Watched in 2012

I expected more. The "growing pains" of Dren (the monster) weren't that interesting. The scientists (parents) seem too drawn and Sarah Polley's acting wasn't that good.

Very stylish. Music was a pleasant suprise as well as the protagonist who seemed flegmatic and indifferent - I enjoyed this very much, but the whole story itself wasn't very original and I should say worn out

I must admit I didn't have any expectations before watching this film. I knew it belongs to New German Cinema, but I've only seen one 60s film that belongs to the movement - Volker Schlöndorff's "Young Törless".
After having watched Yesterday Girl I can say it's definitely a good movie.

Yesterday Girl clearly is (what I personally call) literary film. We can hear narrator's voice and at first glance somewhat incohorenet fragments of dialogues and monologues, it also has demure setting. I had problems joining all the acts and words into a meaningful whole. Luckily this site explained me practically everything. (It made me a little bit proud that I just like the author of the article also noticed that protagonist Anita G. is similar to Nana in "Vivre Sa Vie".)

Being Jewish and refugee from East Germany in West Germany in 60s for me is quite new theme, so it's not overinteletcualized (like E. Rohmer's "My Night at Maud's"), it's just me.

I didn't havė high espectations because I haven;t seen many horror movies and the ones I've seen mostly weren't very original. But "Black Sunday" have positively surprised me - the plot was quite unpredictable and original. Made me want to see more Mario Bava's works.
Though of course it's not entirely my cup of tea, I've quite enjoyed it.



P.S. Forgot to mention the reason why I watched it - because of Barbara Steele. ;)

The second W. Herciog's film I've watched. "Fitzcarraldo" share a lot of similarities with the first W. Hercog's film "Aguirre: The Wrath of God". Both films touche something enourmuos like those ancient greek dramas that are open for countless interpretations and and never get old. Both films could be understood as allegories.
"Fitzcarraldo" is like a different version of "Aguirre: The Wrath of God".

"Fitzcarraldo" is a more original and complicated film. "Aguirre" is very concentrated and purified while "Fitzcarraldo" shows more themes and branches.

Btw, I have to mention that despite the most obvious similarities (plot set in South America and Amazon river, similar traveling by boat/raft and associated risks, Klaus Kinski's oddly Don Quixotic character) you can hear the same intimidating music in one episode.

The start seemed so much promising but I couldn't hold the same high level of interest as the film progressed.

I felt this film lacks story elelents, in other words action. The plot is quite toneless. As I understand, visuality is supposed pull everything up. But the film in general seemed somewhat bland.
There were moments when I expected something to happen, especially during quite often showed sexual hints but emotional state of characters was basically the same throughout the film. Of course, if we do not count the aborigine who clearly went through his own kinda stealthy journey.
The experimental side of the film was quite interesting. But as one reviewer on listal pointed out, some experimental elements are repeated too often.
Also, in connection to mentioned sexual side of the film, I want to add my notice that "Walkabout" plays a lot with the cilized people's obscurities and fears. The children want to run from that hidden side of civilized people's life (which suddently killed their father) but they hardly reach liberation if they reach it all.

Crazy stuff.

Great cinematography. Too long + the script has some boring, prolonged epizodes that seemed pretty unneeded. The acting wasn't bad at all.

The script is wicked! You can not guess what will be next and eventually leaves you suprised. It happens not often to me. Very original story that leaves you with interesting thoughts.

A movie about teens and (unfortuntaelly) for teens. Seemed kind of empty (especially AFTER watching this). The commune part was the most interesting, but it wasn't fullfilled enough. The whole movie actually reached for something but the result was too shallow e.g lacked power. The acting was good though. Photograph-like cinematography matched nicely and was one of the strongest aspects of the movie.

I expected more.

But it turned out more horror like and too much Alien like (like Johanlefourbe mentioned in his review).In my eyes these are obvious minuses (lack of originality).

I also agree with him that Elizabeth Shaw's self operation and later join of the team didn't really integrate, seemed to artifial i.e. not realistic. From that point the scenario got kinda out of hand.

Prometheus didn't really stepped over the intellectual barrier, the engineers researches met were primitive or to be more exact their meeting looked like a human's nighmare, a brute realization of the fear of something absolutely unknown. Their meeting didn't gave any answers, no intellectual contact (though I suppose it would be very hard to show aliens without worn out cliches and yet original).

Humans are still left in their cosmic solitude (and I expected it would show this solitude broken in a mind stimulating way).

www.listal.com/viewentry/3461976