Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Like if time stopped.
Every time I watch a movie I am inside a new story, and I feel like I am taking part of it.
Nothing else matters. I am happy.
Because… As my favourite director, Billy Wilder said; If a movie makes you forget for a second that you didn’t park the car properly, or that you had argued with your boss… Then it had fulfilled its goal.
My name is Pablo and I am 19 years old, I am from Spain but I am studying Computer Science in the Netherlands. My hobbies are directing writing and watching movies. I also created an online blog about movies, in spanish, www.cibercinema.com
Movies are an essential part of my life.
That is why I am here, but I am also on twitter @pablobiedma instagram @pablo_biedma and in many other places.
Thank you so much for your time.
Almost Famous (2000)
Like a fun rollercoaster
I personally like director Cameron Crowe. I think his book "Conversations with Billy Wilder" is a masterpiece for film lovers.
This movie is also his best work. I really liked it and I think most people liked it more than they thought they would before watching it.
It's like a bittersweet rollercoaster of emotions which at the same time is really well made. The reason for this is probably that this movie is auto-biographical, and therefore Cameron Crowe put a lot of passion and effort into it.
He wrote wonderful characters, very charismatic and relatable. For example Kate Hudson, this was one of Kate Hudson's first, and to my mind best, roles. She was mesmerizing in the same tough, broken, little-girl way of so many tragic Hollywood women of the past.
This led to a very emotional, entertaining, enjoyable and relatable movie.
Cameron Crowe perfectly portrayed and expressed his love for music.
This movie is the clear example that when you love what you do and you put effort and passion into it, good things will come out.
Ladri di biciclette (1948)
Unrepeatable movie. Beyond the term "masterpiece"
This is a new way of making movies. Neorealism
I find it so expressive, intimate, beautiful and enjoyable
In fact, these kind of movies are sadly, unrepeatable, because they were made in a period of time (after WW2) when those countries were extremely poor making it possible to showcase these feeling of poverty in the movies and therefore making them so realistic and expressive
This movie goes beyond the term "masterpiece", it is at the level of Casablanca, unrepeatable, it created a genre, when it was released it caused a shock in Hollywood because it was so different to American movies at that time, and all the Hollywood stars would watch that movie during parties after dinner and they would always end up with tears in their eyes
It was a radically different style of movie but admirable at the same time. The heart of Italian Neorealism, it deals with concepts like poverty, social injustice, kindness... In such an amazing way. But apart from that it's also a well made movie. Very accurate and amazing work by de Sica.
This movie will forever be talked about.
Pather Panchali (1955)
The pure definition of cinema
Poetic Indian neorrealism masterpiece.
Such a metaphorical, beautiful, expressive movie.
The way I enjoyed this movie is the pure definition of cinema.
A constant amazement
A wonderfully made movie, with so many amazing shots. Don't expect too much from the plot, please before watching this movie don't expect to laugh as in a regular slapstick comedy. Just enjoy it. So many things happen at the same time.
It is just a enormous visual pleasure, one of the best directed and well made movies I've seen.
The Swimmer (1968)
you'll love what this movie DOESN'T tell you
It's like the american version of a Bergman movie and I really liked it.
I found it mesmerizing, really an underrated gem.
It's an underrated cult film, all the imperfections are perfect, it's beautiful for what it tells and what it doesn't tell you.
The way it makes you wonder what the heck is going on with the character helps advance the story with a tremendous atmosphere of mistery and beauty.
Very deep and metaphorical but at the same time beautiful and entertaining
The Social Network (2010)
Its amazing tempo makes this movie so enjoyable
While watching this movie, I couldn't take my eyes off the screen.
The movie lasts around 2 hours but to me it seemed like half an hour.
All this is thanks to specially a great editing, but also the script and narration that gives this movie an amazing rhythm and tempo.
To me, this is by far the best part of this nice movie.
Although the script is not bad, and it also helps to provide this movie with such a nice tempo, fastest movie I've seen since Billy Wilder's "One, Two, Three" (1961). However, I don't find the dialogs as smart as other people do, that consider Aaron Sorkin's scripts very intellectual. Conversations are just normal for me, if you want to see intellectual scripts then I'd refer you to Joseph L. Mankiewicz movies like "All about Eve" (1950) or Igmar Bergman movies.
Also I found some elements of the script a bit artificial and flawed. Starting with the initial scene, where Erica and Mark are having a discussion, then the audience "discovers" that they are in a relationship in a very artificial way, by having one of the characters say it: MARK: "We are dating" this should be the last resource used when screenwriting, same goes for the way they break up just in the next line: ERICA: "Not anymore"
Regarding the photography, and the way Fincher directed actors, It was quite mediocre during the film which doesn't really matter because they weren't really important elements for this movie in my opinion.
Overall I gave this movie a solid grade because I enjoyed watching this movie and in my opinion, entertainment is something that should be appreciated when rating a movie.
Subtle movie striving to achieve technical perfection.
This movie is of a really high technical beauty in several aspects, mainly due to its photography and sound.
Starting with the sound; Sound is extremely important in a movie with a lot of silence such as this one. In this case, this is done in a great way, and its magnificent sound helps improve the pace of the movie.
Photography reaches new levels of beauty with monochromatic perfection and stunning shots. It mainly has shots from side angles except during importance scenes for character development where the director chose more central conventional shots. It is also important to highlight the fact that most shots are static, which is really rare in current cinema but completely appropriate for this movie. The only two dynamic shots take place when Ida leaves the convent at the beginning on the train and when she arrives eventually at the end of the movie with a really powerful dynamic scene of her walking back to the convent.
In conclusion this is a movie about the necessity and importance of silence and the pain of war. This movie has the advantages and drawbacks of being a very subtle film. The disadvantages are perhaps that the spectators misses power in the message and story but on the brightside this leads to a better enjoyment of the beauty of this superb film.
Good (for pseudo intellectuals)
First of all I want to say that this is not a bad movie and I'll talk about the good things later. I want to start with the bad ones because there are already apparently thousands of reviews talking about how good the film is.
I also want the reader to realize that for a foreign movie, Parasite is extremely comercial, and easy to watch. This of course is not bad but it's important to mention.
In fact, in certain tones and aspects during this film, it could remind the viewer of a Quentin Tarantino movie, in particular during the Ending. Satiric ending full of violence. Speaking of this part of the movie, I believe that certain scenes were not needed at all. For example when "The rich guy" aka Mr Park tries not to smell the dead body while getting the keys.
It was back in 1960 when Billy Wilder (arguably the best film director and screenwriter of all time) became the first person to win Academy Awards as producer, director, and screenwriter for the same film. It was for the movie "The Apartment" starring Jack Lemmon and Shirley McLaine. This movie is a masterpiece. And since then not many other directors have achieved the same thing. In the 2020 Oscars Bong Joon-ho joined Wilder in such an important achievement. It wouldn't be very subjective to think that it was not well deserved.
This could have possibly been done in order to expand Asian market in Hollywood, by making use of the current popularity of Korean culture.
As I said the movie is not bad, it has a solid photography and editing and script that led to an exciting and brilliant tempo. I really like the first part of the movie because I think the director sets up the story in a intriguing and appealing way however after the beginning the movie looses power in many elements.
Many people love this movie because of its message. I find this rather silly because it's a quite simple message, The difference between the rich and the poor? Is this a radical or new message in any way? I do not think so.
In fact I believe this movie is great for pseudo intellectuals, because actually watching a foreign film and liking it (this movie is easy to like because of its commercial features mentioned above) makes your ego go as high as the empire state.
Dolor y gloria (2019)
The movie contains its tears
Superb film by Almodovar. Undoubtedly one of his best works.
You can tell how he put a lot of effort in this movie, probably due to the fact that it is almost completely autobiographical.
One of the best lines of the movies is when Salvador Mayo says: "A great actor is not the one who cries, but the one who knows how to contain the tears"
This is completely true in every sense and I think this movie does it in a way, because it is a very expresful movie but not in a direct way (not crying, we could say). It expresses a lot through the magnificent use of color, a great acting, a powerful story and a good script.
Also very smart from Almodovar to add such an interesting ending because that leaves the viewer of this movie really satisfied.
Lost in Translation (2003)
Beautiful, deep, and expressful movie about lost people.
The title of this movie is really meaningful: Lost in Translation
This is referenced in the beginning of the movie when Bill Murray is shooting the commercial and the director is giving some orders but the translator seems to tell him way less than the director is trying to say.
However this is not the main topic of the movie but just a representation of it. This movie is actually about people that are lost in a moment in their lives, about people that don't fit in a certain situation
This is perfectly expressed by highlighting the contrast between occidental and japanese cultures.
This movie is really deep, meaningful and expressful especially during its first half which I consider a geniality.
This movie is really beautiful and the lenses and that fact that it used 35 mm (Kodak Vision 500T 5263, Vision 320T 5277) negatives makes it even more expressful and beautiful.
Well made movie, Meaningful ending, Is Polanski a Dreyfus?
This is a really enjoyable movie, even though it has a slow pace, it is not boring at all and it is made properly.
A clear example of this is the scene in the church, when Picquart goes to pick something up, this is a slow yet intriguing scene, you are wondering what's going to happeng, is someone going to hand it in to him? Who is the right person and How's he going to spot them? This is a great scene.
It is also clear how you could tell that Polanski made this movie to try to express his innocence in a way. (Perhaps he wanted to tell us he is like Dreyfus)
Also (no spoilers) the last scene is important if you care about the meaning of the movie as (according to my interpretation) it reveals Picquart's actual intentions and the reasoning behind his behaviour during the whole movie.
The Movies (2019)
biased, movies missing, and with spoilers...
Every episode is the same, they just start mentioning (american) movies, talking about the plot, but they don't explain anything special about them.
The worst thing is that even though most of the movies are well known, not everyone has watched all of them so why would you spoil them? It made no sense to me but they ruined the ending of movies like "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)" and many others
The only part where they explain the movies in more depth, is when they talk about black culture and feminist movements and they spent way to much time in that for every single decade when we just want to hear about good movies in general.
The timing was poorly divided. They spent 2 episodes talking about the 70's (1970-1979) (arguably the worst decade) and 2 episodes as well, for the golden age (1900-1959) which was clearly not enough, as many great directors and movies were left out (I'll talk about this later) .
Cinema was originated in Europe, and when talking about the golden age is quite disrespectful not talking about great directors that started in Europe and then moved to the US like Ernst Lubitsch.
It's also quite interesting the fact that they mention the movie "the magnificent seven" 1960 by John Sturges but they don't mention "the seven samurai" 1954 by Akira Kurosawa and they don't even mention him at all.
The best part of the show is the video for the intro, that's really cool to be honest, the show is also good for very begginners and it doesn't require any previous knowledge.
They are also missing many movies in general, and many important directors like Bergman and they don't give enough credit to Billy Wilder, just mention some of their movies. Well... nobody is perfect.