So seems I ought to write my first review on IMDb for this movie's seriously overlooked cult-potential..... It's a film for 'cineastes' with more to do with subjectivity and indulgence than the mafia...
Film students from the 1960s through the 1990s ought to love it - in no particular order there's hints of Godard, Rohmer, early Scorsese, da Sica, Tati, Tarantino et al.
So in terms of 'subject' the film is actually ABOUT film, about subjectivity and self-indulgence, belonging to a family of cultural reflections like The King of Comedy, The Dreamers, Harold and Maude, Dog Day Afternoon, The Master or Be Kind Rewind.
But is it good enough, is it entertaining enough to keep the company of the genres it pastiches? Probably not quite, but maybe it's today's society that has moved on making irony more important than hope. Or maybe it's the art film that has moved on, now that most technical innovations like jump-cutting are now back-in-the-day. Or maybe the script is a little loose, and the technical innovation a little meagre.
So the film can be rated at 5/10 it's a 'wotever' experience, or else at 9/10 it's an early film by the next Tarantino, or an old-fashioned film like Truffaut that will mature with age.
Remembering there are still some French women that adore Truffaut as a national treasure 50 years on, it would be lazy NOT to watch this movie, if you know something about film history.
Film students from the 1960s through the 1990s ought to love it - in no particular order there's hints of Godard, Rohmer, early Scorsese, da Sica, Tati, Tarantino et al.
So in terms of 'subject' the film is actually ABOUT film, about subjectivity and self-indulgence, belonging to a family of cultural reflections like The King of Comedy, The Dreamers, Harold and Maude, Dog Day Afternoon, The Master or Be Kind Rewind.
But is it good enough, is it entertaining enough to keep the company of the genres it pastiches? Probably not quite, but maybe it's today's society that has moved on making irony more important than hope. Or maybe it's the art film that has moved on, now that most technical innovations like jump-cutting are now back-in-the-day. Or maybe the script is a little loose, and the technical innovation a little meagre.
So the film can be rated at 5/10 it's a 'wotever' experience, or else at 9/10 it's an early film by the next Tarantino, or an old-fashioned film like Truffaut that will mature with age.
Remembering there are still some French women that adore Truffaut as a national treasure 50 years on, it would be lazy NOT to watch this movie, if you know something about film history.