Valentina Sagrati

It's a very well structured "romedy" for those who'd like to both relate common circumstances of ordinary life (because its main topics are love, break - ups, rage, fear about the future, about time and aging, generations that change, friendship, the incapability of staying alone etc.) and escape a bit from it (of course, in order to "heat" the viewers, there are some script strategies that are closer to fiction, for ex., always managing to meet new lovers constantly, always available to have sex and usually end it with incredible perfomances, always engaged in exciting jobs that bring extraordinary adventures, not to mention their physical aspect, which is "perfectly, stunningly, but unbelievably Hollywoodian" etc.). The script is quite trivial, actually, there's nothing so original in it, BUT the main purpose is portraying a grotesque part of the American medium - high society, SO it's very enjoyable to "understand" and reflect on all those stereotypes through the characters. Neil Patrick Harris acted really gorgeously, his character was sensitive and intense, just like his theatrical way of playing roles. I suggest to watch it to everyone in need of laughters and tenderness!

A very touching movie about not only the injustices of wars, but also about the ones added when it comes to bureaucracy, that slows down the process to finally become visible and recognized, again, not only as a refugee, in escape from a reality full of fear and precariousness, but also as a whole complete person, in search of a land of opportunities and hope … The cinematographic technique is perfectly coherent with the beautiful lesson of the movie: the framing is dynamic and agitated, in order to give an idea of what it means to run (or, better, swim) away from brutal violence, depicted in scenes of cold and dark colors and lights, and it is opposed with harmonic contrast to the vivid blue of the pool where Yusra confidently swims, pursuing a lifelong dream that everyone deserves to realize, no matter where you come from. The beginning and the ending are structured in a ring - composition with stunning panning shots of the sea, a place of death before, a place of triumph and love then. The acting is simple and innocent, not experienced or too dramatic, just naively pure, immature but intensely sincere. It certainly deserves a watch!

The movie was extremely emotional and MARVELlous. The PLOT is quite linear but entertaining and not banal. Some screenplay choices are unexpected (for ex., the death of a character …), others are predictable (for ex., the identity of the new Black Panther …). The STYLISTIC CHOICES are coherent with the meaning. The framing is very rapid so that it emphasizes the pace of the film and the dynamism of the scenes, which are short but intense. Action and introspection are balanced. The COSTUMES are vividly colored, although I personally don’t like the new hi - tech armors for the Dora Milaje, because they tend to weaken the Wakandian cultural heritage, which is utterly highlighted by the old traditional dresses. Anyway, the cultural aspect is also well - underlined in the dancing and singing scenes. Last but not least, the ACTING follows the Marvel movies trend, in a mix of humor and drama. The film is a tribute to Chadwick Boseman, in fact, I personally think that its main strength lies in the cast expressions of pain for the premature departure of the legendary king T’Challa, an icon inside and outside the Marvel universe. The decision to stop the soundtrack while going through the past movie with Chadwick in it was a touch of class … I cried. A lot. P. S.: please, Disney, please … STOP THE INTOLERABLE SELF - ADVERTISING and MERCHANDISING.

The plot is structured in a very simple way, it could seem ordinary and common. Anyway, it is balanced with interesting stylistic choices made by the director, sometimes, even too complicated, but I personally appreciated them all (for ex., dynamic and strange framing, constant changes in long shots and extreme wide shots, in dark and light colors, in enchanting fields and sudden foregrounds portraying bloody details etc.). The lesson given by the movie may be expressed in a very creepy way, but it can be seen as humanly important and touching, if understood. If I were in your shoes, I would give it an opportunity! Last but not least: yes, just like the most of these reviews, I admit that it could be perceived as a bit boring sometimes; anyway, I think it could depend on the duration of the scenes, which are toooo long (more than 10 seconds for each). Well, I think it’s a decision that was coherent with the sense of the film, so it could be a matter of personal tastes and movie habits.

This is a movie that can be considered brave and completely out of any pressing merchandising expectation. There is no sign of any folkloric rule of standardization: no golden dust, no sleighs, no reindeers, no terrific CGI, no clichés neither in acting techniques nor in scenography, plot twists, scripts. This movie is a sober but overwhelming reflection about every capitalistic mechanism that livens up the commercial hearts of shopping companies and their arid and deceiving advertisements during festivities; it's a tender fight against greediness, corruption and the radical and materialistic skepticism that does nothing but kill the fantasies of children together with their critical sensibility. It's a masterpiece that deserves to be watched.

I have to say that I really loved the first “Enchanted” and I’ve personally never thought that a sequel should be needed (and I’m still convinced about it) … SO I watched the movie with low expectations, BUT it was much better than I planned! The gem of the movie, in my opinion, was Amy Adams, maybe because, among the others, she has been, with all due respect, the most talented and experienced one (I recall you that she is able to act through characters such as princess Giselle in the same way she can play the role of a crazy sorrowful woman in “Sharp objects”, LMAO). On the other hand, I was really disappointed in Patrick Dempsey’s role, because he was totally useless, just “funny” 😅, and that’s a pity: I think he’s such a good actor … Furthermore, I really liked Idina Menzel and the fact that she was more involved in the movie than in the first one. The dialogues were coherent with the ones in the first movie, so, I’m satisfied about them BUT, Gosh … there are TOO MANY songs and they all sound the same (except two or three that I really liked). The screenplay was much more original than I thought. I was afraid that the trailer had shown too many elements and that there wouldn’t be plot twists: I was enthusiastic to know that there were, instead! BUT there’s a huge flaw, in my opinion: the strength of the first movie was the perfect balance between fantasy (prince Edward, Pip, magic, the Witch, the Well, Nathaniel, etc.) and reality (Robert being an advocate, Morgan being a girl without a mother, divorce, break - ups, New York etc.). In the sequel, fantasy OVERWHELMED reality (too many colors, too many songs, too many flowers, even if I like them so much, swords, queens, magic sticks etc.). On the other hand, the costumes were great, the scenography was beautiful too, although, as I’ve already said, it was too luxurious and excessive. Last but not least: please, Disney, please … use. Less. CGI. Or. At least. Use. It. In. A. Better. Way. The animals were just … EW, but cute anyway. That’s because Disney’s becoming more and more pressing in every movie. In the end, the movie was fully passable and pleasurable :))).

I personally think this is one of the worst shows I'ever ... ever ... ever seen. Everything. Is. WRONG. Probably, I will be a little strict because of the lots of cinema exams I've recently taken, LMAO, but remember that it's just my personal opinion. First of all, I personally think that the stylistic choices made by the director are just questionable. The framing is banal and seems illogical most of the time (for ex., no zooms to make the most relevant points of the story more dramatic, no particular strategies to make the play more dynamic, totally stagnant and slow focuses over useless details etc.). Moreover, some needless scenes are just too long (for ex., all the boring parts about Claire being frustrated because of the humiliation she got, after the discovery of her relationship with Eric, and so looking for physical punishment with occasional sex partners), while others, maybe more significant, are just too short (for ex., the WHOLE ending, the last dialogue between the two, or the first lessons of The Teacher, thanks to which the two met, etc.). Furthermore, I personally found the acting really flat and unrealistic. No scene gave me a single chance to empathize with the characters. Claire's faces are always seductive (and that's okay, but she looks unbelievably frozen ...) and apathetic, even when she gets arrested, even when she meets Eric for the first time after the release, - even when she copulates!! - , which should be the most intense scenes. I found Eric quite good instead, he is much more expressive and authentic, but sometimes it seems he's completely distracted and half - interested, even during the breakthroughs in his self - consciousness. Also, the dialogue is quite poor and prosaic and I would NEVER imagine it could be possible, considering that Claire teaches English language, culture and literature. In the end, the lesson of the story may have been humanly important and interesting (managing to distinguish love from abuse), but in my opinion the tendency to romanticize the relationship, especially at the beginning, gained the upper hand and totally destroyed this goal. P.S. I'm really sorry if I made some language mistakes, I'm actually Italian, lol, but I hope I've been clear enough.