Sobz, you soooo ruined it for me by telling the end.
There can be many Fruedian interpretations but overall I think it’s a drivel. Movie is slow, abstract, confusing, boring, depressing, and definitely seems purposeless. Although there are couple of classic scenes in it. I think it could have been a lot better (plot was pretty good) if the director had not left on to pay too much attention on audience’s part. You’ve to be in a certain mood to do that or else you’ll miss it–which I did. It’s not absorbing at all.
Brando definitely pulled it off with his performances though. It was the same year Godfather came out. That was peak of his career performances wise. Rest of the stuff he probably did half-heartedly (except for Apoclypse Now–I read somewhere that he trimmed down his role in it to make the character more mysterious and stronger).
There can be many Fruedian interpretations but overall I think it's a ** drivel **
[/QUOTE]
Drivel is the last thing I'd call it (dribble would be a better word ;) )
Maybe I built your expectations up too much? Maybe its cuz I spoilt it by telling you she kills him? (for those of you that haven't seen it, that was a spoiler alert btw! :p ) God knows why you didn't like it.
When I first saw it, I'd heard nothing about it, and just happened to be channel surfing when I came across it. It's one of those films that leaves you a little dumbstruck, especially the ending. I like films that leave an impression on ypir mind, and last tango in Paris is definitely one of them. I spent a good few hours surfing the net the day after I’d seen it to find out the inns and outs of it. Definitely one of Brando’s best works.
Mehnaz, you can't really review it if you only saw half of it! I remember a Beautiful Mind had me falling asleep in the first half, but it really picked up in the second half and is now one of my top films. Moral of the story? go watch the rest of it!
array bhaee, the ending would have more effect if I didn't know already what was gonna happen. Of course that made a difference. During the whole movie I was wondering so why she's gonna kill him? Are they gonna fight? Is he really a killer like the backdroping suspicion that her wife didn't commit suicide but he might have killed his wife and at the end he might attack her out of his madness and she'd kill him in defense?
The whole point of the movie was reasons she killed him, along with his eccentricity. But it can't interest you to get to that point if you already know she kills him. That's like the shocking twist that changes your whole outlook on the movie.
Now, there can be couple of interpretations on why she kills him. I read someone's review and more agree to it. She killed him because throughout their affair, he refused to know her name or anything about her. He refused to tell her anything about him either. That was kind of special, unique relationship that drew her towards him in contrast to her fiance' who was filming her life to show to the world. But towards the end he told her everything about him and was becoming "normal". She lost that special thing. Along with it his later episodes of madness still disturbed her. It was becoming more of a dangerous proposition than a special relationship.
