Reviews

"Lust for life" of Minnelli is a great film, but in my opinion doesn't give a faithful portrait of Van Gogh: his nature is too romanticized. On the contrary this film of Pialat gives a real mirror of the inner nature of the great painter. I think Van Gogh was really so misanthrope as the film describes. This puts the film of Pialat above the one of Minnelli. Besides this film seems a moving painting, because if you pause the playing when you see the video you can see an impressionistic picture. this peculiarity is so marked that there are scenes that are in the film only for a visive aim (for example the Vincent's sister-in-law that washes herself in a tub). Even if "Lust for life" is a great film, I think "Van Gogh" is greater.

Nobody thought the first film of the three comedians could be so amusing and technically good. Nobody thought three comedians coming from TV can make film so well. In my opinion this film reaches peaks that remind Tarantino (!).

If we add to this that the humor of this trio is irresistible we have one of the greatest Italian films of '90s. I love it.

This movie emanates a very irrepressible erotic climate, I've never seen anything like it. The atmosphere is very exciting and the situation in which the two protagonists is very erotic. I voted this film with a 10 and maybe I've been too severe with it.

Even if it's 20 years old, I think this film is still very relevant, because we remind ourselves in a portrait that depicts the previous generation.

The less of prospects and strong ideals is very topical for this generation too. So the humor of Troisi is only a thin veil that hides a great bitterness.

Troisi was one of the best authors of Italy.

"Chaplin" is a very good film (I voted it with a 9), but I think it is impossible to summarize his life in a movie of about two hours. Many details of him are not very clear. So I think the film must be seen ONLY as a tribute to one of the icons of the 20th century. Maybe another reason to see the film is the good description of Hollywood in those years.

This film has certainly to be seen, but if you want to know Chaplin, you have to see his movies (this is also said in the same "Chaplin")