6u532b

This kept building to several “ohmygod, something amazing’s gonna happen!” moments, and then blocking itself. 
Was that the point?
I don’t know what the intention of this film was, and whether it’s one that- academically- nails it with the whole “you weren’t meant to idolise this guy last time.” If that’s the target. Is it?
I don’t know!

Were the song and dance number meant to be disappointing? They could have gone completely left field and wild, considering whose fantasies they were. But they were decidedly normal.
Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire, using the obvious examples, had some insanely imaginative batshit routines, so why didn’t this? Is that the point?

I’d have liked a bit more movie thievery like the first Joker (of which I wasn’t a huge fan, partly because of the thievery). But was that the point?

Will we still be talking about this film in five years? Is that the point?
Will we ever figure out what the point is meant to be?
Or is that the point?

Two of the sexiest icons ever on screen playing dowdy and downtrodden is the sexiest thing they’ve ever done. 
This film is ferociously well made. The balance between the outside world and the apartment is sublime, and Loren and Mastroianni dance around each other so delicately, with the camera in perfect sync. 
Scola’s direction is so masterful, but deceptively so: he makes sure your attention is off him and only on the two central performances.
Heaven. I cried, obvs.

When I die, my heaven will be a rehearsal room with Bob Fosse’s Roy Scheider Bob Fosse screwing me over then giving me that look, on repeat, for the rest of time. 

This is a deeply satisfying film to watch. I wish Fosse had directed more than his handful of films, and that more people acknowledge how integral Scheider was to 70s cinema.

Possibly my favourite Shakespeare (can’t resist those sweet turn of the 17th century political thrillers), and my favourite Shakespeare on screen. 
Gielgud’s Cassius is so slutty, it is deep joy.

Nic Cage is the most consistently exciting actor in modern American cinema. Discuss.

Oh my. I cried and cried and cried. More than I have at a film for a while (and I cry at films a lot).
Deviations from book totally justified when a script is this tight, and the performances are flawless.

I could never trust someone who doesn’t like this film.

There’s nothing in cinema like the first few seconds of a Roy Andersson shot. 
He gives us just enough time to explore the frame, fully confident that what at first seems banal will reveal itself to be exquisite. 
Only then does he bring in the characters, like furniture, with no past or future, again confident that the full depth of their cardboard cutout lives will be revealed. 
So f-ing ballsy. I love him. 

Two overused phrases that apply:
-“Made me laugh and cry.” I laughed and cried all over the shop. Usually moments apart. 
-“A true auteur.” Andersson is so relentlessly Andersson and nobody else could be. Auteur from the ground up.

Challengers for middle aged people in double denim.