Time Regained
|
List Price: Our Price: $16.19 You Save: $13.76 (46%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $14.70 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of Time Regained
Movie Review: A Proustian Masterpiece
Summary: 4 Stars
This is a beautiful transfer to DVD of a superbly photographed, colorful film that recreates the French milieux of the early twentieth century beautifully, and plays with time in a very Proustian way. I agree with your reviewer that the cast, except for John Malkovich, who is completely miscast as the aristocratic Charlus, is excellent. However, there a major drawback to this DVD: The subtitles cannot be turned off, which, if you know French and want to watch the film without them, is a great pity. Also, it must be pointed out (again, as your reviewer did) that the film, gorgeous and atmospheric as it is, is wonderful if you know Proust's book, but could be rather confusing if you don't. Worth investigating nonetheless.Movie Review: Interesting!!!
Summary: 4 Stars
I watched this movie and I, honestly, understood it. There were moments, as has been noted in other reviews, when the dialogue was "impossible" to to see, but it did not affect my understanding in separating all the characters or shifts in time and place which took place. I have not read any of Proust books and currently I am reading a biography of him purchased here on Amazon. I rented the movie first. I just like what I saw and decided the price of the DVD is worth it for a movie I found interesting and pleasurable.Movie Review: Time Regained
Summary: 4 Stars
I admit I have never read Remembrances of Time Past so a lot went over my head. This film version of the trilogy is interesting but very confusing for a novice like me. There are vignettes of different characters everywhere while Proust dies. Many are interesting and I was glad I watched the film, now I think I need to read the books!Movie Review: A la recherche a decent Proust film adaptation
Summary: 2 Stars
I desperately wanted and expected (because of the mostly positive reviews) to like Ruiz's take on the last installment of Proust's In Search of Lost Time, but after having viewed it--not once but twice--the best thing I can say about it is that it means well. Of course, I understand the difficulty of adapting such an involved, disjointed, and lengthy work, but Time Regained seems to miss the mark (dramatically) in a number of respects.First and foremost, the film is simply unattractive. The film quality--in both the theatre prints and the DVD version--is grainy and drab, in a BBC-literary-adaptation kind of way. The colors appear washed out, and the art direction seems half-hearted. In short, I did not at all "get a feeling" of fin de siecle Paris--its elegance or its beauty. Some of the shots leave a distinct Made-for-Television taste in one's mouth.
Secondly, I have read the entire work, and yet at times I had some difficulty following the film (because of the collage-like style, the incorporation of scenes from various volumes, and an uncertainty as to which actors were playing whom). Meanwhile, Catherine Deneuve seems somewhat miscast as Odette de Forcheville nee Swann nee de Crecy--she is among the most elegant, refined, and put-together actresses in the film, and yet she is supposed to be playing the vulgar social-climbing outcast. The role of the narrator and of Gilberte (Emmanuel Beart) are well-cast, but the greatest of all miscalculations seems to be the casting of John Malkovich as the lecherous Baron de Charlus. He lacks the presence (both physical and social) that we would expect of this classic Proustian character.
The third and most damaging fault of the film is that it feels surprisingly soulless and cold. As we are bombarded with character after character, we are not given the opportunity of "knowing" or of even wanting to know any of them. One of the most distinctive characteristics of the novel was its long examinations of people, feelings, and sensations. This is inevitably lost in a film version and begs the question of whether Proust is suited to film at all. I can't think of a novel that better supports the argument that not all greats works of literature require film adaptations. Proust supplies us with more images and depth than a two-hour sitting in a movie theatre ever could.
Movie Review: Time in a Boring Bottle
Summary: 1 Stars
This film at best, is nothing but amateurish detritus which not only bores the viewer but makes him contemptuously dislike all forms of snobbery or upper middle class portraits.
I've read a few of the other reviewers who attempt to become apologists for the director's lack of talent at establishing even a modicum of interest, they say if you haven't read Proust then you will have a difficult time comprehending this, which in itself is entirely fatuous and pomp. Imagine everyone having to read one of the most lurid and over-rated books of the 20th century to see a film which should substantiate itself. What an exaggerated claim. There's no place for "intellectual hubris" or their own "in-group manifesto" here.
I had high hopes for this film actually but after the first hour I saw that it was devoid and lacking any duality which would allow us to reflect on what is occurring. It is played by rigid, high handed oafs who are spoiled to begin with.
Most of the first hour is infested by artless vignettes which are probably the deluded Proust's memory, and they are reworked in such a disordered way that what comes out is merely a bunch of meaningless, trite and vacuous scenes with banal jargon, not only because they hold absolutely no interest for us, but because they do not invite a further contemplation of what 'time' was to Proust, imagine listening to a bunch of snobs talk about the weather, well, that is what this basically is, how philosophical can one get from that point of reference? It begins to wear thin after the first scene and you pray that there will be no more discussions by those prosaic characters. And it doesn't help that Proust himself is an insipid dandy who parades around in his best suits with his neatly trimmed moustache and becomes a voyeur, if you are asleep already, I don't blame you.
Many of the scenes deal with characters which are entirely void of any human warmth or expression, they are petty aristocrats, snobs who sit and drink tea and eat stuffy food while looking down at the poor. They are [...] who visit [...] brothels and think themselves noble because they hold high office positions during the war while the common man spills his guts out at the front lines. This is a complete waste of time!
Malkovich is even an absurd caricature in here, and his little dubbed French voice is entirely insipid. I laughed at most of this. We learn that he is a libertine who likes to visit male brothels and be whipped by sincere proletarian scum, wow, what a revelation on the mystery of human existence. From the looks of the period pieces and the arrangements, it was expensive but that doesn't carry a film with people walking around with no reference to the viewer. Film is supposed to move us in a way, either disgust us or interest us in some form of merit which it presents itself to us in human understanding but boredom to me is no artistic achievement. Don't even bother with this pretentious and ennui filled work.