Posted 18 August 2011 - 03:42 PM
Posted 11 October 2011 - 05:27 PM
Posted 12 October 2011 - 09:17 AM
Jeffrey: I love your piece. You really nailed what makes the film so intriguing and endlessly re-watchable. I have in mind an essayish review of the film that takes Charles Taylor's The Ethics of Authenticity as a frame of reference. Now if only my shipped-from-Australia blu ray would arrive!
Posted 18 November 2011 - 02:46 PM
It's a little thing, but it's the sort of little thing that hints at an integrity that is deeply moving. The sense of affection that comes through every choice Kiarostami makes is just luminous.
Posted 18 November 2011 - 05:42 PM
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:26 PM
Posted 27 December 2011 - 09:48 AM
Posted 29 December 2011 - 10:50 AM
BTW, William Shimell, who plays James, only has a few other acting credits; he's mainly an opera singer.
After thinking about the movie for a few days (I've still only watched it once), I think
Posted 29 December 2011 - 11:08 AM
We posted much on this film at Filmwell, but I found Mike Hertenstein's essay really riveting. Given your last comment, I think you may really connect with it. Which is good, because CC is all about connections, real or otherwise.
Posted 29 December 2011 - 11:11 AM
Posted 29 December 2011 - 03:12 PM
: Certified Copy is now streaming on Netflix.
But only in the U.S.
So only you guys get it on the internet, but only we get it on DVD?
Posted 29 December 2011 - 03:26 PM
Posted 04 January 2012 - 11:46 AM
Another thing, I see a lot of high, high praise for Certified Copy. It was excellent, but I don't know that it's the best film I saw this year, or decade. What is it about it that is drawing such love from folks?
Posted 04 January 2012 - 12:23 PM
Well, I wrote a love letter to the film at Good Letters a few months ago. Do you need me to say more than that? Did you read Mike Hertenstein's review at Filmwell? Or Michael Sicinski's at Mubi?
The way it's about marriage, faith, art. The frightful folly of the woman's "unhinged" love and willingness to sacrifice and commit and idealize, contrasted with the frightful emptiness of the man's aloofness, his detachment, his cerebral filtering of everything, his avoidance of responsibility, his need to dominate any subject or anything he encounters, his alarming forgetfulness, his fear of mystery, his contradictions.
The mirrors. Mirrors everywhere. But then some of them turn out to be doorways or windows instead of mirrors. Which highlights the difference between art as "a thing" and art as "a way."
The way there are originals and copies, in one sense or another, in almost every shot.
The reflections on the glass of the car window as they're driving.
I could go on and on, but I'll stop there for now.
Edited by Overstreet, 04 January 2012 - 12:36 PM.
Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:46 PM
Wow, somehow I had missed Sicinski's piece. Thanks! It really helps me clarify a lot of what I love about this film and makes my impatient to experience a second viewing.
Which reminds me: Sicinski says Binoche's character is unnamed, but other places (IMDB, for example) say her name is Elle. Is her name actually given in the film?
Posted 04 January 2012 - 04:59 PM