Heroes of Internet memes try to become Adam and Eve and go crazy with despair
The main character of the film, a feminine young guy with a beard, who looks like a vegan-Soyjek from an Internet meme, remains in the lost world of Iceland alone with his girlfriend of the heart. What is he doing to save a lost civilization? Is he trying to preserve the accumulated knowledge of mankind in the remaining electronic artifacts? Does he learn to fish, knowing that the shelf life of canned beans, the supply of which seems endless, will one day end? Can he at least impregnate his girlfriend by giving her a baby so that the couple can become Adam and Eve of the new world? And the film demonstrates that a modern man, facing a task with which his ancestors have coped for tens of thousands of years, can only drive beautiful cars that he can not even fix himself, and photograph the surrounding beauty, while ineptly calming his woman, who knows what this leads to, and who eventually goes crazy and ends her life by suicide.
The film symbolically demonstrates the crisis of masculinity in Europe, which, like the main characters, was imported to Europe from the United States. Beautiful landscapes of Iceland, the northern sun setting over the horizon in Reykjavik, a deep, topical plot, authentic acting, pleasant melancholy music in the spirit of Niels Fram make the film an excellent pastime for Friday evening.
10 out of 10
Genai (Mike Monroe) and Riley (Matthew O'Leary). They seem serious. They are on a romantic trip to Iceland. And when there is a person close to you, the whole world is blurred and all around cease to exist. You think that's fantastic? The movie is a disaster? Am I a legend?
And to my taste, the authors did everything to show that there is an illusion of focus. People just disappeared. This is more like an allusion.
And Jenai and Riley faced the same questions that every couple in society had. How do we ensure displacement, resources, a decent place to live? It turns out that the presence of people is not so important. More important is the test of uncertainty. Someone in a couple is optimistic about doing their job just hoping for the best, and someone considers himself a realist. . .
That's how the whole movie goes. This is not a disaster, but an exquisite quest in Iceland in the style of Wim Wenders. Even, in my opinion, the blurred ending does not fundamentally change anything.
7 out of 10
I'll call Boque, an attempt at a movie that left a crumpled feeling. Beautiful nature, beautiful interiors; plot, allowing you to touch the depths of society and psychology. But instead of depth, it's like a problem.
For example, the film could be strengthened figuratively showing the heroine’s dependence on society and consumption – bringing her passion to the limit and then the finale would look not a vulgar plot, but a continuation of the storyline. For example, show how she dresses up and constantly looks in the mirror, and takes a selfie.
For example, it would also be possible to gradually strengthen the show of the hero’s maturity – from a mother’s son, indulgent to the whims of a woman, to a man, providing a comfortable existence for both of them. For example, the hero had to make a woman work.
In Boca, it seems to me, there is an attempt at what I described above, but some of it is vague, not convincing, alas. There was so much more to put in the movie. For example, ...
The film is like a parable of human relationships. Two young Americans go on a romantic trip to Iceland. Admire its beauty, visit the sights, enjoy life and do not doubt their feelings. But one day, waking up in the morning, they find themselves completely alone - it is unknown why, but the people disappeared and, as in the famous song of Sergei Trofimov, "there are only two of them - he and she."
Having experienced the first shock of such an extraordinary event and realizing that they are the only ones in the world, the couple radically different views into the future. The guy (Matthew O. Leary) lets go of the past and is quite optimistic about moving forward, viewing the situation as a gift with a huge amount of bonuses. The girl (Mike Monroe) is more irritated by the misunderstanding of what happened than grieving for such a globally changed habitual life and sees nothing ahead. That is, we have two completely different psychotypes, which in a normal situation could not notice irreparable differences between themselves, create a family and live happily together for the rest of their lives without even looking at someone else. But the situation of absolute loneliness, and therefore the complete absence of possible choices, puts the characters and their feelings literally on the verge of survival. Almost on the third day, the girl begins to see negative traits in her partner, which she had not even imagined before, and since she is not able to store new feelings and sensations in herself, she begins to eat the guy’s brain with a small spoon. The situation sounds deafening - it was necessary to remain the only couple on the planet to see the shortcomings of the chosen one and so obviously demonstrate their own disgusting character.
However, she also looks at life through the prism of pessimism, trying to build it according to the newly invented rules in order to use the huge resources of the world as long as possible, since she does not see in her partner a person who is able to feed her independently and generally do something with his own hands. And even when he proves the opposite - creates a construction for collecting rainwater and fills it with a huge reservoir, the girl, including the resistance of the gut, uses it to put the final point. In general, her glass is always half empty and this makes her condition truly unbearable.
The finale sounds philosophical - the guy is frankly sorry and I really want to believe that there are still at least a few women in the world and one of them will definitely meet on his way. . .
This clearly arthouse movie excites a lot of hidden feelings and thoughts that probably came to mind alone and to which it is so difficult to find answers. Including understanding between close people and, perhaps, the right choice. You don’t have to wait for the apocalypse to really see who’s next to you. . .
The film is unusual, a little drawn out, in general - for contemplation.
The film describes the Apocalypse and how 2 people: a guy and a girl, differently perceive this situation. It's so realistic!
Psychology is so simple. . .
The situation is real - they woke up - and no one in the world. And the guy is optimistic, enjoyed the moment, he easily adjusted to new circumstances.
He had a camera with him - he went everywhere and took pictures. Therefore, I concluded that for a positive attitude to life, as well as for getting out of difficult situations, having a favorite thing helps a lot.
The girl is the opposite - she had no occupation (in the frame was not shown).
And she went into severe depression and missed home ... which is long gone.
Very interesting movie!
The guy thought they had the world at their feet, and she was worried about running out of food and water. He was able to build rainwater collection equipment and bought filters for the store. . .
From their first dialogue, I strangely believed in the relationship of a girl and a guy... as if they had recently met. Cold enough relationships, dialogue about nothing and so on. The guy invested more in the relationship, and we can conclude that he loved her sincerely. . .
And his psychology made him resistant to this difficult situation:
Happiness = love (relationship with a person, understanding, support) + a favorite thing.
The girl missed home very much, and could not see the beauty in the present, therefore, did not love it. And maybe for someone, a relationship is just a small piece of life, without strong support. Where relationships are not part of a lifestyle, but just a small part of life.
The girl and the guy are very cute: the guy really has good qualities: he is calm, optimistic, intelligent, creative. A very positive hero.
The girl thinks more negatively, is attached to the past, pays attention to unnecessary details. She has the qualities that a hysterical girl has... or something like that... or the like, the girl is closer. It is a shame that the girl was shown, I would like to see a stronger and more independent in the frame.
But the director decided to choose this character and image. It was interesting to find yourself in some actions of the heroes, and other actions were interesting to study. . .
I've been wanting north to Iceland for a long time.
Deciding to get acquainted with the filmography of the young pretty actress Mikey Monroe, I came across the film Boque. As I understand, the girl chooses interesting projects and has not yet been seen in outright bullshit or raising money.
Back to Boca, we have a rather non-trivial reading of the apocalypse. There is no grey, scorched earth, zombies and other paraphernalia of most PA films. For most of the film, we and the main characters are admiring Iceland (hey, Ho Land!). Indeed, the footage is fascinating, the film resembles a more beautiful clip.
It would seem that why does the director “clean up” humanity, if all we do is admire Iceland? Why do you have such a large number?
And around the end of the film, I started asking myself a lot of questions, looking at the behavior, the attitude of the main characters. It is the different attitude to his new life of a young man and his girlfriend that reveal the director's ideas. And I am not sure that the question of whether to live or not to live is the only one.
Very quiet and imperceptible fantastic drama "Boque" offers the viewer a walk and admire the landscapes of Iceland with a young couple. It is worth preparing for the fact that the walk will be very intimate, because there is no one left on Earth except for them.
The film certainly captures great camera work. Each frame "Boke" and I want to keep a memory. The plot of the picture is infinitely simple, but at the same time raises the most important questions about the meaning of our being. The characters express two diametrically opposite positions at once: here is Riley, who is just trying to enjoy the situation and does not think much about what will happen next; but here is Jenai, who is homesick, worried about food supplies that may run out at any moment, and tries to understand why they were left alone in this world.
Each of them is close to the viewer. After all, it is difficult to say what our reaction will be in the end, if we find ourselves in such conditions - will we, humbled, try to keep moving on or will fight as hard as we can to find answers that may not be necessary. "Boke" makes us feel this fear of loneliness, and the touching soundtrack from Keegan DeWitt only adds fuel to the fire.
However, such an approach "forehead" slightly spoils the overall impression. The message is very clear, but from such a film you expect a more filigree approach. Attempting to grasp the questions of being and religion in some places looks very sloppy. However, you get great aesthetic pleasure from the film. And the sediment inside.
It's a modest, small movie that talks about big things.
Very intrigued this movie with its poster and description of the plot. Personally, I was ready to see something interesting and interesting. The film is very unusual, and its history excites attention. Lovers remained on the whole planet together. What do I do? Such an apocalyptic plot excites, and watching this story, you put yourself in the place of the heroes, you think how you would behave in such an extraordinary situation. In any case, this Icelandic film was promising, but I did not like it. I will try to explain why.
Meet a young, American couple who have arrived in Iceland. Here, waking up in the morning, young people face an inexplicable dilemma. No one else is on the island. The boy and the girl soon realize that they are alone in the world. There are no signs of life of other people either in Iceland or around the world through social networks and television.
At first, the movie captures the attention immerses in its incredible story. At first, the film seems interesting and successful. Then something happens and everything becomes raw and ill-conceived. The plot is extremely cold and banal. Heroes do not try to do something, go somewhere, look for people, because Iceland is big. They resigned very quickly, and everything turned into something depressing without any hope.
There is always hope, but when you look at the main characters, you forget about it. I don't think the movie worked. From this story, it was much better and more successful to shoot a picture. This fantastic drama puts pressure on the viewer, stuffed with a dubious, ill-thought-out story. There were more questions than answers to the story. The film looks like in the section of independent paintings on something average, and on the amateur.
The directing was medium, but the camera work pleased. If the previously unknown actor Matthew O’Leary played cleanly and convincingly, then his partner Mike Monroe overplayed, which was obvious in the beginning and ending. When you do not believe in acting, the feeling of falsehood kills everything.
Boke is an Icelandic, fantastic drama of 2017, filmed, of course, with the commercial assistance of US film companies. The film seems intriguing and enticing, but in fact it is sluggish and underdeveloped. It’s a curious attempt, but I’ll say no to the film as a whole.
I was intrigued by the proposed plot idea. Trying to reinvent yourself in a world where there is only one other person besides you is a powerful move. Or rather, it could be.
The film itself seemed to me rather flat and moralizing. An attempt to counteract the primitive-label attitude of pessimism/optimism, without any attentive attitude to the depth of the characters' experiences. What happens to the heroes is revealed extremely dimly and not expressive.
The aftertaste of the film is rather dreary and dual.
In the film, the idea of the importance of the ability to capture the moment and appreciate it, enjoy the beauty of the world in any circumstances, but when impressed with the whole film, after watching it, the more obvious is the idea that such a “here and now”, the desire not to worry about internal issues and challenges, ignoring anxiety and anxiety – is not always a good strategy.
It’s also fair to say that the film is stunningly beautiful. The work of the operator is beyond praise.
It is surprising sometimes what depth lies behind an unremarkable brief summary.
A similar theme was raised recently in Passengers: life without society in a world of abundance and beauty. The topic is fascinating, invites you to try this role on yourself and enjoy the opening prospects. This unusual angle allows us to take a new look at the role of people around us, close and not so much, our role in society and our activities. But the creators of Boke went further.
We were introduced to two heroes who had a very different perception of forced loneliness. And that difference is a lifetime. And where the whole world lies before one’s feet, the other worries about the expiration date of yogurt, where one sees beauty, the other sees only death.
“Yes, nothing is clear, but it does not matter. We can still live a good life.” These words could become an epigraph to absolutely any human history of life, if it were true. If not for our eternal regret for the past, worry about the future, longing for the impossible. And behind these constant tossings of our minds, we forget the most important thing, which is why we all came here. We forget about life. About the brief moment that we only have today. Look around you, you have everything to be happy, you have life.
10 out of 10