Youth Without Youth Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
1938, Romania: at 70, a professor of language and philosophy, Dominic Matei, contemplates suicide: the love of his life is dead, and he remains unable to complete his life's work on the origins of language. Then, he's struck by lightning. After a slow recovery, he grows younger. He must now avoid Nazis, who want to study and experiment on him. Some years later, he meets a young woman who has her own passage through a lightning storm. Not only does Dominic find love again, but her new abilities hold the key to his research. Is the sweetness of life finally at hand?
| Tim Roth | Dominic |
| Alexandra Maria Lara | Veronica/Laura |
| Bruno Ganz | Professor Stanciulescu |
| André Hennicke | Josef Rudolf |
| Marcel Iures | Prof. Giuseppe Tucci |
| Adrian Pintea | Pandit |
| Alexandra Pirici | Woman in Room 6 |
| Florin Piersic Jr. | Dr. Gavrila |
| Zoltan Butuc | Dr. Chirila |
| Adriana Titieni | Anetta |
| Mircea Albulescu | Davidoglu |
| Dan Astileanu | Professor |
| Cristian Balint | Grenzschutz |
| Dragos Bucur | Bartender |
| Matt Damon |
| Francis Ford Coppola |
6.50 out of 10 (2031 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Somewhat of a near-miss for Coppola.
posted on 01 Aug 2009During the second half of this movie my thoughts shifted to Coppola's 1982 movie, "One From The Heart." It was his baby, and in total it wasn't very good. With his pedigree in such movies as the "Godfather" trilogy, and even entertaining and thought-provoking movies as "Peggy Sue Got Married", I always expect something really good from him, and in "Youth Without Youth" I didn't get what I expected.The premise is excellent, set beginning in the late 1930s in war-threatened Eurpoe, an older man in his 70s, definitely on his downhill slope of life, gets hit by lightning. Not only does it not kill him, he recovers into a man who physically appears to be about half his age. But that is not all, his reasoning skills are heightened, he learns languages easily, and even creates his own language so that his dictated notes cannot be stolen by others.But Coppola does not seem able to take this premise and turn it into a movie that stays interesting all the way through. There are Nazis and there is a love story, but the longer the movie runs the more it seems disjointed. Then magic becomes involved, as the man is able to learn the entire contents of a book simply by holding it in one hand and concentrating deeply for a few seconds. Or, manipulate a man's hand with his mental powers until his gun is pointed at his own head.At one point the man and his new love travel to Malta, and in a very quick exchange she asks "What kind of bird is that?" He answers, "A Maltese Falcon." The exchange had no value in advancing the story, it was apparently put there only for a yuck-yuck moment in reference to the famous movie by that name. That is not movie-making that does justice to Coppola's pedigree.I watched the whole movie, even though some of it was about as interesting as watching a glacier move, but it was an overall disappointment, a waste of good talent.Tim Roth was Dominic, the older man who gets young after the lightning strike. I like Roth, and here he does as well as he can with the material. Alexandra Maria Lara was Veronica, the young woman who later was also hit by lightning and became older, and channeled an ancient woman called Laura. She was able to speak ancient languages through this experience.
Born again Coppola !
posted on 22 Jul 2009Don't pay too much attention to the press résumé for this film. It has nothing to do with Nazis and American agents. Although they do appear in the film they are not central to its plot, and this is certainly not a spy drama. If this is what you are expecting you risk being severely disappointed. This film will never be a box office smash hit.No, this is a film which explores the concepts and possibilities of Reincarnation, Karma, Mysticism, Spirituality, and Time. What if time is not linear? What if reincarnation is real? What if human potential could be exponentially enhanced, scientifically? If like me, you are fascinated by these esoteric subjects anyway, and you can forgive the quirks such as "upside down" camera shots, and occasional weak dialogue, then I suspect that you will love this film. It tackles these timeless questions, whilst always managing to be engaging, and entertaining - and it is beautifully shot. At no time did I feel that the film lacked pace or interest.Bruno Ganz is becoming one of my favourite actors. After Vitus, he turns in another great performance here as the doctor who treats Dominic (Tim Roth) after he has been struck by lightening. A brilliant academic who has sacrificed his entire life to the study of the origin of languages, Dominic knows that, at the age of 70, he will now die without achieving his goal, his life purpose. The lightening bolt burns him to a crisp, but instead of killing him instantly, it gives him a new lease of life, regained youth, super-human brainpower and thus a second chance to complete his life's work.He also regains the love of his life, now reincarnated as Veronica. Under his power, Veronica regresses back through the ages, each time speaking an older language, until, as she nears the origin, and his work nears completion, he realises that he can have his life's desire, but first there is a test, and a choice to be made.This fascinating film which Coppola wrote, directed and produced is well constructed and satisfying. It really made me think, and hours after the end, the pennies were still dropping. In what it sets out to do, for me, it is a great success.
funniest film of the year
posted on 12 Jul 2009I am looking in my memory if i can find a worse nutty screenplay in some obscure 70's b-movie but i really can't think of anything so ridiculous and grotesque. except for some good filmography, the movie is a real disaster. Cheap exotic stereotypes that reminds of commercials, a confusing, silly and pretentious mixture of fashionable oriental philosophies, low-budget science-fiction, the exorcist, ultra-shallow pseudo-philosophy on human consciousness and time. (But plenty of big, "difficult" words to make you think this is really serious stuff) I could quote some really funny dialogs: "what birds do they have in Malta" "that's a Maltese falcon" (surely very typical of Malta, no doubt about it!) "when i saw you in the cavern, i thought that if i had been 3 or 4 years older, i would marry you" (why the damn just three or four years older???) "the metha... what is that??" anyway, you must see it to believe it. I specially found hilarious the part where Tim Roth invents his own language and start babbling something in a very funny language and the girl who continuously has exorcist-like night crisis and each time changes language: Sumerian, Babylonian (maybe northern Babylonian?) And the haunting question: where do you want me to put the third rose? (and everyone secretly thinking: in my ass!!!) I really felt ashamed for poor Coppola. Movies like this must have a serious psychiatric impact on the public.
Deep, Entrancing, Thrilling, and Thought-Provoking
posted on 12 Jul 2009I am happy masterful filmmakers like FCP are coming back to the big screen and not only that but full force with a "youthful" independent spirit, an inclination towards the digital medium and a great sense of experimentation. Directors who come to mind are George Lucs, David Lynch, Mike Figgis, and Steven Soderberg to name a few that come to mind.YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH is a brilliant film. It is very appealing visually. Artistic in every way. Philosophically deep and psychologically complex and full of spiritual themes.The pacing of the film will seem very slow to the average viewer and it is slow, but it is more contemplative than slow. And it is stylistically so to go along with one of the main themes of the film: TIME.The plot is all over the place. And I mean that in a good way. It's epic. Progressive. And utterly unpredictable.The acting is BRILLIANT. Thank you, Mr. Tim Roth for another great performance.The screenplay is poetic not less than any other quality in the film.This movie needs a deep viewer with some patience and a love for art, philosophy, spirituality, and science.Honestly, the film should get a higher rating, but it's not the kind that would be accessible to all kinds of audiences. It is in essence EXPERIMENTAL but in every POSITIVE sense of the word. Consciously experimental in a natural and mature way.I am happy this is Coppola's comeback after not so strong movies in the 90's. Well done! It was worth the wait.
An interesting failure
posted on 10 Jul 2009Some moviegoers, no doubt, will call Youth without Youth "deep", "exquisite", a "metaphysical experience", mentioning Hinduism, Buddhism and divine epiphanies; others will dismiss it in two lines as "unwatchable crap". I will do neither.To give you an idea, this feels like a movie co-directed by a burn-out David Lynch and a clinically depressed Terry Gilliam, based on a book co-written by a drunk Jorge Luis Borges and Philip K. Dick on drugs. Get the picture?This was a movie I wanted to like. The plot I had heard seemed ideal for a fantastic, bittersweet tale dealing with themes such as life, death, loss, and time. Unfortunately, the result is uneven to say the least: both too ambitious for its own good, and too chaotic.Romania, 1938. Aging language scholar Dominic (Tim Roth) is struck by a lighting, and inexplicably, as he is cured by a helpful doctor (Bruno Ganz), he finds out he has become younger : he is 35 again. Besides, now he has an incredible memory, and his knowledge about languages is astounding. The Nazis soon find out about him, and Dominic escapes in Switzerland, where he is followed and has to confront a Nazi scientist.In the second half - which feels like a different movie - after the end of the war, Dominic meets Veronica (Alexandra Maria Lara), identical to Laura (I like the nod to Italian poet Petrarca here - see the introductory dream, which is basically a "triumph of the Death"), the woman he loved (and lost) sixty years before. Veronica too is struck by a lighting (what about staying at home during storms?), and she begins to experience visions from her previous lives - she talks and behaves like a Princess from ancient India, then like a woman from Egypt... Dominic is able to understand her, and uses her mystical experiences for his study about the origin of languages.Add to this : - some weird powers acquired by Dominic, who can read books by simply staring at them, and at a certain point is also able to control guns, like a low-rent Magneto; - a cameo appearance by a furry-fingered creature holding a skull- Shiva, apparently (?); - an incomprehensible subplot about a "double", played by Roth as a mix between Gollum/Smeagol of The Lord of the Rings (Coppola even uses the same camera tricks as Jackson during the "psycho" conversations) and Adolf Hitler. No kidding.I like Roth (The legend of 1900, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead), but his performance here is uneven. As the quiet, decent Dominic he is nicely understated and convincing. I found him less solid as the already mentioned "double" - I suspect that Roth too did not understand what the hell he was supposed to play: an angel or a demon, Id or cold reason, or maybe a Jungian shadow? Beats me - and Roth too, I guess.Luminous Alexandra Maria Lara is remarkable in a challenging and somehow thankless role (after a brief appearance, she disappears from the movie for the whole first half).Although I have not read the novel by Mircea Eliade, I suspect two things: first, that it could be interesting, and make more sense than the movie; second, that the adaptation suffers from what is called "the slideshow effect": all the best bits from the book glued together with little regards for pacing (which here is totally off) and clarity. If you like movies which answer neatly all questions, then avoid this one, or you'll want to murder someone after you leave the theater. If you enjoy incomprehensible movies with a weird fantasy twist and a bittersweet atmosphere, you might like Youth Without Youth. Only, if you understand what it meant, please give me a call.
b.s. ending
posted on 06 Jul 2009don't you hate those movies where at the end it turns out that none of it really happened? and then you ask it, well what did i just spend 2 hours watching you for if it was just some "dream within a dream within a dream, etc."? I thoroughly enjoyed this movie until the last 5 minutes, when i found myself silently screaming "no, no, no... this can't be the lame ass cop-out ending to such a creative flick." thats really all i have to say, but i guess i am required to write 10 lines here so yeah here's another one. This is the first comment i've ever posted on the IMDb, and that is because I don't believe i have ever enjoyed a movie so much with such a horrible fizzle of a non-ending. All the talk about "you have to appreciate all kinds of metaphysical studies to get the point" is silly -- get off your high horse, there's nothing mind-boggling about the plot, or non-plot. If you want to make a movie about metaphysics or whatever, then you should never pretend for 97 percent of the movie that there is a real time line or plot to the story. there should be a disclaimer at the beginning.
philosophical art film
posted on 28 Jun 2009This is definitely not everyone's cup of tea and has a pretty good chance of becoming a cult film. It explores major philosophic subjects from a dialectic angle, which might confuse pedestrians. In a nutshell: an elderly professor is challenged by his inability to complete his life's work. He is struck by lightning and gets the opportunity to observe life from a meta-human POV. He realizes that intellect, love , morals and reality in general are always ambiguous. IMO one must have some intellectual baggage, life experience and artistic curiosity in order to appreciate the profoundness of this film. Artistically, the film is very stylized and has a rather cold feel to it, something that might deter and alienate the viewer from actually empathizing with any of the characters. However, it's quite clever and stays with you after watching it. I would say that it felt to me a bit like a Darren Aronofsky film combined with Greenaway's Tulse Luper.
Thank god for Tim Roth
posted on 16 Jun 2009An atypical film for him, but handled beautifully, without him I don't think I would have watched more than 10 min of this film.I'm used to his energetic performances so this was a bit hard to watch but he did a good job and really saved this awful film. I blame Coppola for all the inconsistencies that really ruined this film, right there next to the bad acting from so many I'm not even gonna bother to name, suffice to say this movie had a good idea behind it, good not brilliant, if you think this is in any way a hard to digest philosophical film then you haven't seen too many, watch any Bergman film and see if you feel the same.Good bits: A fairly interesting script, with decent directing and Tim Roth in the lead.Bad bits : Incoherence in the continuity of the story with no emphasis on some of the more important parts,seems Coppola can't decide between a cheesy love story and the pursuit of ultimate knowledge(big choice there)so he thinks he can do both at the same time, big parts in the script seem just thrown in without any reason, some really bad acting, i don't get why people in Romania speak English but write in Romanian.I suggest you watch this if you're a Tim Roth fan and want to see him in a different kind of role, otherwise no.
Guts of trying
posted on 08 Jun 2009I have just seen this in cinema. Francis Ford Coppola adapted a novella by Romanian theologian and writer Mircea Eliade: "Tânereţe fără bătreneţe şi viaţa fără de moarte" which I would translate as "Youth without ageing and life without death" but has been published under the name the film has now.The film's plot in short: A romanian Orientalism-professor has lost the love of his life when he was still young and lives as an old man now in fear that he wouldn't be able to finish his one great book about the origins of language and the birth of consciousness (a feeling we all know oh too well, don't we? ;-) ). By accident he acquires (eternal?) youth again and is endowed with supernatural intellectual powers which might help him finish his work when he gets access not only to his lost love again but also to the foundations of men's language.I haven't read the novel as I almost ignored Eliade's work for years now so I cannot comment on issues of adaptation. This certainly has become a complex and phantastic (in a genre sense) movie which leaves the viewer with many open questions and does not try to really solve the logical problems composed by the plot which does justice to Eliade's intentions I would guess and to the topic for sure. As much as I like the topos and seeing something intelligent (compare the hilarious "Man from Earth") on screen dealing with philosophical issues, I cannot _really_ say that this was well executed, though. It certainly has been a daring enterprise and did not totally fail. Performance by Tim Roth is brilliant, a very good choice, too. Lara is doing well although I can't stand her German accent when talking English. Camera is OK, imagery is OK.On a sidenote: it is amazing how Eliade's vanity shone through the writing into this film - even without having read the novel myself.
Review: Youth Without Youth
posted on 08 Jun 2009In "Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse", a brilliant documentary about making of "Apocalypse Now", Francis Ford Coppola said he was on a learning process while making that film, as he delved into mysteriousness of jungle. In the end, his on-screen works is like a reflection to his own experience. Many years later (20 years to be exact) and 10 years absent from his latest directorial effort (1997's "The Rain Maker"), Coppola tried to do exact same thing like he did in the past."Youth Without Youth" is interesting, yet undeniably confusing tale of Dominic Matei (Tim Roth) who is a professor of language and philosophy in early 19th century. His goal is trying to accomplish a research that he claims to be the key of all human's language. But as it turns out, it might be impossible to finish it after all. This research changed his behavior from fascination into obsession. As he lose everything he loves including his fiancé, Veronica (Alexandra Maria Lara), he has nothing left to live on. Many years later, in a blink of World War II, 77-years-old Dominic is on the way to end his miserable life. But then, lightening suddenly stuck at him before he has a chance to do so. The lightening didn't kill him, instead it miraculously rejuvenates his life. Now, he looks like in mid-30's and gave him a supernatural abilities like reading book without open it, mind bending psychic or even developing his own Dr. Jerkyll and Mr. Hyde-like ultra-ego.After World War II's over, Dominic is traveling throughout the world. He began to look into his research again since now he has a plenty of times to do. But then, he accidentally met his fiancé's dead ringer named Laura (also played by Alexandra Maria Lara). As it turned out, she also happened to be stuck by lightening and develops another supernatural ability which she can speak ancient languages while she slept. Dominic knows right away that it might be an only chance for him to accomplish his unfinished project. But it came with one sacrifice condition, if he decides to stay with her, it might be the way to ending her life.There's an only one different thing between getting lost in the jungle of Philippines and getting lost in freezing cold city of Romania. And that is "Youth Without Youth" lose its audience's commitment as we keep accompany him to his personal enlightenment (in another words, he wasn't wholeheartedly let us ride along in this time around). With his beyond comprehensible dialogs about metaphysical theory and non-linear stories that keep tangled up like a maze, Youth Without Youth seem to be a failure. No, it's magnificent failure from the master of modern cinema living today.The cast is another story here, since they served their duty pretty well especially Tim Roth (again, one of the most unused actor living today) who would do all it take to make us believe in the protagonist. And he seemed to really understand what Francis Ford Coppola is trying to achieve. The movie also accompanied by beautiful score (if shamelessly cloying) by Osvaldo Golijov and surprisingly neat cinematography by Mihai Malaimare Jr."Youth Without Youth" require a multiple viewing, in order to understand some of its massages. Truth be told, I didn't really get it. Coppola once said in the interview that this story is very personal to him. Well, maybe this film wasn't exactly making for us. It's sure gonna make a lot of people frustrated. For me, I'm just glad that he's back to work again.
A confused hodgepodge of esoteric and philosophical ideas
posted on 13 May 2009I'll start with the good part: cinematography. The use of a fixed camera in most scenes adds a certain amount of rarefied stillness.I'll end with the following: It's unfortunate that in order to appear "clever," or "prodigious" or perhaps even to give an air of being a "genius," some movie projects resort to a confused mishmash of a storyline that lacks any discernible plot. I'm not even talking about having a cohesive plot, just a clarity of narrative that informs the viewer that the director actually knows what he's dealing with.What Youth Without Youth simply tells us is that Coppola does not understand the subject he's dealing with (esoteric meanings of time and reality) nor is he capable of representing it in film. He simply tossed it all together at once in the hope of coming out with something beautiful. He didn't.I'd take The Fountain any day over this rubbish.
Muddleheaded, self-indulgent ... but lovely to look at
posted on 07 May 2009I was buzzed about seeing this film. Everyone knows it's been too long since Coppola's previous film. Advance reviews were intriguing. And Tim Roth is such a fine actor. But what happened? The short answer is "too much!" The long answer is "not enough ... editing." Other reviewers here have commented more pointedly and eloquently about this film's shortcomings. Suffice it to say, this film, despite the best of Coppola's intentions to the contrary notwithstanding, is just plain muddleheaded. Oh, and too long by half. Not to be cruel, but stick to the wine biz, Mr. Coppola. You're doing quite well managing the complexities of the grape and terroir. In vino veritas!
Exceptional, But not for everybody
posted on 05 May 2009First of all, i want to express my disgust for people who bash the movie because they didn't enjoy it, or didn't "get it". I accept other people's opinions, it is a free world (most of it anyway), but please stick to just stating your opinion, don't try to change how other people feel about it.So, in my opinion, first and foremost, if you expect a movie that has drama or action that keeps you glued to your seat, this isn't for you. The plot of the movie has nothing to do with sci-fi, war time action or drama. It is a deeply philosophical movie that appeals to the reality matrix of people, trying to immerse you into some kind of a trance, where you begin to think like the author of the book, and the main character. If you are open minded enough, or a more than average philosophical person, this movie will be quite an experience for you. I know that for me, it was.I liked it a lot mainly because of the dream/monologue scenes, because they somehow capture the essence of human thought. The doubt, the inner contradictions, the good and the bad sides of the same person. Things that most or all of us do, maybe not in a such out-of-body experience, but it does happen.I don't want to give to much away, because half of the movie's effect on you has to do with the fact that it catches you off-guard.
Crazy On You
posted on 19 Apr 2009YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH is without question one of the most visually stunning films of the last several years. The movie is a gorgeous concoction of of light, shadow, and color-each and every frame is a treat for the eyes. Yet, there is one huge stumbling block-'The Plot'. The film is inspired by the written works of Romanian philosopher/novelist, Mircea Eliade, who specialised in the history of religious thought. YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH attempts to ascertain the absolute beginning of human consciousness and the birth of myth. However, Francis Ford Coppola(the director)employs a literary construct which wouldn't work in a Green Lantern or Spiderman comic book. Tim Roth portrays Dominic, a professor who's area of expertise is the origin language. In the winter of 1938, at the age of seventy, he is struck by lightning, and, instead of dying, becomes a healthy man in his late thirties. He also can understand books by looking at them, comprehend ancient and forgotten languages, and is able to use his mind to force others to bend to his will. And, if that isn't enough, he develops an omniscient alter-ego. Already, it is almost too ridiculous, yet he meets a beautiful woman who has also been struck by lightning, and she demonstrates miraculous powers as well. Even though the plot borders on the fantastic, I still found YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH a remarkable film. I guess you could say it is THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTONS for Mensa types with a sense of the absurd.
A second Coppola
posted on 07 Apr 2009I really loved this movie. It's a hard one to cope with, knowing the work of the great Coppola, but if you look carefully you'll find such depth in the story it will blow you away. I love the twist in the end, it makes you re-think the last part of the movie, what is true and what is false. Not the safest bet for most of the audiences but if you're interested in the origin of language, dreams and the use of the human intelligence, you'll love it. A mixture of Lynch and Wenders with the ultra-professional touch of Coppola: could you ask for more? If you're a Coppola fan forget the name of the director and prepare for a great film experience. 8 out of 10.
I have so many questions
posted on 02 Mar 2009Yes this was an artsy foreign film, and no I didn't like it. It took me three tries to watch it because I kept falling asleep. I wanted to give the movie a legitimate try before I said anything negative. I understood the premise of the movie, but the way it went it lost me. The appearance of certain characters, untranslated languages, and other things just lost me. I didn't even understand the alter ego or second Dominic (whichever it was). Was it another person or was it an image from his head? His girlfriend siting the other Dominic leads me to believe that it was another person all together. And speaking of his girlfriend: what was wrong with her? How did his presence cause her to age prematurely? Then, it seems he never finished his life work when the movie concluded, or did I miss something again? Maybe I'm too use to simpler films where everything is explained to me, but this movie couldn't hold my attention and it left me with too many questions.
If only it had a horse head...
posted on 16 Feb 2009This film, to me, is a badly written, overly pretentious work, trying much too hard (and failing) to capture the essence of existential angst. Among its faults are its overemphasis on upside down filming, disjointed scenes meant to "unsettle" the viewer, carelessly thrown in fake psychobabble meant to impress the viewer, and bad special effects (electrocution). Most of all, the introduction of multiple regressions into past lives/primitive languages spoken in orgasmic or hysterical states was not profound, but laughable, and seemed to come out of nowhere in the plot. The premature aging looked like it came out of a bad Hallmark movie Finally, the ending was abysmally done, and felt somewhat like a combination of The Shining (you know the scene) and Phantom of the Opera. I'm giving this a "2" instead of a "1" because it was so compellingly bad that I made myself watch until the end.
Romance without Love: Coppola's Obsessive Fixations
posted on 12 Feb 2009I've seen movies that purport to reveal great truths. Those movies fall flat because the revelations they make are not very revealing. This movie doesn't reveal truths of that sort but nonetheless shows the mindset and tribulations of people who (at least claim to) know great things.There are HINTS of paranoia, loves lost, sacrifices made; strange paradoxes (body doubles, visual incongruities, time warps); and great "evils" (Hitler, mad scientists, Nuclear bombs). But none of these are resolved to my satisfaction.So, the movie leaves one with this "final" thought: Though there are suggestions that somehow love (or some other sort of gender confusion / identity crisis) might resolve "everything"; nonetheless, life is morbid. We psychotically BELIEVE in love, genius, greatness, and eternal youth as we EXPERIENCE bloody-red roses, Hitler, hallucinations, and death.Romantic? Maybe not. But a lesson in really GOOD movie making.
Movie Without Movie
posted on 06 Feb 2009So, 'Youth Without Youth' is Coppola, Sr's return to film-making after a glaring ten-year absence, following a series of unremarkable movies in the late '90s. 'Youth Without Youth' is certainly remarkable, but the appropriate remark is closer to "Yikes!" than "Wow!" 'Youth Without Youth' reveals an artist who has lost touch with a lot of things, including narrative grasp, sense, reason, and reality. I guess that's what happens when you're hermetically sealed inside your own vineyard with way too much money, and a daughter whose creative vision has eclipsed your own, erasing the exclusivity of the family name.'Youth Without Youth' begins with great promise, quickly becomes very curious, slowly emerges as silly, and finally winds up a titanic, lumbering, tedious, incomprehensible bore. The first half hour introduces sounds and images that are striking, haunting, and fresh, suggesting a new career phase for the elder Cope. They verge on outright experimentalism. The last hour is just images and stuff sort of happening on a screen. Comparable to nothing else in Coppola's career except, by some stretch, 'Bram Stoker's Dracula' (or, Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula), this movie becomes a wannabe philosophical discourse with a hefty cloak of gravity, with Tim Roth engaging in a some very long-winded dialogues with his alter ago amidst themes incorporating the Third Reich, immortality, and Sanskrit. The elder Cope wants Big Big Big Themes addressed, and the wants to effect sweeping erosion of the Sands of Time, and perhaps wants to exorcise some of his Late Life Crises... and of course, being the Titan he once was, having retained the visionary/delusional drive that made Apocalypse Now possible, he doesn't seem to feel it necessary to invite anyone else inside what he's constructed. This is a house built entirely for himself. Admirable, perhaps, but it shouldn't surprise Cope or anyone else that this movie has been projected onto screens facing empty chairs.The movie's about 15% pure poetry, and 85% pure B.S. The writing is laughable, if you're in the right mood, and stylistically, it's as though the elder Cope himself has regressed in age to become a film student again, inventing cinematic tricks that service nothing, really. I think the man's gone batty.
She knows things that we don't understand yet.
posted on 13 Aug 2009Some familiar faces in this very strange film, written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola, that explores areas like reincarnation and guardian angels. Bruno Ganz (The Reader, Bread & Tulips) and Alexandra Maria Lara (The Reader, The Tunnel) are prominent. Matt Damon appears briefly as a Life reporter, and Anamaria Marinca ( 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days) as a receptionist.The film takes place against the backdrop of WWII, and the Nazis are very interested in Dominic (Tim Roth), who was regressed back to half his age after being hit by lightning. But, soon the war is over and he runs into a double for his old girlfriend, who also appears to be a reincarnation of an Indian mystic. She is able to help him reach his linguistic goal, but the cost is great. A lot of sci-fi is entwined in the story, as well as philosophy and religion. It doesn't seem to make sense at times, but it is interesting enough to hold your attention, and, of course, the cinematography was brilliant.