People are voting emotionally.

Highly Overrated But Still Good

A Disappointing Continuation

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Earlier I watched many movies of JP Greenaway, some films of Jean-Luc Godard and not watched Edgar Pêra movies at all. I was watching a 3x3D movie on Kyiv Molodist festival - I was interested to see how the maitres can work with new 3D technologies. I am proposing to evaluate each parts of movie separately: JP Greenaway, shot a postcard with vignette, rating 6 for past achievements, we have seen nothing new - for example "A TV Dante" (1989)film - "A dazzling and inventive piece of video-image making...an eye-stitching use of television" according to The Guardian. Edgar Pêra, shot a student skit, rating 4, funny, dizzy from the 3D effects. Jean-Luc Godard, shot nothing, rating -1(negative), used to be a great master, the expectations was to high. Average rating 3=(6+4-1)/3.

Peter Greenaway gets a new dimension for his already multi layered visual style which is very appropriate that you will want Tulsa Luper Cases in 3d version. This time though only wandering around a historical place with many information floating free of time, that you would not get this powerful experience with a real visit to there in real 3D world.Edgar Pêra sees this new 3D hype as the first days of cinema where people were afraid of the train coming on them, and accepts that people as true believers of cinema.Godard talks about when everything gets 1 dimensional, collapsed in a Hiroshima Mon Amour style, and underlines that you can never fully translate real life to cinema.