"Van Gogh. With love, Vincent (2017)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

... when I think about the many people whose eyes are watching me, I foresee that if I did not come, they will understand what it is, and they will not overwhelm me with petty recriminations, but being a temptation and experienced in all that is good, fair and square, his whole appearance will say: "We helped you, and have been a beacon to you; we did everything we could for you. In total if you toiled best of their ability? Where are the fruits of our labor and the reward for it? »©
That's animated film (below is an explanation of why not a cartoon)" Love, Vincent, "I want to ask the same questions.
And it will not quite true, as all the same diligence in "Vincent" feel - just look at the titles to see how sensitive, how carefully all the countless artists have approached the project to the business. Every effort is felt in the maelstrom of the night sky, each cow, mortally sad irises in the hands of one of the characters ... in every thread of any of the characters. Adaptation of paintings by Van Gogh to the screen there was a convincing - and what really hide - delicious: maybe they would not look so in reality, but the majority of those who have seen these stunning works, I would like them to look like that. Sometimes there are problems inscribing moving people into the background when noticeable where rotoskopirovannaya animation, and where just animation, but these problems are not critical and are unlikely to separate remarks. If it was a short film showing the world through the eyes of Van Gogh, the price would not have been this film ...
But "Love, Vincent" is not a short film and a triumph of animation artists. This feature-length film, with film and sound, to his misfortune, "a sharp" delightful vinsentovskaya visuality which hides monstrously vulgar and pretentious melodramatic detective, which turned the real life of the real creator. Even certainly strong isolation picture not rehabilitating the rest (and it should be noted that the end - only a strong and dramatic moment for all of a half hour, so that even if it had been resolved at the level of burning in the fireplace sledge with «Rosebud» inscription, it would have its not saved).
There is nothing wrong with the idea of ​​investigating the causes of the death of Van Gogh. Frankly, it's a great idea, because this event has caused a bunch of opinions, innuendo and outright hoaxes; mix ultrasensitive paradoxical vision of Van Gogh's world with a mysterious mystical journey into his past - this is, in fact, it sounds like a potentially great movie
But what a pity that all his potentiality is divided about the stilted pretentious dialogues in which the characters. just recite exposure, motivation, do everything in the world, with using the most lousy existing clichés about the general mood of the plot of the movie about the misunderstood genius and evil in society who do not understand any of his kindness or e of genius. Here even the Conservatoire Christian aunt is - that would be probably interesting character, whose conflict with Van Gogh would have demonstrated that genius can really make life difficult for others, and eccentric views - to frighten or even offend people with deep Christian notions of good and work ... but no, do not worry, script deleted from this potency everything that could be fun and creative. Get an obvious evil scarecrow, all replicas which can be replaced with two sentences: "I believe in God" and "Oo-oo-oo, all artists are the same, there is no going to work." And the same goes for the other characters, with the exception of Dr. Gachet - probably why isolation with his participation seems really emotional and dramatic, and what was supposed to be the rest of the film. Stilted, flat, uninteresting, do not have any identity other than specified in the standard Microsoft Lazy Writer purposes; that we expect from a film based on the life of Van Gogh?
I continue to insist on the fact that it's just a painted film, not a cartoon, despite all the signs of it, on the grounds that "Vincent" almost devoid of animation film language . With the exception of some assembly gluing (eg, surreal care celestial maelstrom), and one or two scenes of "Vincent" uses the techniques of the film of the game - a traditional span camera across the street scene, built on specific lighting, installation of "talking heads", black-and-white flashbacks, no binder with the aesthetics of the Van Gogh (okay they were sent out to his engravings, right there, why do black and white scenes in the film, based on the works of colored artist of the twentieth century?!) ... it's a beautiful scene, but it is unclear why Mr. was to resort to the animation if you do not use animation tools, only citations (which could be replicated in the feature film) but written by oil paints backgrounds?
sad to admit that the long-awaited premiere of the film with a unique, fascinating technology, looking incredible in each of its static shots ended up Globe biopic about the misunderstood genius, koi removed by about five per year - not without achievements, but so ineptly squandered potential, it is better to have these achievements and was not at all.

How to cite this essay: