the scene of the party without an invitation).
Separately, it is worth noting the scene of a conversation with a person at death. You need to think about why the heroine came, having listened to, in fact, agony, in parallel poured out her problems, then left almost without sympathy back to her, or beloved, or already unloved.
Perhaps actions of this kind are explained by the desire of Julia to throw, but as Leo Tolstoy wrote: it is better to do nothing than to do nothing.
The only character to whom sympathy was expressed was Axel. Probably because in his 40-plus years, he finally had his head on his shoulders, attitude and outlook, albeit with a bit of naivety.
I will not write about other aspects, such as camera work, it is really good. But personally, I like to open a beautiful candy to see whether it tastes good or not.
In the end, after viewing, a certain parallel was drawn with the work “Madame Bovary”. Perhaps because of the excessive display of deprivation as an excuse for the promiscuity of the main character.
I'm brave enough to write this headline because I'm 28 and this is my generation too. As Gregg Araki poignantly senses 20-year-olds, so Joakim Trier easily slides across the surface of the 30-year-old world. When I write 'surface', I don't mean 'something bad'. Clothes, thoughts, dialogues of heroes. Details, lots of details. Julia probably loves jumpsuits, sometimes wearing shorts, a loose swamp-colored jacket with pockets. She changes clothes, hairstyle, study/work, sexual partners.
Axel says that they are not suitable for each other, they are in different phases of life & #39; He is successful, he believes in what he does. Julia doubts, changes one for another, and works in a bookstore. He is a recognized comic book author, he is interviewed while Yulia throws provocative phrases, pretending to be a doctor, at someone else’s wedding, where she is not invited.
Alvin is just like her. It's appealing until Yulia says she wants more. He has no ambitions, and Julia is one of those who is eternal ' gives hope ' Good grades, abilities, opportunities in the absence of a goal.
Watching this movie is like going to a therapist. You could make a story about any of us born in the 80s and early 90s. We looked at Julia's life and we're all a little bit of her.
It's been a while since I've been evaluating
Existential melodrama about the reflection of a typical millennial woman from a prosperous country
The main question of our generation "who to be" is experiencing a new wave of popularity in popular culture. Take the same Sally Rooney, whose characters are at a permanent crossroads, or the genre of mumblecore that focuses on the natural reflection of life in general. Jokim Trier, like his distant relative, the great Lars von Trier, also shows everyday life “as is”, only instead of shock, chooses the path of heavy romanticization and easy provocation.
The story itself is about nothing: “the heroine is in search of herself, the film is in search of history.” But it seems that Trier is the one who attracts: he simply captures the tragedy and beauty of every moment. Morning smile, burning coffee, sweet smoke break, rustle of a new book, caressing cheeks summer wind, blinding sunset, walk through the warm night city... The momentary subjective sensations that can be physically felt make Worst Man in the World a very tangible movie. Because of this, Oslo seems familiar, if it has never been there.
Space, by the way, is an important actor. For the frozen city scene, Trier even blocked the streets of the city, refusing to use CGI. Like a skilled landscape painter, he lovingly paints the landscape and the amazing light of the Norwegian capital, drawing an analogy with human actions full of ups and downs, dark and bright motives. Fragmented, broken into chapters by rivers of feminism and channels of infantilism, the narrative does not allow him to speak directly, but it is easy to get valuable between the lines - this is a film about love.
What is valuable is that Trier dispenses with a moral verdict, without naming a specific “worst person”: it is equally everyone who has shown selfishness. Another thing is that I, apparently, was tired of such films, and the audience in the cinema was ungrateful, therefore I do not share the wild delights of critics, although I do not detract from the merits of the film.
6 out of 10
Sex, drugs and rock and roll. If on one of the sunny, or not quite sunny, days, some passerby with a microphone and a camera from Sony asked me, “Hey, what three words would you use to describe your last movie, I would no doubt immediately say, this acclaimed in Western culture of the 70s dash of the 80s slogan, probably all famous rock, punk, hip, bands.”
The Worst Man in the World Trier, but not Lars, Joakim is a story long, if not in life, then in its hottest part, youth. Twelve main novel, with a prologue and epilogue, will tell about a very interesting, sometimes confused, and sometimes terrible, life, a young student, a “specialist” in psychological science, a photographer with experience, a pen master and just a cool salesman from a bookstore, whose life is full of uncertainty and reckless determination.
The life of Julia, the main character of the film, is divided into chapters, each of which actively changes the girl: her behavior, appearance, sometimes it seems that even the manner of walking changes, or I may be wrong, rather than the manner of walking, but her personal confidence or vice versa stiffness.
The plot of the film is her life, a biopic, only in this case a biopic of an unknown girl whose life changes as often as her boyfriends. At the very beginning of the film, I mean the credits, we see a multicolored palette, white, red, yellow, blue and black, which alternate. Why do you think the director decided to add colorful backgrounds to the credits at the beginning of the film? Perhaps they symbolize the same chaotic and uncertain setting of her life, with the increasing change of confusion of her constantly changing interests and men for one or two nights? Maybe. Or they indicate five major chapters of her life, each of which involved something that somehow affected her character and future decisions. Or maybe they are not directly related to the heroine, but only partially reflect one of the main ideas of the film, time.
At the end of the film, Axel is a very old guy, in relation to Julia, who managed to win the heart of a young girl, refusing to continue the relationship, after another change of partner, because he is much older than Julia, he has other interests, and most importantly he wants children. He learns about his disappointing diagnosis, which will soon put an end, not the same cross that he so ardently defended in the fight for free creativity and uncensored art, his key comic book character, the cross on his life. And at the moment when Julia was photographing Axel, in his father's house, or rather on the stairwell, we see again, guess what? That's right, the same colors as at the beginning of the movie. The colors that started the hand of the clock, the colors that will stop it.
If you again characterize a very unusual love union of Julia and Axel, which again does not fit into the model of the future and present life of Julia. Because time... She is not ready yet, she has not yet decided who she should be and what she wants in principle. Time. Not yet. She's not ready. We need to think. She does not want to live the lives of her ancestors, who somehow lost their time because of children. I want to add that they are the most opposite to each other.
Axl is a quiet, calm, grown-up man who wants kids and has a lifelong job drawing comics. Guess who Julia is. She is the complete opposite of him, young, confused, she does not want children, moreover, she is afraid of them, and sometimes even hates them, she has no business of her whole life, her interests are tropical climate, then warm, then cold, then rain, then drought, she is constantly looking for herself in something new. The question immediately arises as to how they lived so long together. And here, comes to mind, the famous Chinese metaphor, yin and yang, opposites attract. Just like in the credits, they began in white, skipping all the other colors, a metaphor for all of Julia’s other relationships, including Evan, and ended in black. White and black, yin and yang, Julia and Axel.
Yes, this controversial union, after all, ended, because not a permanent way of life Julia, made her think that Axel, this is not the person with whom she wants to connect her life. And here's a random guy, at a random party, the best option. Especially after you went to the bathroom together, talked about sex, breathed smoke into each other and set the clearest boundaries of all existing on planet Earth.
Although if you look at the sum of the iconic signs of Julia and Evan, at first glance we can say that they are perfect for each other. They're both unhappy with their relationship, looking for something new, ready for adventure, and both don't want kids. But Evan is just an intermediate color, between white and black, between Julia and Axel.
When I watched the film, I was constantly struck by the often changing image of Julia. Changing, not in the most noticeable features. Guess what? In her clothes and hair.
At the very beginning of the credits, we see an unfamiliar, smoking girl in a black dress, with her hair gathered in her tail, clearly arriving in a bad mood. This initial frame, from the second chapter, is called "treason." When Yulia's mood is spoiled, such as meeting Axel's friends who have children, her clothes change color as a chameleon who uses her natural disguise for protection, and Julia braids her hair in her tail, changes into dark clothes, as if protesting against her boyfriend's desire to have a child. “I’m still like ‘Bamby on Ice,’” says Julia, in another row with her boyfriend over the kids.
The plot of the film, classic mamblecore. Yulia’s life is like an open book, her fate changes with each chapter and a new guy. There are as many flowers in the opening credits as there are shifting interests in life, and men as many as flowers. This film uses an enthusiastic model that smoothly translates the viewer’s attention to the key artistic idea of the film. Not the plot, the plot is simple, life, search for yourself, rejection of prejudice, fear of uncertainty. But the idea is one, it's time.
The director, often showing us the hand of the clock, draws attention to the transience of life. Here Julia entered the first year of medical school, but she is already celebrating her thirtieth birthday, surrounded by people whose time is running out, and she herself does not even know what she wants from life.
Prologue, 12 chapters, epilogue. Julia is a windy at first glance special, seeking to escape from the concept of motherhood imposed on her. Never completes anything like ' shrewd' she herself notices only closer to the ending of the tape. The voiceover, measured and unhurried, begins this story and picks it up at important moments for the film. The main character is trying to become a doctor, then a psychologist, then a photographer - she has this dreaminess and the passion of youth, but ironically, she falls in love with Axel, who, for a second, is two-digit years older than the main character and, accordingly, in their relationship, not only strong love is brewing, but also a conflict of semi-generations, if you can say so.
From the first minutes, 2 main topics are stated: total globalization and society that requires girls to live according to patterns. All the way, Julia is haunted by the image of her mother, actively imposed by others - a real nightmare, a mushroom trip. Everywhere the standards, the schedule according to which one should give birth - all only require, without being interested in the female half of society, whether they want it or not, but everyone has already heard about men's problems - the observation of the charming Renate Reinswe, which, however, can be transferred to reality in different ways and start a whole discussion on this, but it is impossible not to note the typical for modern times a large share of truth in her statement. Cinema does not try to bring something new to this topic, but, following its logic, it is necessary to talk about it, which Joakim Trier decided to do, trying to ride the wave of fem-the agenda, catch this vibe, albeit at times ironic, but quite sincere, wave the handle of progressive youth. Here, in addition to connivance, it is worth giving the director credit, because he does it with his own specifics, delving into the topic in his own way.
Messengers, phones, social networks and photos of other people's ass - a topic to which Joakim Trier devoted some of his creativity, nostalgic for the old days, when people surrounded themselves with things, not things around a person. And here, he did it much less ridiculously than in "Louder Than Bombs," where his flight of thought was confined to clichéd parental phrasing of children and slicing viral vidocs. In The Worst Man in the World, he scatters his thoughts across chapters, masking them under a beautiful form, and the content has become more meaningful. What is the connection with fem-subpoena and gadgets? It’s simple: such a large stream of messages, photos and videos corny does not allow you to distract, think. A person is surrounded by things, imposing certain ideas on him, and not leaving the right to choose, stop, think. In this regard, Julia, of course, is a typical representative of her era, as the director repeatedly points out.
It seems that Joachim Trier chose Anders Danielsen Lieu as his avatar in cinema forever. There are very strict parallels between the director and Axel, and a certain circularity, when the choice of initial credits becomes obvious at the end, makes the whole world around clear and understandable. The director himself, although he pushes himself into the background, giving young people a voice, but wedges into this protest, organically declaring his manifesto “make yourself” along with humanist overtones, thereby quietly sweeping the topical topic and building something more immutable on it.
Despite his own rightness, which Joakim Trier believes in, existential horror, fear of death, his own worthlessness and inferiority eat more and more space in him. The style of the director this time hits the very bull’s eye: the darkness of the picture, sharp transitions through black screens perfectly suit such pessimistic moods, which, although hidden in the shadows, do not disappear with the inclusion of light. Trier puts the existential question upside down, worrying not about what he will leave behind after his death, but about how he lives in the here and now, what legacy he has while he is alive, and what makes sense of all this.
Such a seemingly heavy and emotionally loading movie looks very easy. It literally fascinates even with endless darkness and reflection, a relationship that seems to end at any second, but it is filled with love, tenderness and a reverent attitude towards the characters. The sympathy for Yulia is in stark contrast to the film’s title, and it’s fascinating. Love of humanity, acceptance and forgiveness – every life is sacred, every person is beautiful. Staying so optimistic with that kind of filling is a lot of work. Humanism here is at the forefront, and therefore the finale of the picture causes a very twofold feeling, a sense of lack of justice, randomness of fate and indifference of the universe, but at the same time a great satisfaction and tranquility.
The atmosphere created by the characters, their dialogues and relationships, empathy takes its toll on each of the three main characters. All this is built in order to press, press and once again put pressure on the viewer for the last 20 minutes - the number of punches, experiences of the characters goes off the scale, constantly increasing the emotionality of the scenes. One revelation follows another until the director starts smearing. And there are only a few blunders, but they give a certain idea of the understanding of the dramatic tropes of the director: he tries to press everything, not separating the grain from the chaff, or simply not understanding what can affect the viewer.
Colorful, and most importantly, believable and lively characters, inner jokes, great symbolism, irony and sadness, love, détente - the movie goes on as it should, but the film does not get worse, but the finale is so categorical that it lubricates everything. It follows from the zeal of Joachim Trier, but from the mood of the picture - hardly. Meaningful silent scenes, water as a metaphor for purification – everything seems very clear, but the catharsis of the main character looks dictated by some higher forces that do not know how to irony or drama. Here, the director departs from his own precepts, which Axel adheres to. Maybe this is a turning point in the work of the director, although, of course, it is difficult to believe it, or maybe the main character just late seized the reins of control over the picture.
What is the world saying now? Nothing to watch in the theater? There. Today is a movie that I watched a month and a half ago, at the special insistence of a friend. So every 10 to 15 minutes, I would swallow and say, They certainly know something about me. Towards the end, he said the same thing.
We're about 30. And all the annotations and reviews say exactly that: this is a movie about the crisis of thirty years. Current ones who are 30 right now. I mean, you and me. Such a movie really did not exist, and therefore praise, awards and nominations. Cannes. Oscar.
If we look superficially, we seem to see nothing new. Searching for yourself, growing up, abandoning the patterns imposed by society, the difficulties of building relationships, inaccessible love, problems with parents and... in order not to spoiler – I will stop. New topics? Not at all.
The film itself is divided into parts, and it’s like a lot of different short films. Each with its own meaning. Beautiful and complete.
But here we see all the attributes of our time. And because it is so easy to associate yourself with the main character, determined and almost fearless. He is always in doubt and always in search. It’s not a coincidence that chapters 12 are still ahead. After the twelfth mark on the dial of the clock begins a new circle.
It is said to be an intellectual melodrama. Which is a paradox in itself. But let them talk. You're ready for drama. I think her intelligence is in how many events she covers (the whole saga) and how confused you might find yourself after watching (like me). But! An hour, a day, two will pass and you will think of Julia. You will remember these romantic moments, these hopes, tender touches, chance encounters, experiments, new professions, gleam in the eyes. And those meetings in difficult times, untimely, choice choices and how things break down. How it changes, how everything changes and how black turns white. "Bamby on Ice." Where are you in all this? When will life begin?
The aesthetic/picture is amazing, all because the picture is filmed. There are so many nuances and subtleties in the film that the director (who also wrote the script) survived every ringing moment. Hand hugs, the early morning of an empty city, uncomfortable laughs, men's tears, books on the shelf, glasses, sex on the carpet, kisses ... so much that everything around freezes. Literally.
Ohhh. I write and watch movies and it’s like I’m there again. Where? Of course in my past. In their associations. My heroes with broad shoulders, my bookshelves, my chance encounters, my sea, my love and my life. Thank you, Joachim.
P.S. In one of the first reviews of the film, the film critic argued that the relative well-being of our generation led us to infantility, which means that we did not find answers to all the “main” questions in our 20s (like our parents), because we may not have searched. And now we have to learn in extreme conditions, and even in a constantly changing world.
An avalanche of fundamental questions remain open ... for all those "important years," for all those past 10 years. You're over thirty and you don't know either.
Life for yourself or family?
Freedom or relationships?
To have or not to have children?
How to choose a partner for a living together?
What is treason?
Work or creativity?
What is ambition?
How to build relationships with parents?
I quoted this list and added it only so that after the show you will return to it. We picked up a piece of paper. We set a date. And we wrote the answers today. And then they went back and forth, and they went back and forth. Fixing his own movie called "The Best Man in the World."
When I wrote a brief impression of the film ' hot on the trail', I said that this tape, which in a period of great crisis around allows you to return to 'normal life'. In which we create our own problems, not the state or the ambitions of individuals at the head of states and corporations. And more constructively, a movie about a generation. Perhaps not about everyone, but about many of those who were lucky enough to carry the title of "Millennial" & #39;.
The generation of those who are now ' in the area of 30' is the first generation with a lot of choices in life. After all, the older generation had less vectors of development due to the information development of society. And where there are many choices, there are many mistakes, but they began to form a society of very different, interesting and versatile people with a whole bag of trial and error behind them. To look into such a bag of one individual person gives us the opportunity Joachim Trier.
The main character Yulia changes her life a lot and, importantly, no one prevents her from doing this. The setting here is at a point in her life when the frequency of change slows down a little. For doubters, however, everyday life tends to become an uncomfortable reality that requires striking strokes to beat stagnation. Different insights lead to these strokes.
In my opinion, each of the 12 chapters of the film is about a single change or a separate awareness. How often do you notice an important awareness in your life? Well, you get it. So, for the main character it has already done Maesto Trier. And also amazingly revealing called his work, hanging this title over the joyful and amazingly real Renate Reinswe. After all, you can consider and call yourself ' the worst person in the world' in the eyes of others, but knowing that your choice you did not betray yourself.
Very real and non-linear cinema. But not everyone will like it.
"I want something more." Something more... Is that what?
In these words, the main character of the film “Worst man in the world” 2021 can recognize themselves absolutely everything. Apparently, this is one of the main reasons why this Norwegian film became one of the main films of the year, received enthusiastic responses from critics and viewers.
The Worst Man in the World is an existential exploration of life. When you are young and free to do whatever you want, what should you choose? Choose a serious career? Or family and children? Or creative self-actualization? Which choice is right? What choice will bring happiness and destroy our constant sense of life as a theatrical production in which we play a secondary and insignificant role?
And this choice must be made now, because the clock is ticking, time is ticking, old age is on the threshold. The heroine is thirty. She still doesn’t understand what she wants.
Critics unanimously claim that “The Worst Man in the World” is a life-affirming film. A film about a young woman’s search for herself, who finally finds her identity. Although, if you don’t look at this story so optimistically, it may well turn out that “Worst Man in the World” is a story about a girl who wanted a lot and ended up with nothing. A kind of Norwegian story about a woman left to grieve at a broken trough. Or the story of the Buridan donkey, who for so long chose between two equivalent haystacks, could not make a rational choice and died of hunger, and did not dare to take a step towards one stack.
In any case, Worst Man in the World is a great film, certainly worthy of rave reviews. Joachim Trier himself, speaking about this tape, notes that this is a romantic comedy for people who hate romantic comedies. After all, in the center of the story here is the love of which many dream, but even it makes you doubt and suffer the heroes who received the desired.
6 out of 10
How does it feel to be the worst person in the world? What is it like to rush from side to side, looking for your inner happiness, while breaking the hearts of others? What is it like to constantly torment yourself with questions 'Who am I?' and 'Does it make sense?'.
Many people lose themselves in these matters, as does the main character of the film 'Worst man in the world'.
Joakim Trier, the film's writer and director, brings up this topical topic that is familiar to almost everyone - the dissolution of our true identity in the fog of delusions, dreams and false idols.
When we lose ourselves, we no longer know what to feel, what emotions to feel. In fact, we can no longer control it. Clinging to every opportunity, every person, in the hope of salvation and happiness, such people, realizing that it did not help them again, break not only themselves, but also those who were with them, loved and accepted them.
And when such a person has gone too far in ' forest' of his thoughts, he begins to ask himself the most terrible questions: ' Maybe I am not worthy of happiness?', ' Maybe I am not worthy of love?', ' Does it make sense to go on?' And along with these finishing questions and not being able to feel really happy for even a second, a person says to himself, I am the worst person in the world.
I sincerely hope you never tell yourself that. You deserve more than you think.
In the meantime, watch the movie 'Worst Man in the World'. Good. Oscar nominations in the categories 'Best Original Screenplay' and 'Best Foreign Film' are fully justified.
I always wanted to be captain. I played volleyball, and it worked. Dropped, offered a band. Then the lab. Got it. I think he's the captain again. I left my dreams and ideas for later. I'll win my position! And it would not hurt sometimes to collect thoughts... And now where to find them, these thoughts... Let's say tomorrow is over. What do you want? At the end of the day, our business remains here. . .
'Day train', 1976, dir. I. Seleznev
Youth, youth, golden age. In stuffing bumps. Because these bumps are nothing at all. Okay, a slight shake. After that, he got up, shook off, went on. It's been climbing these years. Lessons are in the ease of comprehension. You hurt? Heart, soul? Well, the problem is... Think a splinter... It is treated quickly, scarred with one 'mach'. And on, on, on, on... For feelings, for impressions, for satiety. To satiety, oh, how far away. What do you say? Youth, youth. That is why we are given these moments. It takes forever.
Julia is bathing in the blessed time of her years. Finding a change of professions in training. Understanding partnership - relationships with one, another, third. The magic of sex, the magic of words, conversations, conversations, ' singing' triles - I take, give, share. And a single space, and a single roof over the head comfort idyll. Lucky for the audience. The smile of her face is the charm of everyone. Lovely, intelligent, good, beautiful and further and further you can squander the delights of this shining lakes eyes nymph.
Is there a grain in this movie for understanding what is happening on the screen? The director provides the viewer with something to reflect on the vastness of the existence of the maiden diva? Or is there a slight ripple of action here dominated? Pleasure, pleasure, pleasure? That's it? Just like that?
Perhaps everything is not so simple in this melodramatic story of Joachim Trier. The first is the name of the tape. 39: The worst man in the world, who is the worst? Why? Who is it? Julia? What's wrong with it? Let's take a closer look then... The second author's hint - the first frames of acquaintance with the person. She went to Medical University not by vocation, not out of desire to become a doctor, a professor - but the ecstasy of her own greatness to demonstrate high grade points. There it is! That is, pride, self-aggrandizement. How about a healthy ambition? And not without vanity, of course here... And for the sake of this career choice ' do not understand where, do not understand what?' What about the future? All right, so be it. The third stroke, in my opinion, is the cruel heart of a nice lady. You disagree? And you are on breaks-departures from your yesterday's piers 'fragile boat' pay attention. No wonder 'bald' it all started in a bar? Forgot about it in an instant carried away 'drawing '. Hard? Brutal? Is that easy? However, ' the artist' did not escape the same fate. And what happened to 'the coffee serveer'?
So what is it? Who's who? Immature lady? Strong woman? So you remember the wise Igor (Valentin Gaft) from ' Day Train' - I always wanted to be captains. I played volleyball, and it worked. Dropped, offered a band. Then the lab. Got it. I think he's the captain again. I left my dreams and ideas for later... Wouldn't play Julia... Don't play!
The picture is full of different themes without Julia. Fathers and children, for example. And the kids, as such. Need them? Who? What for? A burden? Sketches about the younger generation are colorful, fresh.
The director, who created in his time - 'Oslo, August 31', and earlier 'Reprise' - incidentally with the same acting ensemble that now deserves kind, warm words. The current film is a gift to true connoisseurs of ballads about love, feelings, male and female in contact.
The name of the director-Trier, the heroine is Julia. But this is not Trier, and Julia is not Russian. But there's the Cannes award. So to the point.
The Norwegian version of Dakota Johnson does not know what he wants and where to stick himself. She is neither a doctor nor a photographer nor a writer. Julia is sure that if you hug children, they will definitely become drug addicts, and her husband draws comics and does not pay attention to her, if, at least, do not lift the T-shirt in his face. Apparently, trust "Norwegian" is when you do not leave anything for yourself, but then is it possible to remain for a long time interesting at least for someone?
The Scandinavians are different.
Male full frontal here as if, quite, in context, and without mushrooms is unlikely to survive the northern inevitability, while the lynx destroys Christmas.
I am a big fan of Scandinavian cinema: it attracts and disgusts me at the same time, knocking down all settings and clearing the place for surprise, but the film is just a keyhole into someone’s life to know what exactly you don’t want in your life.
Norwegian love is strange, but they are absolutely right about one thing: when you love, time stops, and while you are only a moment in someone’s life, someone is life itself to you.
Three stages of viewing the film "The Worst Man in the World" (Verdens verste menneske):
0 min - 55 min. What the hell is that? Rating 8.2 on IMDb, you say? These are the Europeans who came.
• 55 minutes - 1 hour 40 minutes. Well, there's something about this movie. For example, this scene was curious.
1 h 40 min - 2 h min Yeah, good movie. Makes you think.
So here's a fresh Norwegian-French movie that got a very high score of 8.2 on IMDb. Usually, such ratings have recognized masterpieces of cinema, so it is surprising that a little-known project received such an honor. Let’s find out what kind of movie is this? Is this really a masterpiece?
What's the movie about?
Yulia, a medical student, realizes she doesn’t want to be a doctor, but instead wants to become a psychologist. Having started training in a new field, the girl comes to the conclusion that this is not her vocation. Photography is what really attracts Julia! Having changed many boyfriends and never found her favorite line of activity, the main character gets a job as a sales consultant in an ordinary bookstore. Soon she meets Axel, the author of scabby comics. But is Julia ready for a serious relationship?
What kind of movie is this?
Many years ago, I watched a dramatic movie called Louder Than Bombs, which featured Isabelle Huppert and Jesse Eisenberg. Her ratings were average, but I liked and remembered the film. The story follows three men from the same family - a father and two sons - who are confronted with their mother dying. Each of the heroes in their own way experiences tragedy. Two years later, I learned that the director of this film, Joachim Trier, made a new movie, a mystical one. I immediately took the time to watch it. The Norwegian did not fail – the film “Thelma”, which tells about a girl with superhuman abilities, also turned out to be memorable, unusual and thought-provoking. The director immediately got into my list of filmmakers whose new works are worth waiting for. It took four years to wait. Was it worth it?
The new creation of Joakim is dedicated to several years of the life of a quite ordinary girl (Renate Reinswe - the prize of the Cannes Film Festival for the best actress), in the fate of which nothing happens that would not happen to others. The main character just lives, rushes between her desires, tries to understand what she needs, but never stops. And that's what the movie is worth. The way in which it conducts the study of human life, can envy any textbook on psychology. At the same time, everything in the film happens according to the annotation - the director promised to tell about the life of a woman - the director did it one hundred percent. There is nothing to complain about.
The film doesn't touch much at first. It seems that we are forced to watch an incomprehensible girl who is mad with fat and does some nonsense instead of important things (to a large extent this is exactly what it is). However, from about the middle of the film begins to overgrown with interesting chips that adorn the viewing and make it cut into memory, and for the central heroine from now on you begin to worry.
I am glad that the characters in the tape behave realistically - almost all their actions are logical, understandable and recognizable. Situations in which they are also periodically found in everyday life, so we can safely say that Trier’s tape takes the viewer not with an amazing idea (which is not here), but with an affordable, colorful and classy set of famous platitudes. Surprisingly, the film helps because it is shot in a somewhat cold Scandinavian style. If we imagine that the “Worst Man in the World” would be entirely created in France, then it would definitely turn into a real clown, which we would still like to avoid.
Any component of the film separately is something simple and often found in other films, but in total they all create a stunning effect that cannot but make you note the magnificent, but more importantly, non-trivial directorial work.
The Worst Man in the World is a movie. It is from the category of films that are worth watching to understand the direction in which modern cinema is developing, no matter how banal it may sound.
What's the end result?
The film gives the impression of something significant. “The Worst Man in the World” will not be a movie that you can forget a few days after watching. The picture will definitely make you think about yourself, later - periodically return to your head at a convenient opportunity, and after many years - pop up in memory as something interesting and evoking emotions. First of all, I would recommend this film to those who really love cinema and watch not only those of its representatives, in which the main characters wear red pants and save the world.
Julia suddenly drops out of medical school. Something changed my mind, decided to study psychology, and then, and completely fond of photography – a very versatile girl. Next, she finds a cozy place in the bookstore, as well as the embrace of the author of the comic artist Axel, twice her age (he is 40). Life goes on as usual, where there are visits to various relatives, passing into fun evenings and nights.
Julia, lives in “today’s time” (where likes are put on Instagram accidentally and not accidentally, medical masks, which are already in the prologue). Soon, the 30th birthday is scheduled and you need to do something further with your life, as life with the author of the comics becomes an unbearable routine, strangling Julia, as Axel hints at their difference, and demands a little more from her. From despair, the girl takes, and shows up for an uninvited party, where she meets Alvin. After some time, the beautiful Julia runs through the streets of European Oslo (time around freezes, no one moves), and she has to decide whether to break her close connection with Axel, or stay. Thus, all this smoothly turns into a specific rom-com.
Renata Reinsve is attracted by her special energy. Youth flows in Julia, and she wants to radiate her energy and versatility in the environment for a long time. So, her life is broken into chapters: twelve headlines, prologue, epilogue. An unusual person who feels the glow of life. Anders Danielsen Lieu/Axel and Herbert Nordham/Elvin are also active in their lives – and Julia remains an important person for them, for each in different ways. The connection with Axel, Julia will not be lost, and he will remain with her for a long time, because there are reasons for this.
"Worst man in the world" - a non-standard rom-com melodrama, freely passing tragicomedy with a bias in romance. Life, through the eyes of beautiful young people (for Julia important 12 chapters, of which she will learn something) is sometimes confusing, sometimes uncertain. There is also humor in moderate doses (especially Julia’s drug trip, which is shrouded in flabbiness and comic inserts from Axel’s creation). Here you can feel the depth of the scenario, imbued with universality, thereby leaving a positive impression.
8 out of 10