Overview
From her volatile childhood as Norma Jeane, through her rise to stardom and romantic entanglements, this reimagined fictional portrait of Hollywood legend Marilyn Monroe blurs the lines of fact and fiction to explore the widening split between her public and private selves.
A huge plus of the film is Ana de Armas. The most similar Marilyn so far, well, a beauty..And she played wonderfully, of course, to the point of goosebumps.
And yes, Ana and still nyashka! :)
Ana de Armas is very similar to Marilyn😍
The authors and the same actors represented by De Armas said that the film was created in order to show Marilyn and Norma - these are different people. That Marilyn was objectified, used her & # 34; body", that her role is " stupid blonde". That in fact, the norm is a well - read, educated person. This is the same woman that in the 50s (!) tried to create my own production company in Hollywood, Karl! In this masculine Hollywood of the 50s!
The basis for the plot is excellent. Especially true stories.
But what do we see in the movie? Ana de Armas-who should show how to minimize the difference between Marilyn and Norma, plays them completely the same. Marilyn Monroe in the frame spoke with a sigh, a languid look, and so on. But this is not the norm. This is an image for the object.
The only scene where we are told that Norma is not a stupid girl is a comparison with my sisters. But even in this scene, where she is clearly accused of not being able to read such a work. How is she behaving? Builds eyes, lips with a bow and continues to look like a stupid blonde.
They try to tell us that people looked at her as a piece of meat, while showing us a naked Ana de Armas in the film almost through every scene. And the frame on the shooting platform, where the skirt develops - a few minutes from all angles translates the lower underwear.
And yet - the movie runs for almost three hours, and half the characters around Norma that turn around know who it is! Five minutes to show her underwear from under the dress, and find 30 seconds to explain - this is her makeup artist, they were close in a friendly way, and so on did not find time. Roughly speaking, I have to guess who it is. Keep Wikipedia open all the time?
Huge potential and mediocre work. Starting with the script, ending with the acting game.
Being Norma Jean, I probably would have turned over in my grave.
I didn't expect the film to be an ordinary biopic, no one promised that, and if you know Dominic's work, it will become obvious why everything was shot the way it was shot.
And everything was shot very beautifully, magically, with a change of cameras and sharpness. Black-and-white frames are replaced by bright colored ones, indicating, as I understood it, the mood of the Norm.
Her father's letters were very infuriating, – who are you anyway to condemn her? And when it turned out who wrote them, it became strange: Chaplin Jr. wanted to avenge her abortion in this way? You killed my child– did I symbolically kill your father?
But in general, I see here the humanization of a pop icon, a reminder that she was first of all a person, very lonely, in whom everyone around saw anything but a human being. And, of course, after this movie, it will be very difficult to laugh at Some Like it Hot.
I really love biopics and have never seen a movie jump on a grave like this one.
I am not an ardent fan of Monroe, but I am familiar with her biography, so for the first few minutes with little Norma Jean, I caught facepalms. They just took the fact that her mother was ill and turned it upside down: they threw apocalyptic shots with fires, a thriller with drowning and the dramatic moment when the girl was sent to an orphanage by random neighbors.
Actually, this motif of desperation runs through the whole film. Since childhood, the authors jump into an acting career, where Marilyn is immediately and certainly raped. Of course, why show how she loved movies, how she worked in a factory and became a model? Monroe is a priori a victim, all those around her are lustful, vile and smelly bastards who use her. The creators did not consider anything except family beatings and debauchery in the life of the actress. The subsequent scenes are just competing in their abomination.
Of course, there was fear, disappointment, and pain in Marilyn. But she didn't stop there. This woman challenged the industry, became one of the first women in history to create her own production studio, had a large library and was very well-read, opened a career for black jazz singer Ella Fitzgerald (this was in the 50s!). But no, it's better to show Ana de Armas's bare breasts at every opportunity, call her "meat" or a dumbass, I'm generally silent about the shot from her vagina.
I have not watched other works by this director, but, for me, he just used ALL the techniques of modern cinema, from different widths and colors of the frame (Have you already figured out what exactly this means? Keep up to date!), before the shaking and the next close-up in front of the hero. The director shot a set of clips, glued them into something single, and the abstruse and omniscient film critics will figure out for themselves how to interpret it correctly.
"Blonde" is a very dirty, vulgar, sticky movie. It's not about Marilyn, it's about an abstract actress of that time. If you don't know anything about Monroe or only know the general facts, you're unlikely to understand any of this. This is not a plot, not a movie telling a story, this is a set of surreal images, among which it is not clear where the dream is, where the reality is, and where the next arrival or seizure is.
It turned out too many letters, but I just really wanted to pour my Bue out of my soul...
I understand that this is not 100% true, but I think many moments were in reality. At least remotely.
The only negative (for me personally) is that the whole story goes in fragments and there is no single plot line. Because of this, at some points the essence of the narrative was lost.
Some kind of shameful game.
The film criticizes the fact that Monroe was treated like a piece of meat, while constantly undressing Anya.
I did not find any sense in changing the cb and color. At first I thought it was how they separate truth from fiction, but no.
Or what's in color - when Norma is happy, but also not!
And this bed scene where the cameraman swings the camera left to right and moves to the next scene over a waterfall...
the camerawork in general in the film looks strange in places. So many different techniques are used just like that, well, the operator wanted to do it, so they did it. (as it seems to the flower maker, I wanted it in color - it was in color)
Ana is really the main advantage of the film.
Well, at least they showed the truth that a dumb sucker and a drug addict just knew who to suck from and when to die in time. Americans are able to create the right idols for themselves from this, and worship them a few decades after their death))
For almost three hours, the director has been trying to immerse us in the nightmare of Marilyn's life, turning all the people around her into monsters. But because of the unconvincing nature of what is happening, it is difficult to dive. I approached the film three(!) times before I mastered it. Elton John once managed to solve this problem in Candle in the Wind in just 3 minutes and 40 seconds. With much more success. It was definitely stronger.
Unfortunately, Ana is incredibly beautiful and looks terribly similar to Marilyn's image, but probably not at all like Norma Jean.