ads

Slider[Style1]

Style2






A low-budget science-fiction movie can actually work out really well, as some other movies have shown in the past but this movie is really lacking in true creativity and fantasy to consider this a successful attempt.

It's a movie that picks an artistic approach and thinks that because of that can get away with just about everything. It's a science-fiction movie without any science-fiction. The movie is supposed to be set in the future and on a different planet as well, while it clearly is 1960's Paris the entire movie is being set in. Just about nothing in this movie indicates that this is a different and futuristic planet the entire movie takes place on. Must be some artistic statement with a deeper meaning to it perhaps but I just don't get it and it really took me out of the movie.

But even as an artistic movie, the movie is really suffering from its low-budget. No real lighting got ever used and the sound was really poor for most part. Even some of the artistic compositions of some of the sequences were obviously not as originally intended. I'm sure they had plenty of good ideas with this movie but the execution of it all is seriously lacking.

It's not really a movie you will watch for a story (don't even ask me what the story is all about) but more because of its visuals and the approach it takes. Even though it was lacking, I still can't say I hated the approach of director Jean-Luc Godard. It still makes the movie an interesting one, though it's not really one that ever truly fascinates or impresses.

6/10

Watch trailer

About Frank Veenstra

Watches movies...writes about them...and that's it for now.
«
Next
Newer Post
»
Previous
Older Post

No comments:

Post a Comment


Top