stop overrating old movies
just because they're foreign and in b&w doesn't make them good, this movie was average at best with some of the worst acting i've ever seen
so many movies, so little time
just because they're foreign and in b&w doesn't make them good, this movie was average at best with some of the worst acting i've ever seen
so many movies, so little time
Sad to say that, but your post tells a lot about your own lack of creative insight.
Listen to your enemy, for God is talking
What kind of response is that? Its completely pointless and arrogant to just insult him and act as if he's stupid without saying anything meaningful. At least try to disprove his points or even back up your own statements so that your comment can have value.
shareIf the OP had been constructive, or appeared interested in understanding the film, I'd agree. But posts like that are akin to saying that a book, written in a language you don't understand, is rubbish because you don't understand it. If you don't speak the language, or even get that there's a different language being spoken, what is the wording of a forum post going to change? Why go out of your way to find people who do speak that language (or try to) just to tell them it doesn't make sense?
He's right about the acting. It didnt use top actors and it showed in the film. It ruined the film, actually as the audience cannot get more emotionally involved in the characters.
The acting in this film was an embarrassment.
It's not the problem of this particular movie. It's about an imagination - or you do have it, or you don't.
shareI have to admit, aliza_tvito's response wasn't exactly stellar - but you (and many, many others) have truly misunderstood the acting bit.
Bresson was a very unique director. He did not like to have his actors...emote. He liked having naturalistic, quiet performances that wouldn't draw much attention to themselves (and away from the director, in Bresson's eyes the true auteur).
Hence, the acting in Pickpocket is rather dull and cold. I think it works really well for the film - this way the character arc and themes are very apparent, and unlike some of Bresson's later films, it never quite crosses the line to just be robotic and lifeless. It just ultimately feels real and natural, not dramatised or exaggerated.
Yeah, strangely, this acting seems more modern to me than the melodramatic histronics found in Hollywood in the 40s and 50s.
I think a lot of modern viewers find that acting style "funny" especially when watching old movies with a large audience.
I suspect the acting in Bresson's films might seem more dull to people like the OP, but they'd probably also object to melodrama - pick your poison. It's acting, either way.
I take it this was your first experience with Bresson? He consistently used nonprofessional actors and insisted that they give very muted performances. This created an exceptional realism in his films and makes you realize just how phony most acting is.
It's also a mistake to approach a Bresson film looking for an incredible story. His films are minimalist, and emphasize technique over narrative. I'm thinking about his sound design and his cinematography (his tendency to watch his actors' hands being very well-suited to this material) more than I'm thinking about the plot.
Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean others will feel the same. People have different tastes and reactions to what they watch, because they are very different people.
I personally love this movie, I'm not trying to impress anyone, it just hits my buttons. Some people love history and watching these snapshots of times and places that don't exist. Plus the human themes are timeless. The amount of lost men, who have squandered potential, is very high in this world.
I think Godard, Bergman, Scorcese and Nolan (to lesser extent Kubrick as well) are overrated but I can at least understand why people like them. Some people like reading 2000 page novels on dense subjects for fun. A secure person has no desire to go to those boards and talk shit.