Perziurejau. Galiu pasakyt tas filmas yra vienas didelis "mindfuck" su buriu 
zvaigzdziu ir pigiais efektais.
Po Donnie Darko galvojau, kad rezisierius yra jaunasis genijus. Po Southland 
Tales ir The Box manau, kad rezisierius tiesiog toliau saudo tais paciais 
soviniais, tik pastarieji du nelabai sekmingi.  Kurybingas tas Richard 
Kelly, bet deja per daug druskos sugadina patiekala.

Kas nemate siulyciau geriau paziureti Watchmen
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/
Panasus "alternatyvus" pasaulis, istorija taip pat pasakojama vieno veikeju, 
persidenge siuzetai ir vizualiai idomus filmas. Ir sakyciau zymiai idomesnis 
ir daug geriau pavykes nei Southland Tales.



"Kaksht" <kaksht@cianetikrasmuilas.com> parašė naujienų 
news:i4jl34$sav$1@trimpas.omnitel.net...
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405336/
>
> Kazkaip prisiminiau sita sena filma ir nutariau priminti tiem kas nemate 
> :) Siaip sunkus filmas ir tikrai nekiekvienam, daug kas nesupras, daug kam 
> nepatiks, bet kam patiks - tam labai patiks. Man asmeniskai labai patiko, 
> super istorija, super nuotaika perteikta filme, ir visi aktoriai labai 
> gerai vaidina.
>
> Rekomenduoju!
>
> vienas komentaras is youtube
> "This movie was very under rated. It is a fantastic story which makes you 
> think about you and your life style. The style of the film is also 
> individual which I love."
>
> Papaste'insiu viena is review is imdb:
> This is the way the world ends. Not with a whimper, but with a bang.
>
> This is a film about all of the seemingly random events that lead up to 
> the end of the world. And it's also a comedy.
>
> That says it all right there, doesn't it?
>
> When this film ended, I ran to tell every one I could find about it. The 
> odd thing I found about it was that I ended nearly every one of these 
> conversations with the following:
>
> "It was amazing, but don't see it. You won't like it."
>
> It's strange to hope that a film I feel so passionately about should not 
> be seen by the very people I want to discuss it with. However, that's 
> exactly the way I feel here. This film is not for everybody; in fact, 
> there are only a precious few out of all of the people who see it that 
> will even tolerate its existence. But you know what? That really isn't 
> important.
>
> Art is subjective, and no matter how many times I bother to explain a 
> difficult concept to somebody who hated this film, I realize that it will 
> never work long before the conversation ends. The problem is that these 
> difficult concepts are actually very simplistic: Richard Kelly had Dwayne 
> Johnson spoof the stereotypical, apocalyptic action-hero throughout the 
> film. This included over-dramatic readings of his lines, delayed reactions 
> and odd vocal dynamics.
>
> What? You say that it wasn't intentional, and that it was just Johnson's 
> poor acting skills?
>
> This is where the small-minded fail to grasp the most simplistic of 
> concepts. The great analytical film student will analyze a crooked frame 
> and declare the brilliance of its intent; they will say that this 
> intentional error supports the themes of the piece. So why does the same 
> not go for Southland Tales?
>
> Each one of these already-marked actors has broken out of their shells for 
> this movie. The fact that everybody stereotypes them attests to Kelly's 
> genius in assigning them the roles; however, it also proves how 
> unfortunately small-minded today's modern audience has become.
>
> Was this film a mess? Absolutely, in every sense of the word. But was it a 
> coherent mess? That's the real question, and I think that I can safely say 
> that it is. This film is nowhere near as difficult to understand as 
> anybody would have you believe. The concepts are straightforward and are 
> practically dictated to you by the narrator; this becomes essential to the 
> understanding of the story, as there is just way too much going on to take 
> in on your own. However, instead of hindering the film, it makes these 
> seemingly unrelated scenes string together into a true tapestry that is 
> worth exploring.
>
> So, you know what? I'm going to go against my own advice and advise 
> anybody and everybody who reads this review to go out and see this film. 
> If you don't like it, don't come back to this website whining about it, 
> because nobody here has the tolerance to explain things to you that you 
> will never understand. No amount of discussion of cinematography, lighting 
> or the fantastically haunting score by Moby is going to change the mind of 
> an already jaded viewer.
>
> But maybe, just maybe, you will like it. You'll get a chance to experience 
> something you're likely to rarely, if never, experience again. Because as 
> all of us who enjoyed the film know:
>
> It had to be this way.
> -- 
> Honda Civic '00 EK3 1.5 Vtec-E
>