elmundo.es
Three Ambitious Films at the Film Festival
The Venice Film Festival showcased three ambitious films: Ildiko Enyedi's "Silent Friend", Franco Maresco's "Un film fatto per bene", and Cai Shangjun's "The sun rises on us all", each with unique strengths and weaknesses.
- What are the central themes and styles of each film presented at the festival?
- Silent Friend" explores nature and interconnectedness through a multi-generational story around a ginkgo tree. "Un film fatto per bene" is a self-reflexive, comedic critique of contemporary Italian cinema. "The sun rises on us all" is a melodrama focusing on forgiveness and a past crime between two lovers.
- What are the main criticisms of these films, and how do these critiques relate to their ambition?
- Silent Friend" is criticized for its excessively slow pace and self-importance, hindering its impact. "Un film fatto per bene" suffers from self-indulgence and narcissism. "The sun rises on us all", while well-acted, is criticized for its excessive melodrama and lack of control over its narrative.
- What are the overall implications of these films' successes and failures for contemporary filmmaking?
- The mixed reception highlights the risks and rewards of ambitious filmmaking. While bold themes and unique styles can be captivating, excessive self-indulgence or lack of narrative control can detract from the overall experience. These films demonstrate the ongoing tension between artistic vision and audience engagement in modern cinema.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The review focuses on the ambition of the films, framing them as either overly ambitious or lacking in control. This framing, while insightful regarding the filmmakers' intentions, might neglect other aspects of the films' artistic merit or audience reception. For example, the positive aspects of the cinematography in "Silent Friend" are mentioned, but overshadowed by the critique of pacing.
Language Bias
The language is generally descriptive and evaluative, using terms like "exasperatingly majestic," "inmisericorde and condescending," and "terrorist explanation." While colorful, these terms express subjective opinions rather than objective analysis. More neutral language would improve objectivity. For example, instead of "exasperatingly majestic," the reviewer could describe the pacing as "unhurried" or "deliberate," and its effect on the audience.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses primarily on the directors' ambitions and the perceived flaws in execution. Missing are details on plot, character development, cinematography beyond a few brief mentions, or critical reception. The omission of broader context limits a comprehensive evaluation of the films.
False Dichotomy
The review presents a false dichotomy by framing the films as either excessively ambitious or failures due to that ambition. It doesn't consider that ambition can coexist with artistic success. The films are judged almost solely based on whether they control the ambition of their narrative and thematic scope.