Category: Uncategorized

Mostra 2025 – Final days + ciao ciao Venezia

The two last days of the Mostra, we took it slow: we skipped Day 9 screenings (honestly, enough of Italian movies!) – apparently, looking at the reviews, we did well; and we gave a 1h chance to yesterday’s Chinese movie “The Sun rises on Us All” (Cai Shangjun). Though it was still more pleasant to watch compared to “Jay Kelly” (to which I give my special “2025 Disaster Award”), it was not worth having a short night. Even more as hospital stays and cancer patients are not really on the top of the list of topics I am very excited about currently – on that front, we deserve a break.

So, what do I take out of this year’s Mostra? I would say it was a pretty good one but missing the “magical discovery”. With one remaining unknown though: until the screening of “The Voice of Hind Rajab”, everyone was talking about a Korean movie, “No Other Choice” that had all the chances of winning this year’s Golden Lion. For some reason, the Mostra organizers thought it best to put some “Out of Competition” movies in our abbonamento programme, rather than to allow us to see this one. I won’t complain though. Our programme was high level enough, with some jewels to spot, such as Sorrentino’s “La Grazia” and Jarmusch’s “Father, Mother, Sister, Brother” (not to forget my crazy Lanthimos’ “Bugonia”).

We were discussing yesterday and reached the agreement that most probably the Golden Lion will eventually go to “The Voice of Hind Rajab” (to be confirmed later tonight). Maybe not for its perfect cinematic quality, but for all the other possible reasons in the world. Allow me a bad word game: unless there is a big surprise, it seems that the Jury has No Other Choice.

It was a special year for us, filled with nostalgia and emotions but also with the huge satisfaction of one very important promise kept. From now on, Venice will not only be my usual yearly cinema rendezvous, but it will also the place where the full spot in my papa’s story has been put. A place where I will return to wave at him and remember.

Ciao Venezia, ciao papa, ci vediamo in 2026 ❤️

Mostra 2025 – Day 8: “Duse” (Pietro Marcello) and “The Voice of Hind Rajab” (Kaouther Ben Hania)

Yesterday’s first film was one of the (as usual, too many) Italian movies in the official selection (just for the record, 5 out of 21 films are Italian productions). With all due respect to my many Italian friends, I do not think that it is representative of Italian cinema’s actual quality (and again, no particular grudge about Italy, I would say the same about France).

Given the fact that we had already seen a jewel in this ocean of Italian movies (Sorrentino’s “La Grazia”), the odds that another jewel would swim out of it were quite low. Low they were, low they remained. They were even smashed to pieces for me after two minutes, when I understood that I would be spending the next two hours with Valeria Bruni Tedeschi. As I am a sadly partial human being, this fact killed all the potential for me to enjoy the projection. I just can’t.

Now, to try and provide you at least with some useful information without dwelling too much on my VBT allergy, “Duse” tells us the story of a renowned Italian theatre diva from the end of the 19th/beginning of 20th century, Eleonora Duse. She seems to be quite a myth in here and used to be called the “divina”. My fellow watchers who do not suffer from the same VBT allergy as me, would tell you that it’s quite watchable (though my VBT allergy made me sleep through part of it as a coping mechanism) and that Bruni Tedeschi is quite a fit for such a diva role (my VBT allergy makes me see hysteria everywhere). So I would leave it to this as, let’s face it, I’m really not the right person to comment on this one.

The second movie, “The Voice of Hind Rajab” had been flagged by Alberto Barbera (the festival’s Director), at the official selection announcement press conference, as extremely powerful. This had triggered my curiosity as Barbera usually barely gives any opinion on the selection, or at least not in such an “engaged” manner. Reading a bit about it ahead of the festival, I understood what could have sparked such an unexpected attitude: the movie uses the real red crescent’s recordings of their calls with a 5 year old little girl who has remained as the only one alive in a car in Northern Gaza. The four other members of her family who were in the car with her are dead. The night is falling (the child is scared of the dark), the Israeli tank that shot at the car is approaching and the little girl is calling for help – desperately begging the rescuers on the phone to come and get her.

The recordings are dreadful and speak for themselves. The screening lead to a 23min standing ovation in the Sala Grande (in the presence of some of its very renowned producers: Joaquin Phoenix and Ronney Mara). Some say it’s the most important movie of the year.

What do I personally make of it? It is actually really hard for me to tell as I am still debating with myself and with my movie buddies. To give you a hint, I will present some of the questions that we are still debating and for which I might not have an answer: aren’t the real life recordings sufficient to speak for this tragedy? Would a documentary format have been better? Does the acting (sometimes overly dramatic) around these real recordings strengthen or weaken the message? Was it the movie that “deserved” the 23min standing ovation or the dreadful context behind it? But isn’t it good if such a movie can at least generate a shock wave, maybe that, as such, justifies for its existence?

As said, I have no answer yet and will leave it for you to see. We can chat about it once it is out and distributed around the globe. I can at least say that the silence that followed the end of the screening (prior to unusually long applauses in the Palabiennale screening hall) confirms the movie’s efficiency. I had to wait for 5mins before I could say a word. The voice of Hind Rajab kept on resonating in my head. It deserved a moment of meditation for all the lost lives in the past years.

Mostra 2025 – Day 7 (following a break on Day 6): “A House of Dynamite” (Kathryn Bigelow) and “L’étranger” (François Ozon)

One could not imagine a more contrasted evening than yesterday’s one: on one side an American thriller about a missile attack on the US and, on the other side, a French adaptation of Camus’s famous “L’étranger”. As both movies were pretty decent, it somehow ended up working well for us. I am however not sure that it would have been the same if the screenings were inverted (meaning first the French, than the American one). Indeed, Bigelow’s film is a tensed, nervous and very rythmic film, that might have been slightly too “agressive” if it had been screened after the slow paced “L’étranger”.

Anyhow, things turned out well and our evening started with Bigelow’s race against time. A missile launch is detected by the US intelligence services. The movie retraces the 20mins following the first alert – the moment what seems to be a nuclear missile is detected – until it is about to erase the city of Chicago from the surface of the earth. It follows the same 20mins but from three different places: a military command, the office of the Secretary of State for Defence and the office of the President of the USA.

The persons in these three places follow a similar mental path: first disbelief (all are convinced that it is a false alert), then realization, finally followed by dread and panic. 

It is extremely well constructed, efficient and breathless. The pace of the movie never slows down and holds you alert on the edge of your chair until the end.

Now. Does this mean that I would have given it 5 stars as The Guardian did? Definitely not. Why? Because, for me construction and efficiency are not enough. I also need a sense, a meaning, a purpose. When the lights turned back on, I however could not come up with such a meaning for my own self. I mean, we all know that the world is not doing great and that politicians have to take tough decisions (and might have to take even harder ones in a – potentially near – future). Do I need a movie to remind me of this and add additional anxiety to my life? Not really.

The second movie was a risky adaptation of Camus’s “Létranger” by François Ozon. To be honest, I had my doubts. Not an easy one to adapt as a movie. 

However, against all odds, it ended up being a pretty good surprise: Ozon’s black and white picture (that did not work for me at all in “Frantz” back in 2016) beautifully renders the city of Alger, its heat, its sea, its atmosphere. 

Add to it a wonderful young French actor (Benjamin Voisin, whom I had already spotted in “Illusions perdues” a few years ago) who really surpasses himself in a tricky role, and what you get is a quite faithful to the book and pretty enjoyable film.

I have difficulties explaining why I am not more enthusiastic than this. Maybe because I did have a feeling that, unlike the first movie, this one looses a bit of its rythm in its second part..

Conclusion: still, it was overall a surprisingly enjoyable evening!

Mostra 2025 – Day 5: “Father, Mother, Sister, Brother” (Jim Jarmusch)

Since the Mostra’s selection has been released at the official press conference in July, this particular screening has been marked in all my agendas with a big exclamation mark. All possible reminders have been set and friends have been instructed to aim first at the tickets for this specific film, preferably at the Sala Grande. Four computers have been mobilized to try and enter the vivaticket booking system on time to reach the target. 

This seems to be the right moment to have a loving thought for my booking buddy, Evghenka, and to express my eternal gratitude for helping me out fulfilling one of my dreams: attending a Jim Jarmusch film projection with Jim Jarmusch in the room.

This also seems to be the right moment to have a loving thought for my mom who dragged me to see “Dead Man” when I was a 15 year old grumpy teenager and who forever changed my perspective on cinema (it was definitely not only my papa’s deed).

As it is repeatedly recited in the already mentioned “Dead Man”: “Some are born to endless nights, some are born to sweet delights” (or the other way around, I don’t exactly remember). Well, yesterday, we all agreed that we were definitely more on the sweet delights side of things. If I have to be honest, I would say that I was even on the total euphoria side of things (and this stayed as is before, during and after the screening).

Prior to the screening, my movie buddies seemed pretty excited as well, but mostly due to Cate Blanchett’s presence on the red carpet. Hence we all got our childish/back to adolescence groupie moment – them with Cate, me with Jim. Everyone happy.

Now, “what about the movie?” will you ask. Well, would I have been selected as a jury member, I would tell you that I have found my 2025 Golden Lion. Looking at the previous jury decisions, I however doubt it will be the case: it is a too discrete, too delicate and too apolitical movie to attract the attention of jury members. But what a delight it still was. 

As Jarmusch has already done several times, it is a movie divided in three parts, each of them giving us a short insight into different family relationships (one in the USA, one in Ireland and one in France). It is a movie made of hints. Characters are caught at a particular moment (without any information given on the wider context) and the spectator is granted only a few clues (short sentences, looks, silences) to put together the puzzle of these (sometimes extremely tensed or weird) relationships. It is funny, it is chilling, it is moving. And it is supported by great actors (Adam Driver, Cate Blanchett, Tom Waits, Charlotte Rampling – you basically name them) with all of them performing at the same level of excellency. I do however have a personal soft spot for Tom waits’ eccentric father character, which is absolutely delicious.

Conclusion: it was worth coming to Venice just for that one!

Allow me to end this one with a special pic because aaaaaaaaaaaaah I saw Jiiiiiim Jaaaaaarmusch!!! :)))

Mostra 2025 – Day 4 “Frankenstein” (Guillermo Del Toro)

This one is an interesting case study on how depending on the watcher’s mindset, his/her perception of a movie can vary dramatically. For the context: Guillermo Del Toro won the Golden Lion with “The Shape of Water” in 2017. Another monster story. Back then, I was very much in disagreement with the jury’s choice, although, if I remember well, I did express some appreciation of the movie’s visual quality.

The same visual quality appreciation can be granted to “Frankenstein”, that, we all agreed on. But what each of us took away from the movie as a main impression is very different. I believe that somehow, we all have a point. And if you put all these points together, you end up with a pretty good overall assessment of the picture:

Point 1: what is the added value of another “Frankenstein” adaptation? Especially as this must have been a very costly one – expensive actors (such as Oscar Isaac), impressive visual effects that must have taken loads of working hours on top notch machines, a lengthy movie (2.5 hours)… How many other movies, including first projects by young directors, could have been funded from that huge amount? That is why spectator 1 came out sad and disheartened by this quite obvious money making machine. As a big lover of independent cinema, I cannot disagree with her.

Point 2: my spectator 2 is one who likes when stories are well thought through and make perfect sense up to the smallest detail. Spectator 2 could not help but notice some inconsistencies that made her disconnect from the story. Some concerns were also raised about the need for so many not so pleasant visual details (especially when Frankenstein is assembling his creature by putting together – and cutting and sawing – pieces of dead bodies). Here again, I cannot disagree with these comments.

Spectator 3 had only one main regret (and again, I agree that it is perfectly valid). The fact that Guillermo Del Toro could not help but repeat the pattern of “The Shape of Water” with a monster/human belle love story component that, let’s face it, was a bit cheesy.

And what about my spectator self? Well, to my defence, I would never have gone to watch this picture in standard Brussels circumstances. It is not the kind of movies I am generally attracted to and, as spectator 1, I do have a philosophical problem with these massive productions. But this is also why, as it is unusual for me, I have a tendency to approach them with a kind of curiosity/innocence. Hence my spectator self got swallowed by the visual (and also musical) beauty of the picture – amazing soundtrack, I have to say. I am not sure that I could give you a proper summary of the film’s plot as I approached it as one would approach a painting: absorbing the colours, the decor, the costumes and just enjoying the beauty of what I was seeing. Given the millions that were invested in order to make this film a visual delight, I did enjoy every single second of its aesthetic. Nothing less, nothing more.

Mostra 2025 – Day 3: papa’s final swim into the Venetian laguna and “After the Hunt” (Luca Guadagnino)

This will be short.

Day 2 ended not only with a very bad movie but also with a Venetian shower of the utmost intensity. The entire crowd exiting the Palabiennale got soaked from head to toe (including us). Even umbrellas could not save us, the shower was too strong. A vaporetto full of dripping people with no remains of a hairdo left on their head departed from the Lido back to town. Seen from the outside, it must have been quite a view.

Day 3 however greeted us with the most beautiful sun and blue sky, which was quite a relief, as dispersing papa’s ashes during a Venitian (almost) hurricane did not seem like the most pleasant perspective. Indeed, everyone had warned me: beware of the wind.

I won’t dwell into the details, but we had a beautiful moment surrounded by friends (including the Venetian ones who joined us by surprise) and by the water and the city that we all love(d) so much. Papa is now where he asked to be, I can almost see him floating in the sea with a contented smile on his face singing Matuška’s “plavu si, ani nevim jak, vzdyt nemam prsa, nemam znak, maaaaam jen hlavu plnou ideaaaaalu”. It was a sad but very happy and comforting moment at the same time. 

After this, I knew that unless we attend the screening of a masterpiece, it would be hard for me to focus on the evening movie. Sadly, Guadagnino did not produce such a masterpiece (not that I expected it from him, but I still had a little bit of hope… you really never know). Julia Roberts does not do such a bad job in her role as a Yale university professor. I thought it was actually a quite good job. The problem is more on the screenplay (overfilled with words, not well constructed, slow and ultimately just bluntly boring) and the soundtrack (extremely loud and agressive).

Guadagnino could however not spoil the sense of peace and achievement that accompanied me along the whole day. 

We did it! Papa is back in Venice!

In memory of my papa, Jan (18/08/1947-30/11/2024)







Mostra 2025 – Day 2: “Bugonia” (Yorgos Lanthimos) and “Jay Kelly” (Noah Baumbach)

This was a much awaited day that started well: in the morning we got the final authorization to spread my papa’s ashes at the San Michele cemetery. A Venetian acquaintance told me that this was quite an achievement in itself: it seems that the Venetian municipality is a demanding one in that sense. I have to say that the amount of papers I had to provide and the amount of administrative bodies I have been in touch with in the past months has indeed been impressive. But I have as well been in contact with many civil servants that spent a lot of time explaining the process to me and supporting me through it with great patience and empathy. So, on my side, quite a positive experience.

It seems that, following this key milestone, Venice decided to mourn my papa with us – a rainy day it was, with quite a massive thunderstorm at night. I love Venetian Summer thunderstorm, they tend to be quite dramatic.

We arrived at the Palabiennale first screening under the rain. I was looking forward to that one. My relationship to Yorgos Lanthimos is an ambivalent one: it started with very big scepticism and switched to surprised appreciation when “Poor Things” was screened here two years ago. It actually won the Mostra back then. It also won me over, without me being really able to explain why.

I needed two years to process “Poor Things” and therefore skipped Lanthimos’ last year “Kind of Kindness” – this guy is quite prolific. Maybe a bit too prolific.

So, let’s talk about “Bugonia”. Emma Stone and Jesse Plemmons  again. Both at the peak of their art. A young American (Jesse Plemmons), wounded by his childhood, his mom’s addictions and tragic destiny and obsessed with conspiracy theories. Convinced also that a successful CEO (Emma Stone) is an alien and that aliens have invaded the earth in order to destroy it as well as all the humans on it. The CEO’s kidnapping is therefore organized in order to try and put pressure on the alien invaders. Nothing however works out as planned. 

One should not share more about the plot (with many surprising twists) in order not to spoil it for you. But I can at least personally say that I very much enjoyed this one, though some of us were more sceptical than others. Coming myself from the sceptical side, I can fully understand how it can be difficult for a rational/down to earth person to surrender to Lanthimos’ madness. Totally mad he indeed is. But his madness is smart, powerful and very often hiding a strong message.

In this case, at the end of the screening, I could not help but thinking how we, humans, are wreckless destroyers and how we are all actively working together on killing all the beauty of the world for the sake of our own instant satisfaction. And I’m pretty sure that that’s exactly what Lanthimos wanted me to think. Brilliant.

Now regarding movie 2 (“Jay Kelly”). Remember how I was telling you yesterday about my strongly active 2025 “no bullshit” filter? Well this one was put to the test quite intensely yesterday. All the alarms in my head started ringing pretty soon into the screening. By minute 30, I was repeatingly saying to my movie buddy: “this is bad… this is pretty bad”. By minute 40, I had switched to “this is terrible… quite extremely terrible”. 

Remember also how I told you about Tony Servillo’s face saying it all without saying anything? Well. Throughout the entire Baumbach movie, George Clooney’s face (and, trust me, there’s an immense amount of it) says absolutely nothing. 

And remember how I was telling you that the dialogues were great in the Sorrentino movie? Well the Baumbach movie has definitely won the price of the stupidest sentence of the festival. I quote: “do you know how I knew you did not want to spend time with me? Because you did not spend any time with me”. I’m not kidding.

Conclusion: a movie about nothing with bad acting.

Mostra Final Days – “Iddu” (Fabio Grassadonia, Antonio Piazza), “Kjaerlighet (Love)” (Dag Johan Haugerud) and “Broken Rage” (Takeshi Kitano)

I had a writing break as the last days of my Mostra were a bit more slow paced with less movies and, let’s face it, as well less to write about them.

Although, I would be badly placed to say anything about “Iddu”. To be perfectly honest, I must have seen the 5-10 first minutes of it… and the two last ones. What did I do in between? I slept quite deeply, it seems. I could hear, once in a while, the laughter of my fellow watchers (though, in that specific case, I hardly qualified as a “watcher” myself) and sensed, based on the applauses at the end of the screening, that the movie had earned the public’s fair appreciation. That’s about it in terms of what I can share with you on the “Iddu” topic (… oh yes, maybe as well that it takes places in Sicily and someone dies at the end). 

And, do not get me wrong, the deepness of my sleep had absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the movie. It was mostly linked to my level of relaxation after 9 days spent in the city of water, as well as, let’s be honest with ourselves, the two campari spritz I had drank with our Venitian landlords right before the screening – you live and you never learn.

As for the two other films, “Kjaerlighet (Love)” is a nice, quite simply filmed and sympathetic Norwegian movie about love (as its title suggests) and relationships. It is worth a watch for the good acting – the main female character is one of an interestingly independent woman, who is keen on experimenting freely and is not ashamed of sharing her thoughts and impressions about these experiments with her friends and colleagues. Quite refreshing. 

“Broken Rage” is one of Kitano’s typical yakuza stories but, this time, with a twist: it is only one hour long and offers two versions of the same story – the first one, the standard yakuza version (with the shootings, the bad mafia guys and drugs), the second one, the humorous version of the first one (with clumsy killers missing out on their target and falling off their chairs). 

Because of its length and style, it has hardly any chances to be distributed in cinemas around the world, but judging by the way we, and the entire Palabiennale laughed, it seems to have done the trick. It was actually a really nice and light way to close my 2024 Mostra.

So this is it, one more year is over. The prizes have been attributed and, as very often, the jury’s choices left me quite sceptical. Whilst I was extremely happy to see Almodovar finally winning the top award at a major film festival (he actually never did before, which is quite surprising to me), and some of the films that I found really special adequately appreciated (the Silver Lion to “The Brutalist”, I very much agree with), on the acting side, I really do not understand based on what the jury took a decision. Maybe just on the fact that Nicole Kidman was daring enough to go for naked and dominated? (I would argue that what was acknowledged was more the character than the acting… but oh well). And, that Vincent Lindon is awarded the best actor to the detriment of Adrien Brody? No one will ever explain this to me. The same goes for the Silver Lion to “Vermiglio”, which was indeed a nice movie but definitely not Silver Lion material, according to my understanding of life.

Anyhow, overall it was a very good year that I have enjoyed to the maximum. I am looking forward to see what 2025 will bring to us. Until then, ciao ciao e un grande bacio da Venezia.

Mostra Day 8 – “Joker: Folie à Deux” (Todd Phillips) and “Diva Futura” (Giulia Louise Steirgerwalt)

When I found out that the next Joker would be screened in Venice, two main thoughts went through my mind. Thought 1: why on earth would you even risk to attempt at a second part of something that was so close to perfection that it is almost impossible to beat? Thought 2: Gosh I cannot wait to see Joaquin Phoenix being the Joker one more time.

As bits and pieces of information progressively came out on what Joker II would look like (a musical? With Lady Gaga? Really?!), thought 1 started winning over thought 2 inside my head.


Yesterday’s red carpet was a good sociological experiment, perfectly reflecting how these two worlds (the darkness of Joker and a musical with lady Gaga) would be hard to reconcile. The arrival of Joaquin Phoenix together with Todd Philipps was followed by a 10mins wait for Lady Gaga’s entry (not in the standard festival car but walking through the crowd of her hysterical fans). To be honest, in 25 years, I have never seen this happening – not the walking part, but the crew not making an entry as one team ready to defend its artistic project.

What surprised me even more was that most of the crowd was there for Lady Gaga. Yes, yes, I know that she has a huge fan base. But in my rational little mind and given his previous unforgettable performance, I was somehow expecting Phoenix to be the star of the evening… Intriguing.

The movie only confirmed my fears. I don’t think that any of the both worlds (Joker vs Gaga) came out of it with a satisfied spirit. Bear in mind that my previous evening and my deep hatred and anger at the Guadagnino movie, might have not made me the most objective audience in the room. I kept on telling to myself “well, at least it’s not as bad as Queer”. 

Considering myself as a defender of the Joker’s darkness, I did not get enough of it. You get bribes of the first movie’s madness – that strange laughter that feels like crying for example – and Phoenix is as stunning as before. I did even very much enjoy his singing of some old American standards – it’s impersonated in such a theatrical way that it feels more like a cry of despair/anger than a song. Quite mesmerizing to me. 

And then Gaga appears as her diva self and the dynamic is lost. To be perfectly fair, I did find her quite convincing in a few scenes at the beginning, but then the movie looses its rythm.

The Gaga side, on the other hand, complains that this movie is such a waste of her talent. That there is not enough of a musical to it (true that there are only a few moments of joint Phoenix/Gaga singing and not much of an original song). As I hate musicals, this was actually quite a relief to me. That her acting talent is not given sufficient space. I would say the same, but more on the Phoenix side.

As a conclusion, I would recommend to rewatch the first one instead. Reconciling these two hardly concilable worlds was too big a challenge for Todd Philipps. Though I have loads of sympathy for his urge to spend a bit more time with such an amazing character as the Joker. This is for sure the end of the Joker story, and Joaquin Phoenix will always remain as the most stunning Joker to me.

After that, the second movie was actually worth a watch. It goes back to the golden age of the Italian porn (remember la Cicciolina?) with loads of humour and madness. Though it is a bit messy going continuously back and forth in time, the entire Palabiennale had a good laugh and appreciated the acting performance. Out of all the Italian movies in competition, this is the one for sure standing out.

Mostra Day 7 – “Queer” (Luca Guadagnino) and “The Harvest” (Athina Rachel Tsangari)


For those who remember, two years ago after the screening of “Bones and All”, I had an entire reflection on my love/hate relationship with Luca Guadagnino. Back then, we had a tie between the love (“Io sono l’amore” and “Call me by your name”) and hate (“A bigger splash” and “Suspiria”) sides. “Bones and all” remained in the middle, as it left me totally indifferent. 

This year, the hate side has taken a solid advantage, which might even be a win on KO. On the morning after, I still feel extremely irritated about what was thrown – I would even say vomited – at me the evening before. Now, let’s not forget that we are in Italy and that, in general, Luca Guadagnino has his strong supporters. I have seen articles passing by about a “masterpiece” and Daniel Craig being “heartbreaking” or “mesmeric” with his performance. 

And yes yes, this is art, this is very personal and sensitivities are extremely diverse.

My personal sensitivity (and it seems that most of the Palabiennale screening hall’s sensitivity as well, if you consider the booing after the movie) resulted in absolute dread and blunt irritation. Very similar to my post Suspiria state of mind.

What I have personally seen is a totally feelingless style exercise that some call a “trippy gay odyssey” and I call “visual vomit”. As often with Guadagnino, everything focuses on the visuals, the colours, the effects… the picture basically. Problem is that, even that was too much for me. Just fakeness. 

And yes, Craig is astonishing in his unexpected gay dandy performance. But the director’s choice has gone towards making him overplay it (you can really feel the Guadagnino imprint on the acting style). With a bit more “restraint”, it could have been heartbreaking indeed. Presented as it is, it is just infuriating as lacking any kind of frailty. 

This lead me to rethink a vivid discussion that I had with my friend Pamela years ago. Still influenced by my love for “Io sono l’amore”, I strongly defended Guadagnino, refusing to admit that his aesthetics might be slightly pretentious. Well, Pamela, it is never too late to revise one’s position. I now fully agree with you. Guadagnino IS damn pretentious. 

Obviously, given my state of mind, the second movie stood no chance. As I spent the first 40mins of it cursing at Luca and booing in my head, I decided that it might make more sense to go home and sleep over it. Let me just add one more morning BOOOO to close this chapter for good.