sininjae

At the beginning of the character build-up, the character between each character was on the good side. However, if you watch the battle against the Vietcongs in the second half, it is developed from a very general point of view, so sometimes you get goosebumps. Of course, it's an enemy from Australia's point of view, but it's only used too much. Take, for example, director Cleat Eastwood. He made a movie called Flags of Our Fathers and a movie called Letters From Iwo Jima. You can feel the irony of humanity and war while watching each movie. In particular, Letters From Iwo Jima received a higher rating than Flags of Our Fathers and was a box office success, so it is ironic in some ways. However, this film portrays the Viet Cong as an axis of evil that is too mechanical in a way that is too general. Not good. However, other factors were generally satisfactory.

It may say that Steel rain 1 is much better than 2. In particularly, in korea, it says the character is too charmless and have a superficial imitation. Especially, american president is motivated to someone. But, it was just same at his often saying. It may not say the worst, but it has no appealing.

Maybe, for the reality, it has a little dramatization. But i think it make this movie and characters more stiff. Sometimes i doubt about character's cause and effect, and don't understand some act. Neverthless, this drama based on true story have not bad value to appreciate as an Film for gucci's house story.

The fight scenes in the beginning are very impressive. And in the play, when DiCaprio grows up and goes to see Bill the butcher, throwing the Bible away seems to say a lot, both internally and externally, in a very meaningful way. It is indescribable because of the emptiness that comes with the passage of time at the end of the movie.

Like the movie "psycho", the latter half main plot is progressed with dialogue. Director hitchcok often like using expression with camera walking and color. But this movie is not like that kind and just the dialogue make audience tense and eerie. I heartbeat because of Rebecca who i didn't see in real but painting.

The casting is gorgeous, and as you can see in the poster, you can see Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Margot Robbie. You can also see DiCaprio's unconventional performance peak in "The Wolf of Wall Street". For example, he is amazingly good at acting that he can't act. Brad Pitt's performance in the play is already explained by his Oscars. Deep Purple's cover song "hush" still lingers in my ears.

I didn't know that, but it is said that director Ha Gil-jong adapted this film and made his debut film. The visual beauty is amazingly beautiful, and the camera with a trembling that seems to make the heart flutter. The downfall of the bourgeoisie was expressed directly, but it was a good thing that early neo-realism was combined without Pasolini's unique myth.

It takes the form of a fake documentary, but it is so realistic, witty, and excellent. Contingency is also a very important factor in the film, and it enhances the closeness of the story, and such organicity leaves a deep impression on the audience for a long time. What can I say about this... it's really good.

I didn't even know at first that this was about a surgeon, but it got so twisted. There are too many central characters, the stories keep revolving, and for the Korean War as the background, I can't feel it except for a few Korean signboards, and if Nashville is a bit refined, this seems a bit more confusing. Still, I found it funny, quirky, and fun.

It's not without its boring aspects, but considering the genre of art films alone, it's not that boring. It makes you feel uncomfortable throughout the movie, even though there are not very uncomfortable scenes.

It is a remake trilogy, and the characters are almost identical to those of the second work, the fairy tale, but there was no sense of boredom or paralysis from the previous work. The foundation itself was similar, but the plot was different and it was fresh. Here, too, there is a lot of novelty in the direction, when Myung-ja kills Dong-shik and stumbles over the wall saying that I will die too.. Besides that, the director's attachment to mice is revealed a lot, and now he shows a rat den full of mice. , and throwing mice at Myung-ja is also directed. He's an amazing director in many ways.

There seems to be a lack of empathy in many ways. At first, I had high expectations because it was a film directed by Lee Chang-dong, but it felt slightly different from his films such as Mint Candy and Oasis. It looks like a kind of absurd play, it looks like a picaresque, and in many ways it makes you feel mysterious. To put it simply, I want to say that it is not a film that is easy to empathize with.