View: 93|Reply: 0

Antonioni may be the weak spot, but the other two shorts aren't great, either

[Copy link]

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
11-3-2021 00:07:08 Mobile | Show all posts |Read mode
Wong's film seems to come from the same universe as In the Mood for Love and 2046, which does give you the feeling of been-there-done-that. But, still, it is beautiful and nearly as hypnotic as those two films. Soderbergh's film is slight, but highly amusing. Robert Downey Jr. and Alan Arkin are fantastic. Antonioni's segment is pretty worthless. It feels like European softcore art-porn. But, really, would it surprise anyone that his film is the least of this bunch? As far as cinematic history is concerned, Soderbergh shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as Wong, and Wong probably not quite in the same sentence as Antonioni. But, let's face it, Antonioni hasn't made a good film in three decades. I'd still suggest watching Eros for the first two segments. If you can keep your curiosity in check, just shut it off before the third begins.

score 6/10

zetes 13 February 2006

Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw1290812/
Reply

Use magic Report

You have to log in before you can reply Login | register

Points Rules

返回顶部