It’s these sorts of moments that lift Senso above run of the mill melodrama, albeit, like Gone With The Wind, not far enough into real drama. If only Visconti had been able to graft a small bit of his working class affinities by showing a bit more of the struggles of the Italian Resistance, Senso may have hurdled that bar. Sans that, Senso lives up to its titular billing, as but a sensual comfort. And all can use a bit of that from time to time.?
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
Article comments
1 - Costello
Too much synopsis here. A good review doesn't reveal how story ends. I'll be sure to skip your work if I haven't see the movie
2 - Dan Schneider
Good criticism deals with all aspects of the art. If you have not learnt that how that the how an end is gotten to is more important than that end, that's no one's fault but yours.
3 - Costello
If the how is more important then there's no reason to reveal the end and spoil it for readers. If you haven't learned that, you shouldn't be writing reviews
4 - Dan Schneider
Costello: with that sort of logic it's no wonder you needed Abbott (and Elvis).
The end is no matter, and in the context of the review says alot of the motives and methods of Visconti. It's simply not a film dependent upon plot, like Hollywood thrillers.
But, don't stress, there's always a brain-dead Hollywood thriller about to open.
5 - KJ
The movie is, like, decades old. I'm pretty sure the embargo on spoilers ends at some point, and I'm pretty sure it's within that time. If a review of Citizen Kane told you that the journalists gave up the shirt and that Rosebud was the sled, would you give the same comment, or would you arbitrarily make the distinction that because Kane is famous and well-known, it gets special treatment? You simply cannot discuss the art of a movie without considering the ending; this is not a newspaper with limited space nor a Hollywood review show. It's an in-depth piece of criticism. If he doesn't say what the ending is, how is he supposed to dissect it and show whether or not it "works"? And why are you reading a piece of criticism for a movie you've not seen if you're worried about spoilers, anyway?
6 - El Bicho
You absolutely can discuss what works and what doesn't about a film without revealing how the story concludes. And it's rather simple to talk about Kane and not identify what Rosebud is.
Did you read this review, KJ? There's three straight paragraphs revealing the plot sans any in-depth criticism of the events.
Many people look at reviews to determine whether they should buy an item. Are you not aware that Criterion is trying to sell this DVD? So, yes, spoilers should be avoided.
7 - Dan Schneider
El: The article has plenty of criticism. Because the plot is spoken of, including the end, does NOT take a thing away from the film. If you are so one dimensional that you cannot get something from a book or film w/o knowing something of its ending, that's your lack.
And KJ made a good point. If you are reading a review of a work of art you should expect writing of the totality of the art. Only in dumbed down America do they worry of spoilers.
Childish, indeed. Plus, no critic should act as a de facto shill for a movie, which is what spoiler warnings do
8 - El Bicho
It does take away from the experience of the person who hasn't seen the film. That's rather obvious.
No one said anything about not being able to take away from the film without knowing something of the end. If only you had limited the plot revelations to just something, there wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, you revealed all of it. If you are so one-dimensional as a writer that you must reveal the ending to talk about it, that's your lack.
According to Random House Dictionary, a shill is "a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty." TI am sure you'll deny it, but that's exactly what you are doing. You've written a review in exchange for early access to a free DVD.
Only in dumbed-down America do they not realize they are members of dumbed-down America.
9 - Dan Schneider
El: No it does not take away from the experience. It refines the experience, and people reading a DVD review are, by and large, NOT going to be seeing a film for the first time. And if they need to be handheld through a review they can always watch Dr. Phil to get them thru the trauma.
To NOT reveal an ending is to be one dimensional, for it assumes you are writing down to a child. Of course, having seen a number of your reviews, which lack any analysis, this is so.
You write what are referred to as 'magalog' reviews: catalog entries masquing as criticism. You clearly intend only to sell merchandise; a flaw film criticv Ray Carney has said infests American criticism of all arts, and he is correct. I get 1000s of magalog reviews submitted to my own website a year, and send them to the trash.
I'm glad to see you can Google definitions but, given my tepid review of the DVD, I doubt anyone would say I was hawking anything; unlike someone who writes reviews w/o any analytical content and whose comments consist of 'this is good,' 'I liked this,' and 'Wow!'
My reviews, if you look at them, have been consistently critical of a number of Criterion flaws, yet they send me review copies anyway. That's the antithesis of shilling. It's called integrity.
Go Google that!
PS- loved your last line. The irony obviously went by you, as well.