[Closed] Recent Viewing

Don't worry, only you do such mistakes

PERFUME

Deeply disappointing for a Tom Tywker film, and while it has some very good elements like the able visual representation of senses, smells and the central character's craze along with some breathtaking scenery, the movie in general felt standardized Hollywood to me while it should have never been like that for this director. Tension came and went and wasn't as gripping as i thought it would be, performances were so and so (with the exception of the brilliant central character), the much-talked "disgusting" scenes weren't as strong as reputed, care for the virgins getting killed was totally absent and not created for the audience against them and overall the movie felt too long, tiring and lost at some points. The climax (from the point he stands as "messiah" in the middle of the crowds due to the perfume) if it's to be taken dry, i.e. without metaphorical extensions, is too over-the-top but the surprising ending is very effective and shocking i must admit. In general, i think the over-hype killed this movie for me.

Additionally, for those who accuse the score as "bastardized baroque porn music" (and several other relevantly "cute" characterisations), i say go watch the movie and the use of the music in it; it's easily one of the most effective, creepily beautiful, gripping, intense and spectacular modern symphonic film scores out there. My (otherwise high) appreciation for the score rose even more. Brilliant work.

I'm sure there's an ancient Chinese proverb that says 'man who watch too much junk TV cry very much'

Watching Disney's MULAN

Playing the promo score at the same time. Amazing Experience!!

So nobody saw PERFUME : THE STORY OF A MURDERER?

Just slamming The Shawshank Redemption in my DVD player for the millionth time. Still, the film never ever fails to amaze me and always leaves me with a smile for about an hour afterwards. Perfect chilled-out Friday night viewing.

Bob, are you familiar with the previous Tywker works?

Hey, I'm European, we even live next to Germany, of course I am I think especially Lola Rennt is amazing, and Perfume isn't even a big departure for him. All his films are about the connection between visuals and music, and this is no exception. He adapted exactly the right kind of style for this story. Have you read the novel, btw?

I agree with Michael. That's what i am saying; i couldn't believe PERFUME was a film by the man who gave us the BRILLIANT Heaven and Run Lola Run. Very little relation between those projects and Perfume; that disappointed me, Perfume could have been done exactly the same by any other director out there.

I don't think anyone else would have made PERFUME the same actually. I think there's quite a few visual techniques he carries from one film to the next (as much as the next director, that is). Though it is true that PERFUME is quite dissimilar from HEAVEN, HEAVEN is nothing like RUN LOLA RUN or WINTER SLEEPERS. (And in some ways PERFUME is more like RUN LOLA RUN.) But that seems to be a product of the type of stories being told. HEAVEN is, as the title suggests, about a kind of absolution available even to those who do terrible things. Understandably, there's an emphasis on late afternoon light, renaissance-era architecture and structures (with their underlining principle of the relationship between God and Man), the visual motif of ascent, etc.

PERFUME on the other hand devotes most of its construction to communicating the 'sense of smell'. Saturation and colours are used more intensely. The theme, and therefore the expression of it are very different. Kieslowski's script called for imagery of the divine. Suskind's novel and language call for something earthy and sensual. It didn't bother that it was so different from HEAVEN, since the story is based on apposite roots. I sometimes think modern directors too quickly assume that they are the next Bergman or Welles or Antonioni and impose a style of familiar characteristics on material that might have been better handled. (Of course it's partly a way for directors to market their talents - to be so identifiable in much the way that investors know what they'll get if they hire George Clooney to play a role.)

James, if you'd like, I can send you a dvd that has North's score matched up to the first 45 minutes of the film.

Michael, how is WINTER SLEEPERS ? I haven't seen that one yet.

Decent score? Are you insane? Its one of his most beautiful

I wasn't very taken with it. Mind you, it's been 8 years since I saw it in Jan 2000, so my opinion may have changed. I had just seen RUN LOLA RUN and was disappointed it wasn't more like that. It's a small scale story of intersecting lives where there are dark secrets (someone accidentally killed someone else, and then ended up with his girlfriend). Some good skiing scenes, from memory.

That is pretty interesting.

Tarkovsky (who made the other GRAVE, PROFOUND SCI-FI FILM of that era, SOLARIS), accused Kubrick's film of having 'no heart'. It's often interesting to hear these film-makers talk about eachother, because they often think of the way they would have made the film as the basis for criticism. SOLARIS does indeed have a lot of 'heart' compared to 2001. I'm rather glad we got both.

2001 and Star Wars are both scifi James.
George really did make such a movie!