criterionforum.org

In the [i]Beowulf[/i] thead, flyonthewall2983 wrote:I'm rambling now, but I really wanted to see The Dreamers when it came out in theaters because it was NC-17. It looked like a good film (still haven't seen it as of yet), but it was mostly the rating that had a very taboo appeal to me.

Surprised that there wasn't already a thread for this. I think there may have been one before we moved from ezboard. The film is a decidedly mixed bag, but there are a few fun bits for cinephiles, and a frequently, fully, and explicitly naked Eva Green is as good of reason to see a film as any.

The NC-17 cut of the film is playing tonight on IFC, and will be followed by the second installment of IFC's four-part doc on sex in the movies. The first installment, which aired last night was excellent and thorough. For those young 'uns posting about awkward movie-watching situations in this thread though, I wouldn't suggest watching the doc with your parents. The doc is chock full of clips, and I'm pretty sure that every penis that has ever been captured on film was shown in last night's episode.

That doc sounds really, really interesting, especially the 4th episode.

It's worth seeing, but it's nothing compared to Garrel's Les Amants Reguliers, which also stars his son, Louis.

David Ehrenstein wrote:It's worth seeing, but it's nothing compared to Garrel's Les Amants Reguliers, which also stars his son, Louis.

Funny, after wasting three hours on that film, it was my understanding that anything was better than Regular Lovers.

I finally got around to watching Garrel's film the other day and was quite taken by it - the only other film of his I've seen so far is La Naissance de l'amour, and while both have their similarities I found the former to be the stronger film. I can see where some would find it dull, but I was drawn in immediately by Lubtchansky's gorgeous b&w photography and Garrel's confident direction, allowing the riot sequence to play out in long takes where not much can be seen happening. It immediately gave me the feeling that this was not just your typical period reconstruction of a historic event, but instead made it somehow more present, tangible, real. The same applies to the rest of the film, in its wise restraint from too many obvious period references; all the things that dragged down Bertolucci's film, or at least made it seem much more like an outsider's romanticized view of the events.

The scene where Lilie asks Francois if she can sleep with someone else was heartbreaking - you can sense his immediate displeasure at the idea, which he catches quickly, in order to show his commitment to his progressive ideals. He's able to play it off coolly, as if it's not a big thing. Then, afterwards, Lilie's downplaying of the act - perhaps feeling a tinge of regret, or simple disillusionment with that kind of openness - is equally painful. It's two people trying to convince themselves that everything is okay, when it's clearly not. And of course the ending - bleak, painful, not unlike that of The Devil, Probably - but all the same, ringing with truth, having come from someone who was there and has no illusions about it.