Full Movie Reviews
Rating of
4/4
Au Hasard Balthazar
SteelCity99 - wrote on 04/28/2018
Before the French New Wave could be formally established, a director named Robert Bresson suddenly appears for the sake of French cinema and starts to consolidate his overwhelmingly unusual direction style, a style that would earn him worldwide recognition and a strong Catholic sensation throughout his filmography that first began in 1951 with his film Journal d'un Curé de Campagne (1951) and that would be utterly strengthened with a possibly intentional human condition trilogy consisting of his three most powerful masterpieces: Pickpocket (1959), Au Hasard Balthazar and Mouchette (1967). Au Hasard Balthazar is arguably his definite and most representative cinematic masterwork and his most emotionally compelling piece of work. Representing the second part of a trilogy, Bresson, perhaps …
Rating of
4/4
Au Hasard Balthazar review
Daniel Corleone - wrote on 01/23/2013
"Life is nothing but a fairground, a market place where even your word is unnecessary." One of the best allegorical and spiritually intellectual film. Sometimes a simple picture can be poetic, without extravagant stars, special effects or even a complicated plot. Marie and the donkey named Balthazar are the central figures. Balthazar is handled by various owners. Luckily, this reviewer garnering the Criterion Collection, the interviews (with the director himself) and commentaries proved how great a picture this was. A trained donkey may be ludicrous to think of it as the main attraction of the movie, it instills much more.
The score was touching, pace of the story perfect, direction was impressive and performances sincere. Screenplay was exceptional with lines: "You must …
Rating of
2.5/4
Al azar Baltasar.
kustaa - wrote on 10/16/2007
When I went to the store to rent the film, I asked to the guy what was his favorite Bresson. We start to talk about him and we agreed that there are 2 diferenced groups, those that hates him, those that loves him. And, both for the same reason: How he directs the actors.
Of course that, between lines, we can talk and talk about the whys and the hows, and start analizing the whole thing. That's not the point. The point is: You like it (I'm sorry being so simple) or not.
I don't.
Let me state first that I understand Bresson's idea. I get him. But, I don't share his view of filmmaking. There was one deffinition that was around my head during the whole movie about the actors: Was like watching zombies acting. They cried, but not with their eyes. They "smiled", but not with their …
