A celebrity model couple are invited on a luxury cruise for the uber-rich, helmed by an unhinged, alcoholic captain. What first appears Instagrammable ends catastrophically, leaving the survivors stranded on a desert island in a struggle of hierarchy.
Money is important when you don't have it.You can buy everything, but not always.What other earners, equality? Manipulation is possible if the feelings are not mutual.Everything has changed, quotes are about Marxism, everyday capitalism on its own hump.This is a deconstruction of satire to not funny, from H&M to 𝑩𝒂𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒈𝒂
Initially, I went to watch because of Woody Harrelson and a bunch of mentions on the web.
I decided to Google that I'm not the only one who thinks that Carl (the model guy) looks like a young Jonas (Louis Hoffman) from the Darkness. And so I looked at Yandex first, then I went to Google. Don't repeat my mistakes, lol. P.S. if anything, the first result in Google with the title "If you love Harris Dickinson, you'll LOVE Louis Hofmann!"
I foresee dislikes for this comment, but I expected more! There were so many arguments, stories about how people left the movie in cinemas, but in fact everything turned out to be pretty smooth. Vomiting and bowel movements are not surprising to anyone right now. The first part is interesting, the rest has already happened. The final twist is from the teen comedy "Love on the Island"🙈 Of the heroes, an elderly couple who produced weapons fell in love the most. It was funny about them. And can someone explain where Carl was running to in the final scene?
@vk1280831: I guess he ran to his old woman and to his old life)) I think the Luivittons seller on the beach still burned down the others, and Carl ran to look for them to tell them.
@11831: Carl ran to prevent bad events. He initially wanted to go with them, wondering if it would lead to what was left behind the scenes. Well, the pirate probably had nothing to do with it - then he would just walk calmly without getting ripped off by the jungle
It was very interesting to find out about the actress who played Yaya, it turned out that she died on August 29, 2022, the press writes only of a sudden illness:( 32 years in total
@barbie_turatova: Thanks for writing about this! Here's what's on wikipedia: On August 29, 2022, Dean was admitted to the hospital in New York. The initial symptoms were mild, but the actress' condition deteriorated rapidly, and she died a few hours later. Autopsy results confirmed that Dean died of bacterial sepsis
Some kind of twofold feeling was caused by the film after watching, on the one hand it seemed terribly delayed, and on the other hand, after the ending, there was a feeling of understatement, it was possible to continue for another two hours))) Well, in general, Woody Allen turned out to be on minimals, watchable)
When you haven't read the abstract or reviews and watch this movie, your eyes are slightly rounded from the change of genres, confusion, lack of connections. From my feelings, Cloverfield 10 reminded me-forget what was in the beginning... At the same time, the impressions of the film are strong, both negative and positive, this is definitely not a passing movie, a decent direction, an excellent acting ensemble.
Today's consumer society is elegantly shown. Money is nothing when you are alone with nature. The characters of people are perfectly shown. The acting and directing are great.
I laughed a lot at the communication between the captain of the Marxist ship (USA) and the capitalist oligarch (Russia). They swung ideologies without looking. )))
@TheWinnie: I laughed so much from their drunken nonsense, which was broadcast to the entire yacht and from the absurdity of the situation, but I thought that the yacht would be washed overnight, cleaned and by morning it would be calm again, the sun and everything would rest, sunbathe, and walk as if nothing had happened, as happens on our seas in The storm 😆
There are a lot of allegories and inverted situations in reverse, for example, an Asian woman who feeds five rich people with her labor, and at the same time she quickly merges into the role of a daddy, and Carl shares the fate of Yaya, who was looking for a relationship where she would be provided.
It's amazing how unsuitable all these rich people turned out to be. Russian Instagram star, I understand, but it's amazing that a Russian capitalist would not be able to make a bonfire. He himself told the captain about the school. Like, he got a good education. Everyone in his childhood went hiking and learned basic techniques of survival in the forest. The couple on the ship died epically - from their own weapons.
The characters are stupid to the point of impossible, not a single likable, from that no sympathy, no excitement for their fate. The main ideas (they say all skeletons are the same in coffins, and something about happiness is not in wealth) are shot right in the face mixed with orange vomit, and this despite the fact that physically, it seems to me, it is difficult to show the negative side of wealth, in principle, always in the backyard consciousness looms: "if I were locked on a yacht with such money, I would not have died so stupidly, and would not have sat in place while the cleaner was building a totalitarian regime." This feeling somewhat blunts the meaning of the narrative: do we have to take something out of the film, or just fuck with the stupid rich? It didn't work out, because the viewer's attempt in 2022-3 to surprise with vomit and a stream of excrement from the toilet looks like a waste of frame and time, and it turned out to be difficult to get the essence out of the film: don't be stupid. The only plus of the film: what kind of dialogues are there between a capitalist and a socialist in a well-mounted, watchable action. PS. What the ***** is with the relationship of these models?! He sleeps openly with the cleaner, initially to gain benefits for himself and his girlfriend, then scores on the lady and dutifully moonlights as a prostitute, not bothering to break off relations with Ya-Ya, but also not claiming that he wants to remain her boyfriend; she scandalizes a little, maintains excellent relations with the cleaner despite the fact that she I stupidly stole her boyfriend, and....What? I admit, I don't even see any drama in this, just an incoherent stream of some actions, which somewhat contrasts with the declarations of love at the beginning of the film. A huge part of the time has been removed from the relationship of these young morons, but it is absolutely unclear how they relate to each other, on the basis of which they should empathize and root for their relationship. If the film hopes to make us want all the characters to just disappear from the screen, then thanks for the end credits, we really came in.
Author's satire. The film is not bad, original, and the development of events is interesting. Although, in my opinion, a little raw. Underdressed, but polished. And yet, this is definitely not an easy comedy to laugh at, those who have been waiting for it will be disappointed.
@Mysherry: I totally agree. The film is hooked, many genres are mixed, the idea is original, events develop unexpectedly and unpredictably, but something was missing. And this open final also made me a little tense. Somehow I wanted the story to end, it was also possible to make sure that there are still survivors, and they have been safe for a long time, they have been helped. And everyone considers our characters missing. In general, I missed something in the final. But it looked with interest, and it shows so well how helpless and defenseless we modern citizens are, how quickly all the external gloss, moral principles, devotion and loyalty fly off us. There is something to think about.
@nikonovajulia: I don't undertake to speak for the whole Estlund, but in all three films that I have already managed to watch, there is always an open ending, and even a double one
an amazing movie. in his own way. It's been a long time since I've seen such a thing that all the parameters dangle from the surface level and facelessness to Lovecraft depths, creating an unreadable result. in this case, the directing, the script and the whole bunch of editing are on the conscience of one person: he did not hesitate to present the canvas with a single and incredibly fresh thought, or rather, a package solution — a satire on capitalism in the second act and a parable about the instantly corrupting vertical of power in the third
those who were flattered by an allegedly spicy dish with an elegant presentation and did not turn off by the middle are served the following: a plot for three kopecks, a plot on snot glued from episodes without logic, a motley company of characters from which even the main characters are not registered and not played — they were given one goal and a landmark, the rest were left two-dimensional caricatures and introduced for the sake of one or one and a half episodes, or as extras. a decoy for an audience that just for the sake of a picture with a cloudless sky and a pretentious idea will not lift its ass to the cinema, but wants to see at least one familiar face — Comrade Harrelson. the implementation in the style of "south park on minimals" is an accent scene with streams of vomit and excrement and an accusingly instructive tone. a shaky composition: a tightened tie, half—dead development on the ship and on the island, a semblance of a climax and an aftertaste of a light on *balova
I will tell you about the first act separately: there, the only plus I noticed (besides topless shots from gg) is the opening scene - and the only noticeable character is a reporter from it. a rather funny piece, apparently, squeezed the author of the texts like a lemon (somewhere after the middle he woke up, took out a quotation book, and then even gave birth to a small simple monologue to the captain, but in comparison with the rest it turned out pretty). the model kitchen and the life of the title couple could be made into a separate film, as they look, with their own problems and measured dramaturgy
Admittedly, a cringe combo of scenes of a girl forcibly bathing in the pool and regular negotiations with the captain through the door (why strictly Thursday, if he was offered any day except Thursday, for an objective and good reason? Why is he in this position at all? or is the script not exchanged for small things?..) it caused an impulse to drop and a drop of regret that there is no such option for films on mayshous, but it is very telling) "triangle of sadness" would add to my modest list from begotten (here you can clarify that the plot is completely painted in the annotation and on any resource mentioning this film, since it cannot be disassembled in any other way and for the audience experience with the artistic part, half is enough) and "Ralph against the Internet", but out of curiosity and, apparently, longing for the normal time of the year (at least spring), I still watched it. on this occasion, I will finish the sheet with a couple of tips — suddenly someone has not seen it yet, but is interested and not averse. if you are confused by the audience rating here or on kinopoisk, it is still too high. if you still sat down to watch, but you don't pull in one go (like me) and, for example, decided to sharpen the film for food — move the food on the stage with the captain's dinner. After the storm, you can continue. actually, that's it)
Quite a good black comedy with a mirror image of situations. As they say:" what we fought for, we ran into." The staff was taught not to say no to snobs, now the rich have to go along with the toilet administrator. The main character wanted equality, so he got an alliance in which he is weaker. Even though I watched this picture because of Woody Harrelson, I didn't regret the time I spent. The part on the yacht reminded me of the Shining. And visually, she justified this association. The only thing is that the open final did not give an answer whether Yaya was a donkey like the one the programmer-coder was hunting. But a certain looping of the plot only plays into the hands of the film.
there was a mix of emotions: the TV series time, white lotus and savages with the idea of showing gender inequality and economic and political references. It was cool, bright, but no matter what everyone said, I had too many vomit scenes. and yes, it can be just as unjustified as the excessive prolongation of the bed scenes.
I decided to Google that I'm not the only one who thinks that Carl (the model guy) looks like a young Jonas (Louis Hoffman) from the Darkness. And so I looked at Yandex first, then I went to Google.
Don't repeat my mistakes, lol. P.S.
if anything, the first result in Google with the title "If you love Harris Dickinson, you'll LOVE Louis Hofmann!"
Of the heroes, an elderly couple who produced weapons fell in love the most. It was funny about them.
And can someone explain where Carl was running to in the final scene?
Here's what's on wikipedia:
On August 29, 2022, Dean was admitted to the hospital in New York. The initial symptoms were mild, but the actress' condition deteriorated rapidly, and she died a few hours later. Autopsy results confirmed that Dean died of bacterial sepsis
And Young October on your chest!
They swung ideologies without looking. )))
The scene of the captain's dinner and the explosion was fun.
And before and after boredom.
The couple on the ship died epically - from their own weapons.
The main ideas (they say all skeletons are the same in coffins, and something about happiness is not in wealth) are shot right in the face mixed with orange vomit, and this despite the fact that physically, it seems to me, it is difficult to show the negative side of wealth, in principle, always in the backyard consciousness looms: "if I were locked on a yacht with such money, I would not have died so stupidly, and would not have sat in place while the cleaner was building a totalitarian regime." This feeling somewhat blunts the meaning of the narrative: do we have to take something out of the film, or just fuck with the stupid rich? It didn't work out, because the viewer's attempt in 2022-3 to surprise with vomit and a stream of excrement from the toilet looks like a waste of frame and time, and it turned out to be difficult to get the essence out of the film: don't be stupid.
The only plus of the film: what kind of dialogues are there between a capitalist and a socialist in a well-mounted, watchable action.
PS. What the ***** is with the relationship of these models?! He sleeps openly with the cleaner, initially to gain benefits for himself and his girlfriend, then scores on the lady and dutifully moonlights as a prostitute, not bothering to break off relations with Ya-Ya, but also not claiming that he wants to remain her boyfriend; she scandalizes a little, maintains excellent relations with the cleaner despite the fact that she I stupidly stole her boyfriend, and....What? I admit, I don't even see any drama in this, just an incoherent stream of some actions, which somewhat contrasts with the declarations of love at the beginning of the film. A huge part of the time has been removed from the relationship of these young morons, but it is absolutely unclear how they relate to each other, on the basis of which they should empathize and root for their relationship. If the film hopes to make us want all the characters to just disappear from the screen, then thanks for the end credits, we really came in.
And this open final also made me a little tense. Somehow I wanted the story to end, it was also possible to make sure that there are still survivors, and they have been safe for a long time, they have been helped. And everyone considers our characters missing. In general, I missed something in the final.
But it looked with interest, and it shows so well how helpless and defenseless we modern citizens are, how quickly all the external gloss, moral principles, devotion and loyalty fly off us. There is something to think about.
those who were flattered by an allegedly spicy dish with an elegant presentation and did not turn off by the middle are served the following: a plot for three kopecks, a plot on snot glued from episodes without logic, a motley company of characters from which even the main characters are not registered and not played — they were given one goal and a landmark, the rest were left two-dimensional caricatures and introduced for the sake of one or one and a half episodes, or as extras. a decoy for an audience that just for the sake of a picture with a cloudless sky and a pretentious idea will not lift its ass to the cinema, but wants to see at least one familiar face — Comrade Harrelson. the implementation in the style of "south park on minimals" is an accent scene with streams of vomit and excrement and an accusingly instructive tone. a shaky composition: a tightened tie, half—dead development on the ship and on the island, a semblance of a climax and an aftertaste of a light on *balova
I will tell you about the first act separately: there, the only plus I noticed (besides topless shots from gg) is the opening scene - and the only noticeable character is a reporter from it. a rather funny piece, apparently, squeezed the author of the texts like a lemon (somewhere after the middle he woke up, took out a quotation book, and then even gave birth to a small simple monologue to the captain, but in comparison with the rest it turned out pretty). the model kitchen and the life of the title couple could be made into a separate film, as they look, with their own problems and measured dramaturgy