Jump to content
Forum Cinema em Cena

SaveFerris

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SaveFerris

  1.  

    Todo esse carnaval entre Cannes e Cegueira está mais atrapalhando do que ajudando a fama do filme. Vamos ver no que vai dar...

     

    Em compensação' date=' a Julianne Moore apareceu na lista das 100 pessoas mais bonitas segundo a People. 01

    [/quote']

     

    Meu Deus do céu, mas que conversa é essa?

    O impasse entre Cannes e Blindness gerou um grande buzz para o filme de Meirelles, o colocando no centro das discussões na mídia de entretenimento mundial, não obstante a americana.

    A exceção que o festival conferiu ao filme, de ser o filme de abertura e tb concorrente, é um precedente.

     

    Trata-se de buzz da melhor qualidade.

     

    Verdade. Mas é bom lembrar também que por estar no centro das atenções a responsabilidade é maior. Com toda essa expectativa sobre o filme, ele precisa ser considerado pela crítica ao menos como muito bom, para continuar firme na disputa por premiações futuras.

     

    Exatamente, no ano passado Um Beijo Roubado de Wong Kar Wai abriu o Festival de Cannes e participou da mostra competitiva. O filme era bastante aguardado e muitos acreditavam que seria um dos principais destaques na temporada de prêmios de 2007. Porém a produção não foi muito bem recebida pela crítica lá e acabou sendo mal distribuido ao redor do mundo.

     

    Ainda assim, acredito num futuro melhor para Cegueira.

     

  2.  

    Revi Notas de um Escândalo e A Rainha. O trabalho de Dench me impressionou muito mais que o de Mirren nesta revisitada. Eu analisei mais profundamente as partituras. Humm...confesso que talvez tenha havido uma superestimação forte...

     

    Sou mais fã do trabalho de Dench também. Ela foi capaz de construir algo incrível em cima de uma personagem repugnante em um filme bem mediano.

     

  3. A IndieWire chamou 106 críticos para elegerem seus filmes favoritos de 2007, o resultado foi esse:

     

     

    1. There Will Be Blood

    2. Zodiac

    3. No Country for Old Men

    4. Syndromes and a Century

    5. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days

    6. I'm Not There

    7. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

    8.Colossal Youth

    9. Killer of Sheep

    10. Offside

    11. Black Book

    12. Once 

    13. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

    14. Eastern Promises

    15. I Don't Want to Sleep Alone

    16. Regular Lovers

    17. The Host

    18. Southland Tales

    19. Into the Wild

    20. Ratatouille  

     

  4. Bom ou mau ator, ele ainda tem chances de ser indicado.

     

    Acho que devemos olhar as indicações do SAG e juntar com as do Globo de Ouro e do BFCA pra ter uma idéia melhor de quem entra e quem está de fora. E ainda esperar pelo importante DGA.

     

     

  5. É, mas devemos nos lembrar que muitas vezes os que surgem como favoritos logo no início podem acabar perdendo fôlego e cedem espaço para outros concorrentes (Brokeback Mountain, Eddie Murphy, Felicity Huffman, etc)...

     

  6. Eu sou muito fã de Wes Anderson, o único filme dele que não vi ainda foi Bottle Rocket.

     

    Digo isso, porque gostei bastante até do detonado A Vida Marinha com Steve Zissou. E Viagem à Darjeeling mantem a qualidade dos filmes anteriores do Anderson. Mesmo que pela primeira vez, acho que ele não tenha alcançado o impacto emocional almejado, algo que ele fez com bastante sutileza e eficácia em seus outros longas.

     

    Seu apuro estético e toda a construção visual do filme são impecáveis. E discordo das críticas que afirmam que Wes Anderson valoriza o estilo em detrimento do conteúdo, suas elaborações visuais sempre dizem muito mais do que aparentam. Além de tornar todo o filme mais agradável aos olhos.

     

    O destaque fica com as atuações, os três atores protagonistas (Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody e Jason Schwartzman) apresentam uma boa química, nos fazendo acreditar que aqueles personagens realmente pertencem à mesma família e todos se saem bem tanto nos momentos cômicos como nos dramáticos. O elenco de apoio também é bem utilizado e o filme ainda conta com uma marcante participação de Angelica Huston.

     

     

  7.  

     

    Eu admiro muito a Scarlett Johansson. Claro que é limitada, mas ela só tem 22 anos e acredito que ainda vai desenvolver melhor o seu talento.

     

    Sobre seus trabalhos anteriores, ela se saiu muito bem em filmes que souberam aproveitar a sua naturalidade e sua presença carismática como em Ghost World, Encontros e Desencontros, A Moça do Brinco de Pérolas, Em Boa Companhia e Match Point. Em alguns filmes melhor do que em outros, mas em todos esses ela não só mostra que entende bem o que está fazendo e como ama o que está fazendo.

     

    Acho que o momento mais divisivo em sua carreira foi no ano passado. Pessoalmente, acho que ela teve uma excelente química com o Woddy Allen e mostrou um bom timing cômico em Scoop. Não é um grande trabalho, mas é eficiente. É injusto falar que ela tava mal em A Dália Negra, visto que todos os atores (com excessão de Mia Kishner) estavam péssimos, acredito ser uma falha maior do Brian De Palma (diretor que eu admiro muito) do que da Scarlett. E por fim, ela foi mal utilizada em um personagem sem atrativos em O Grande Truque. Ela não tinha muito o que fazer no filme.

     

    Só acho um equívoco ela ter explorado com certa continuidade uma imagem sexy, já que sua naturalidade a torna muito mais sensual.

     

    SaveFerris2007-11-21 23:29:49

  8.  

    Engraçado' date=' o nome do filme se refere a personagem de Scarlet, mas no trailer, Natalie parece a protagonista. Confuso...

     

    Os olhares de Portman estão fodas!!! Delícia!!!

     

    Agora a pergunta, foi adiado por ser ruim ou por outro motivo?
    [/quote']

     

    Pessoas que assistiram o filme em alguns screenings disseram se tratar de um bela produção, mas cheia de falhas na direção. Compararam o clima do filme com o de Segundas Intenções (?).

     

    Aparentemente, você pode apreciar o filme se não for leva-lo muito a sério...

     

  9. This past weekend Southland Tales screened at the Fantastic Fest in Austin, and the film got some pretty damn good reviews...

     

     

     

     

     

    AICN: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34146

     

    "If you want a simple tale, look elsewhere. This is the type of

    end of the world conspiracy that you’d expect to come out of Terry

    Southern or Hunter S Thompson or Kurt Vonnegut. It concerns alternate

    realities, subversive sub-cultures, neo-politic-paranoia and religious

    doomsday soothsaying."

     

     

     

    TwitchFilm: http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/fantastic-fest-report-southland-tales-review#extended

     

    "If Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain was too obscure and cerebral

    for mainstream audiences then Southland Tales, a more challenging film

    by far, is destined to die a quick and unpleasant death at the box

    office. That said, for those who make it through the initial overload

    of information and can latch on to Kelly’s vibe, Southland is also a

    dazzlingly smart, funny, and engaging work, one that fuses political

    fears with apocalyptic religiosity and techno-dread and wraps it all in

    a glossy, colorful package. Southland Tales is far from the mess it has

    been made out to be, a work that rewards as much as it challenges and

    succeeds in finding the human, emotional core lurking beneath all of

    its high concepts."

     

     

     

    Cinematical: http://www.cinematical.com/2007/09/24/fantastic-fest-review-southland-tales

     

    "I like a movie I can watch with a group of friends, then head

    off to a coffeehouse or bar and have an interesting discussion about

    what exactly happened and what it all meant. Southland Tales will have

    us debating through dinner, drinks and dessert ... maybe for several

    meals."

     

     

     

    CinemaIsDope: http://www.cinemaisdope.com/fantastic-fest-2007-playing-catch-up-persepolis-dainipponjin-crazy-thunder-road-richard-kelly/

     

    "Southland Tales” I liked. It’s a challenging film for sure but

    its essentially “Donnie Darko” on a global scale with a really engaging

    post 9-11 discussion. Kelly’s strong voice of cinema and the stellar

    ensemble acting make up for an often much more complex than perhaps it

    needs to be film."

     

  10. Vixi que tão vaiando todo mundo esse ano... aliás' date=' alguém tem mais notícias de Southland Tales?[/quote']

    Jeffrey Wells disse que a versão exibida em Canes não deve ser a final:

    So it turned out that two youngest American filmmakers with films in competition here -- Southland Tales's Richard Kelly, 31, and Marie-Antoinette's Sofia Coppola, 35 -- got slammed the hardest. Had to hurt. For what it's worth, the Southland Tales team said they were on schedule to finish the film in mid-June, and when they heard they'd been accepted (they expected to show it out of competition, at best) it was general quarters, no notes handed to Kelly, not enough money to finish some of the things they had to finish and rush-rush-rush. I'm certain there will be another big critics' viewing down the road (maybe in Toronto) and by that time some of the length and clarity issues will, I presume, be resolved.

    uma olhada em críticas bem divergentes sobre o filme:

    . essa é do Village Voice:

    Not so the most audacious, polarizing, and to my mind, enjoyable movie in the competition thus far: Southland Tales.

    Kelly's second feature is as talented as—and even more ambitious than—his debut, the cult hit Donnie Darko. A high-voltage farrago of unsynopsizable plots and counterplots, Southland Tales unfolds—mid–presidential campaign—in an alternate, pre- and post-apocalyptic universe where Texas was nuked on July 5, 2005, and a German multinational has figured out how to produce energy from ocean water. The mode is high-octane sci-fi social satire; the cast is large and antic (with wrestler Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as an anxious, amnesiac action hero and Sarah Michelle Gellar biting down hard on the role of socially conscious porn queen Krysta Now).

    Essentially, Southland Tales is a big-budget, widescreen underground movie. ("Star-Spangled to Death," one colleague commented as we left the screening.) Filled with throwaway gags and trippy special effects, it's a comedy as well. Philip K. Dick is the presiding deity—the movie is thick with drugs, paranoia, and time-travel metaphysics—although Karl Marx (and his family) keep surfacing in various guises, including the last remnant of the Democratic Party. The film is a mishmash of literary citations, interpolated music videos, and movie references—most obviously to Robert Aldrich's Kiss Me Deadly—but it's even more concerned with evoking the ubiquitous media texture of contemporary American life.

    At two hours and 40 minutes, Southland Tales flirts with the ineffable and also the unreleasable. There's no U.S. distributor; nor does the movie's humor, much of it predicated on a familiarity with American television, political rhetoric, and religious cant, seem designed to travel easily. Received with a lusty round of boos and a smattering of applause, Southland Tales provoked the festival's most negative press screening and hostile press conference since The Da Vinci Code. The first question suggested (incorrectly) that Kelly's movie had set a Cannes record for number of walkouts and asked the director how he felt.

    Why was the Kelly Code too much to take? Sensory overload is certainly a factor, but unlike Da Vinci, Southland Tales actually is a visionary film about the end of times. There hasn't been anything comparable in American movies since Mulholland Drive.

    .essa é do Indiwire:

    Anyway, back to Southland Tales. Part of the problem with trying to review this overstuffed folly, even in rushed, conversational capsule form, is that the amount of sheer unadulterated stuff Kelly throws at the screen precludes any kind of coherent synopsis. (In that respect -- but only that respect -- it reminds me a bit of Arnaud Desplechin's Kings & Queen, another movie most egghead American critics liked a lot more than I did.) You've got a crypto-fascist arm of the government called (I believe) USIdent; you've got radical neo-Marxist groups attempting to swing California in an upcoming election with the use of severed thumbs; you've got The Rock as a famous actor whose screenplay foretells the forthcoming apocalypse, and who begins to confuse himself with his fictional hero; you've got Wallace Shawn with bizarro hair as some kind of sinister energy mogul, plus Zelda Rubinstein as his...assistant? (nothing in this movie is that clear); you've got Seann William Scott as a beach cop who's replaced his identical twin brother for reasons that only become apparent in the film's third hour (by which time your brain has long since gone numb); you've got Miranda Richardson pulling pinched faces in front of a bank of video monitors, which appears to just be something that Kelly can randomly cut to for rhythmic purposes; you've got Kevin Smith overacting in a big stupid beard; you've got Sarah Michelle Gellar and three other hotties providing the newsflash that porn stars are stupid and shallow; you've got Justin Timberlake narrating events in the quavery voice of an 80-year-old woman...the absurdity just goes on and on, and yet everything remains disconnected and surface-level, weird-for-weird's-sake. Yes, Kelly addresses a handful of hot-button topics -- the growing infringement of civil liberties in the name of the war on terrorism; the increasingly symbiotic relationship between politics and entertainment -- but only the most shallow, simplistic, name-checking kind of way. Which would be forgivable if the movie were remotely funny, but it just plain isn't, despite the painfully labored efforts of the entire cast. Hence my previous reference to Hudson Hawk -- a much better movie, I have to say -- which is the last time I can remember seeing so much strained pseudo-satirical whimsy in one motion picture.

    Incidentally, I have yet to see an actual printed review of Southland Tales that wouldn't qualify as a pan. The rave reviews I mentioned in my last entry, for the moment, remain only a rumor.



  11. "I just saw Sofia Coppola's Marie-Antoinette," says a French film critic whose name I should probably keep under wraps. "Empty shell, boring as hell. Don't know if the Cannes jury is gonna buy it, but the average moviegoer will suffer deeply
    watching gilded 18th-Century types people get bored, eat, drink, and
    get bored again. Movies about boredom and filling spaces are tricky to
    film. Coppola did it right with Lost in Translation, but this time she fails completely, in my opinion. You were right about the parallel between Marie Antoinette and the Paris Hilton crowd . It's here. The rock soundtrack works in the beginning, but quickly turns into a gimmick that doesn't hold for two hours."


  12. The presentation of the Cannes selection



    April 22, 2006






    The Official Selection of the Festival de Cannes 2006 will, as every
    year, be made up films presented in: the Competition, Un Certain
    Regard, Out of Competition screenings.
    It offers both a shorts and film schools competition (Cinéfondation).
    Cannes Classics concerns heritage films, shown principally in the Buñuel Theatre.

    Finally,
    in addition to the theatres of the Palais (Lumière, Debussy, Buñuel,
    Bazin) now the Beach Cinema offers festival-goers and Cannes residents
    alike outdoors screenings.

    - What are the criteria used for a film to be selected for Cannes?

    That
    is the most important question... and the answer is the most difficult
    to formulate. Cannes remains faithful to its principles, and the
    philosophy which leads the selection equally remains the same:
    highlighting auteur cinema, the search for singular voices in different
    cultures, qualities of direction, the practice of cinema as art, a
    world which recognises itself through the films screened. To this must
    be added the relationship between the state of cinema and that of its
    audiences, as well as the massive presence of journalists and
    professionals. The Festival de Cannes, finally, derives from alchemy of
    author's cinema, glamour, market and press.



    - We know
    that, over recent years, new image-creation technologies have led to a
    highly significant increase in the number of films submitted for
    selection at Cannes...

    Yes, such is once again the case this year.



    - Nevertheless, the number of selected films doesn't likewise increase?

    No.
    Quantitative increase doesn't necessarily entail qualitative and, in
    any event, there's no point in multiplying the selections. On the
    contrary, we are more than ever anxious to present a tight selection to
    better highlight the films. Cannes will never be a 300-film festival.
    The Official Selection represents about fifty, no more; for the rest, a
    large share of the world's production is presented at the Marché, the
    largest in the world. That is why the number of films selected has
    remained identical, even though the Competition will last ten days,
    that is to say one more than in 2004 or 2005. The programming schedule
    will thus be lightened.



    - That is to say?

    After
    the opening on Wednesday, May 17th, with the Out of Competition,
    presentation of Ron Howard's Da Vinci Code, the Competition and Un
    Certain Regard will commence on Thursday, May 18th and will continue
    until Saturday, May 27th. The Awards will be announced Sunday, May 28th
    at the Closing Ceremony. Outside the Opening and Closing, we shall
    therefore have 10 days of Competition.



    - How is this Official Selection organised?

    2006
    Cannes will present 55 films representing 30 countries. In all, we
    shall attend 48 world premieres, a figure which testifies to the
    resolution of the Festival de Cannes to present unreleased works. There
    will be in Competition 20 feature films from 13 countries. The
    Selection equally will present 8 debut films.



    - The
    2005 Festival was marked by the massive presence of recognised
    directors, as the awards testified (Golden Palm for the Dardenne
    brothers, Grand Prix for Jim Jarmusch, Best Director for Michael
    Haneke). Is this the case again this year?

    The Festival de
    Cannes is the privileged venue where great directors present their
    latest opuses. This year, we'll find once again Nanni Moretti (Golden
    Palm in 2001 with The Son's Room), who returns with his new film, The
    Caiman), Aki Kaurismäki (Grand Prix 2002 for The Man Without a Past),
    who presents Lights of the Suburb, Pedro Almodovar (Best Director Prize
    in 1999 for All About My Mother), who comes back with Volver, Ken Loach
    (Prize for Best Script in 2002 with Sweet Sixteen) who presents The
    Wind That Shakes the Barley or finally the French Bruno Dumont and
    Nicole Garcia, who've already come in Competition. But amid the whole
    Competition, new names appear...



    - Isn't this the case every year?

    Yes,
    we try hard in fact not to stagnate the Selection; even if faithfulness
    to those artists who have helped make Cannes what it is today counts
    very much for us. But over the last few years, we've wished to throw
    open the doors and windows to let in a burst of fresh air of
    contemporary creation, not hesitating to go beyond the limits normally
    assigned to an international festival. By trying to shift the lines.
    Along with Gilles Jacob, we had made the wish to see genre cinema,
    animation and the documentary attain a visibility corresponding to the
    place which is rightfully theirs in world cinema and in the
    sensitivities of today's critics and audiences. Today, this has been
    accomplished.



    - How might one classify 2006?

    The
    2006 selection should be classified in the category of "renewal years".
    For the Competition, three groups of films may be distinguished. First,
    as just mentioned, a group of recognised filmmakers: Nanni Moretti,
    Pedro Almodovar, Aki Kaurismäki or Ken Loach, as well as Bruno Dumont
    and Nicole Garcia, returning both for the second time in Competition.

    The
    second group represents the "rising generation": Sofia Coppola, Paolo
    Sorrentino, Rachid Bouchareb, Alejandro Gonzales-Inarritu, Lou Ye,
    Richard Linklater or French director Xavier Giannoli.

    The third
    group finally welcomes filmmakers with original films whose presence in
    Competition will ring a particular echo. They range from Mexico's
    Guillermo del Toro to the American Richard Kelly who will be the
    youngest at the Competition as he's only 30 years old.

    Moreover,
    Un Certain Regard, if one closely studies the nature of its
    composition, presents an appreciably different face, with here as well
    a blend of well-known names and young filmmakers.



    - Is the discovery of new talents the major challenge of today's cinema?

    Yes,
    it is a fundamental challenge but not the only one. We are not obsessed
    with discovery and are anxious to show famous filmmakers within the
    framework of their on-going work. And we distrust excessive displays
    which can prove dangerous: the audiences at Cannes are connoisseurs and
    even if they enjoy being surprised by the appearance of new names, they
    remain above all highly demanding.

    But the presence at Cannes of
    some filmmakers is the result of scouting carried out in search of
    young creators for several years now. Moreover, by looking close, you
    will see in the Official Selection names which have already appeared on
    the Croisette as "young filmmakers".



    - Who for example?

    For
    example, the Romanian filmmaker Catalin Mitulescu or French director
    Xavier Giannoli won the Shorts Golden Palm in the past. They find
    themselves together in the Official Selection this year. Mexico's
    Francisco Vargas, competing in Un Certain Regard, comes from the
    Cinéfondation, as does Polish director Adam Guzinski, First Prize of
    the Cinéfondation 1998.

    There begins to appear ties of filiation
    within the very Official Selection, between the Competition, Un Certain
    Regard and the Cinéfondation, the shorts, the Residence and the Atelier
    (launched last year). Consequently, this enables Cannes to proceed to a
    certain traceability of the filmmakers and talents, which proves that
    the Festival contributes as well to energising creation.



    - That is to say?

    By
    putting both its prestige and means in the service of creation
    upstream, we wish to assert that a great international festival isn't
    obliged to content itself with just screening films. It must search for
    new paths, promote directors and countries, and contribute to
    establishing new bonds between creators and producers. A festival,
    while remaining based, as we wish, on a narrow Official Selection, must
    not reduce its sphere of activity but widen it. This was Gilles Jacob's
    wish when creating the first Golden Camera in 1978 then the
    Cinéfondation some twenty years later.



    - Does this work bear its fruit?

    Indisputably.
    And you should not see in this any narcissistic charge that consists in
    valorising our own "genetic heritage": it is simply about a vital stake
    for the world's film diversity. Moreover, the Festival de Cannes isn't
    the only one to develop this practice because Rotterdam, San Sebastian
    and even Pusan in Korea have equally created writing grants,
    development funding and production supports.



    - You said earlier that the number of films submitted for selection is still increasing. Have you made special arrangements?

    Yes,
    we've created a third selection committee in Paris to be able to screen
    all these films, as the two committees that already exist (foreign and
    French films) not no longer suffice. Moreover, the Festival de Cannes
    develops its correspondents' networks throughout the world. I should,
    moreover, like to thank and pay tribute to all those who, in a regular
    way or not, share with me their knowledge and advice all year round
    throughout the world. The selection, even if I assume full
    responsibility, is above all a matter of teamwork, all the more so as
    watching films stimulates debate and nourishes the exchange of
    opinions. And I hope that lively discussions will continue between
    festival-goers.



    - Let's return to the composition of the Official Selection. What is striking is the strong European presence in selection...

    Indeed,
    Europe remains great motion-picture continent. Over recent years, we've
    sense an East wind rising. The 2006 selection confirms it: Poland,
    Hungary, Romania, Lithuania are again present. Let it be recalled that
    it was the Romanian film by Cristi Puiu that walked away with the prize
    of Un Certain Regard in 2005.

    We also find in the 2006 edition
    of Un Certain Regard films from the Scotland, Norway, Italy and Spain.
    With its masters present in Competition (Almodovar, Moretti,
    Kaurismäki, Loach), Europe recalls, if need be, that it does indeed
    possess a truly great motion picture industry.



    - Asian cinema confirms its importance...

    There
    would be a lot to say on the fundamental contribution of films from
    Asia over recent years. From an artistic point, a great festival can no
    longer exist without Asian films. From the point of view of the
    industry, professionals come in ever greater numbers to the Festival.
    In 2006, we find China in Competition, Out of Competition and in Un
    Certain Regard. Cannes continues to pay particular attention to the
    films of this continent, from India to China. And to its artists: from
    this standpoint, Wong Kar Wai's choice as Jury President represents a
    strong signal which we wished to send out.



    - You evoked the renewal of generations. This seems to particularly apply American motion pictures...

    Yes.
    Richard Linklater, Richard Kelly and Sofia Coppola: the American
    filmmakers present in Competition are coming here for the very first
    time. Let's add on John Cameron Mitchell who is presenting Out of
    Competition a highly audacious film. Consequently, Sofia Coppola, whose
    young career has already been hailed by one and all, seems to be part
    of the landscape for a fair number of years now!



    - From the point of view of the themes and subjects dealt with, what might we say about this selection?

    New
    ways of looking launched by a young generation: love stories, genre
    films, the emergence of Europe, and, of course, great filmmakers
    represent as many film proposals as films in Competition this year.
    More than ever, the cinema has become the mirror of the world and its
    extrapolation. The 2006 selection of the Festival de Cannes thus takes
    up a dual challenge: depict the consequences of political and social
    movements in the world, (with the emergence of a new European cinema,
    in particular that of the countries of the former Eastern bloc); and
    project the great questions as to the very future of our planet.



    - Do shared themes span this 2006 edition?

    Yes,
    first History and replacing it political perspective. Rachid Bouchareb
    films the past to understand the present by making Indigènes about
    French colonisation. Polish director Slawomir Fabicki (Zodzysku) and
    the Rumanian filmmaker Catalin Mitulescu (The Way I Spent the End of
    the World) come with their debut films straight out of an Eastern
    Europe cinematically the creator of its very social ills. Social
    issues, along with History, are what once more inspired British
    director Ken Loach with the Irish of The Wind that Shakes the Barley.
    Sofia Coppola, meanwhile, endeavours in an audacious manner to
    conjugate history with the intimate evocation of a young queen whose
    life still yet today gives rise to astonishing resonances.

    Art
    is always political, the question no longer even arises. Nanni
    Moretti's The Caiman about Italy, Berlusconi and the cinema, Fast Food
    Nation by Richard Linklater about the ties between "junk food" and the
    political exploitation of clandestine emigrants at the Mexican-American
    border. And last but not least Bruno Dumont's Flanders, an astonishing
    version of the ordinary man faced with a war which might be Irakian, is
    an evocation of modern barbarism.

    Another current trend, a
    certain return to the genre to evoke the future of our societies, and
    for the Festival the occasion to open its doors to a young generation
    of activist filmmakers, such as: Southland Tales by Richard Kelly, an
    audacious musical, poetic and political futuristic film about the
    United States of tomorrow - and therefore of today; The Labyrinth by
    Pan de Guillermo Del Toro, a dreamlike, fantastic Mexican film about
    the civil war as seen by a little girl, the very free and modern
    Marie-Antoinette by Sofia Coppola; and finally Babel by Alejandro
    Gonzalez Inarritu who blends in a complex script several stories about
    the state of the world.

    Last but not least, the destinies of
    everyday characters and beautiful love stories enhance these two
    trends: Pedro Almodovar with Volver evokes a matriarchal society
    haunted by vengeance; Xavier Giannoli explores the world of popular
    balls with When I Was a Singer, (illuminated by Gérard Depardieu's
    immense presence); Aki Kaurismäki with Vartijia (Lights of the Suburb)
    shoots once more at man's level, as does the Italian Paolo Sorrentino
    who with L'Amico di famiglia (The Friend of the Family) films all those
    we never look at. In her own way, Nicole Garcia with Selon Charlie
    (According to Charlie), follows suit. Finally, the impossibility of the
    couple will be the eternal and universal theme once more revisited in
    the magnificent distractions of the lovers of Summer Love by Chinese
    director Lou Ye, and the sun dance of the heroes of Climates by Turkish
    filmmaker Nuri Bilge Ceylan.



    - What is Un Certain Regard like?

    Un
    Certain Regard 2006 is made up of 22 films (among which 7 debut works)
    from 20 different countries. It is a selection whose level echoes the
    quality of the filmmakers and represented countries. For several years
    now, Un Certain Regard has become so demanding that it is now a true
    alternative selection to the Competition itself. For young filmmakers,
    it means a first entrance into the Official Selection.

    It is,
    moreover, in Un Certain Regard that we find the greatest number of
    first films. For seasoned filmmakers, it is the occasion to return to
    present their works under conditions totally different from those of
    the Competition. Thus, Marco Bellochio or Rolf de Heer, regulars of the
    Red Steps, come to present films which will surprise more than one by
    their artistic originality and freedom.



    - In
    conclusion, can we say a word about the films presented Out of
    Competition at the Buñuel Theatre? It seems that this programme has
    grown stronger with every passing year...

    It has indeed grown,
    but once again without exceeding the number of films presented last
    year, even when the Festival has one more day. The Buñuel Theatre
    presents a programme of particular films, both documentaries and
    fictions. Just a glance at these films, reveals once more filmmakers
    and subjects that represent a good deal of the trends of contemporary
    creation.



    - What stars are expected on the Croisette?

    First,
    the actors of the opening film: Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Jean Reno,
    Jean-Pierre Marielle. Then, by film, Penelope Cruz, Carmen Maura,
    Cillian Murphy, Liam Cunningham, Kirsten Dunst, Judy Davis, Asia
    Argento, Marianne Faithfull, Steve Coogan, Michele Placido, Cate
    Blanchett, Gael García Bernal, Sami Bouajila, Jamel Debbouze, Samy
    Naceri, Roschdy Zem, Patricia Arquette, Ethan Hawke, The Rock, Sean
    William Scott, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Sergi López, Cécile De France,
    Gérard Depardieu, Jean-Pierre Bacri, Vincent Lindon, Benoît Magimel,
    Benoît Poelvoorde, Fanny Ardant, Bruce Willis, Nick Nolte, Juliette
    Binoche, Willem Dafoe, Ben Gazzara, Bob Hoskins, Maggie Gyllenhaal,
    Ludivine Sagnier, Gena Rowlands, Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Ian
    McKellen, Kris Kristofferson, Nanni Moretti, Silvio Orlando, as well as
    the actors present on the Jury: Tim Roth, Samuel L. Jackson, Helena
    Bonham-Carter, Zhang Ziyi and Monica Belluci.

  13. pra filme, eu acho que fica assim:

     

     

     

    Hustle and Flow

     

    Penetras Bons-de-Bico (ou Virgem de 40 anos)

     

    Star Wars - Episódio III (ou King Kong)

     

    Batman Begins

     

    Sin City

     

     

     

    e acho que Brokeback tem boas chances de ser indicado a melhor beijo

    mesmo...Brad Pitt e Angelina Jolie devem levar de melhor briga..

     

     

     

  14.  

     

    Olha o que a Sarah Michelle Ghelar soltou:

     

    Basicamente' date='

    eu só gosto de escolher filmes que eu não entendo. Desde que eles sejam

    superiores a minha capacidade mental, eu penso que devo estar fazendo

    algo inteligente, certo? Não é isso que faz de alguma coisa arte,

    quando você não a entende?”

     

    é pedir pra ser chamada de loira burra smiley36.gif

     

    fonte: http://www.cinemaemcena.com.br/cinemacena/not_cinenews_filme .asp?cod=4013

    [/quote']

    Essa é realmente uma pérola da Sarah! Depois dessa, dá até pena da coitada...

    O melhor foi um comentário que fizeram (no CeC mesmo, ou no Omelete, não me lembro): Será que ela não entendeu os filmes do Scooby Doo?smiley36.gif

     

     

     

    então, eu li a entrevista inteira quando a Sarah Michelle Gellar disse isso, ela estava sendo irônica.

     

     

     

     

     

    Loira burra de verdade é a Jessica Simpson que mandou essa:"I think

    there’s a difference between ditzy and dumb. Dumb is just not knowing.

    Ditzy is having the courage to ask!"....hahahaha

     

     

  15.  

    Acho que a Renée Zelwegger só funciona em comédias (Bridget Jones,

    Enfermeira Betty,Abaixo o Amor). Quanto à categoria atriz, as chances

    da Felicity Huffman ainda são grandes sim, apesar do favoristismo da

    Reese.

     

    Só quero ver se Capote entra mesmo na categoria melhor filme, estou

    torcendo,mas acho que o filme vai ficar de fora por ser "pequeno"

    demais.

     

     

    SaveFerris38742.0841087963

×
×
  • Create New...