Monday, December 10, 2007

Film Review: Youth Without Youth (2007)

The other day, I went with my friend Josh to see a screening of Francis Ford Coppola's film, Youth Without Youth. I was pretty excited about this film because a) it was one of Coppola's first films in a while and b) the man himself was going to be there to introduce it, along with a cast interview after the film.
After finding our seats and enjoying our popcorn and brownies, courtesy of the theater we were at (the Paris I think), Mr. Coppola himself came out. After giving us a long speech about the film and how it was independent and such-and-such, Coppola told us that he, and I'm paraphrasing here, "didn't want this film to be one that we would have to think about a long time after, but something that we could enjoy for what it was." He also reminded us that both Apocalypse Now (1979) and The Godfather (1972) were panned when they first came out, but then went on to be classics. He then left the theater, and didn't come on again after the film. And as Josh and I both decided after the film, he probably left because he knew what type of film he was presenting us. A piece of crap.
I am so mad that I sat through this existential self-indulgent turd. Those are three hours I will never get back. This film made absolutely no sense and carried on for way to long.
The plot, well, if you call it that, had something to do with a man (played by the excellent Tim Roth) at age 70 who, while living in Europe right before WWII, gets struck by lighting and, after surviving, wakes up to discover that he has aged back to that of a 22 year old. From here on out, I have no idea what the hell was happening.
I'm pretty sure there were Nazis...oh, and something to do with the God Shiva and reincarnation. Matt Damon also makes a cameo. And roses. Lots of stupid roses. That's really all I got from this film. Every time I thought I understood what was going on, something weird and dumb would happen, and the film would shift course dramatically.
I have absolutely no idea why this film is recieving all the praise that it has gotten. It's not a good film. Sure, it looks like an old black-and-white film the way it was shot. Sure, but so what? It's still not a good film.
Would I recommend this film? No...well...wait, no, no I wouldn't.

Bleh/10

No comments: