|
Re: Taste of Cherry (1997)
| | Added by gr. on 2006-05-05 15:59:56 |
I can't believe you gave such a review for a taste of cherry. 2 out of 5? are you crazy? Apart from winning the Palm D'Or in Cannes it IS a classic and is the film that made Kiarostami who he is. Moreover, by my standards the film is not slow - i mean Bela Tarr or Theo Angelopoulos are directors who tend to make slow and long films - a taste of Cherry is 95 min long and it is really touching at many points. Plus it has one of the most original and clever endings and overall is a great new wave film. I dont know, I think you should probably watch the film again, maybe after you had a good nap...
|
|
|
reply
| | Added by Charles Vuolo (email) on 2006-05-06 15:02:54 |
Winning the Palm D'Or, or an Oscar for that matter has nothing to do with anything. Critics have relativistic opinions that are neither inherently right or wrong. Ebert gave "A Clockwork Orange" 2 stars, and that certainly doesn't detract from the film. Reviews (and festival awards) are just examples of individual taste. As for "Taste of Cherry" being a classic, nine years is to short a time to define a lasting work. Wait another fifteen and we'll see.
Concerning Tarr and Angelopoulos, yes, they make slow films, as did Antonioni and Hsien... however I fail to see what that has to do with Kiarostami.
In the end the film's emotional content did not justify its pacing, and thus its two star rating.
|
|
Add new comment
All comments are owned by their posters.
Please e-mail [email protected] with complaints.
|
