Bloodless Coup got together last night to watch Bertolucci’s The Dreamers. As our views on it differ, I expect you may see a post or comment from Baltar on this in the near future. Personally, I liked it. This is not to say it is without flaws. But if you’re looking for a movie about a young American’s awakening (sexual and otherwise) to a world he never thought existed you can do a lot worse. Of course the young American, played by Michael Pitt, never fully becomes a part of that world. He stays true to certain values he brings with him. And in a way I suppose you could interpret his actions and beliefs as a swipe by Bertolucci against what he now may view as the excesses of 1968. But in any event the tale of the young man and his relationship with the French twins is engaging and intriguing. It’s also very well-played by the attractive, young cast, and it’s beautifully shot.
Now I suppose I should make some remark about the level of nudity and sexuality in the movie and its NC-17 rating. That’s what we’re all really supposed to focus on when it comes to this movie, right? Well, there’s a lot of nudity, and some unusual expressions of sexuality. But so what? It’s all quite appropriate to the story. The ratings system is an embarrassment and a sham that, among other things, continues ridiculous norms that pervert our cultural representations of life. People interested in a story like this should expect to see these things, and not having them in the movie would have been to ignore how such a story really would have happened. Instead you’d get more of that tinselly world of make-believe that Hollywood is so happy to show in the place of reality. Yeah there’s sex. Yeah there’s nudity. But in a story like this, how could there not be?
Posted by armand at July 15, 2004 04:24 PM | TrackBack | Posted to MoviesLike Armand, I thought the movie was worth watching. And yes, I agree that the visual appeal of the film was strong. However I also liked the treatment of class and revolution, as well as the gulf between the French twins and the boy from the United States. I thought the background of the involvement of the intellectual class in revolution was well done. While the whole film was a romantic and nostalgic look at the era, it did have a fairly clear-eyed view of the way young intellectuals "play" at revolution, adopting the imagery of the movement (the Mao lamp was priceless, as was the red beret) but confining their behavior to a much more personal (and in this case, decadent) rebellion. Unlike the strikers in the streets, the twins might not even want their revolt to be exposed, especially to their parents against whom they rhetorically rebel but from whom they receive the financial support and a fairly tolerant blind-eye that enables their "revolutionary" diversions. Again, like Armand, I imagine that Baltar will have a different view, but that's what keeps movie night interesting, now, isn't it?
Posted by: binky at July 16, 2004 12:03 PM | PERMALINK