Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

In a truly outstanding film work, both the director's design and the actor's performance should be part of the film, rather than excessively showing off the individual. The film succeeded in doing this. Enclosure and communication constitute the main contradiction and conflict of the movie plot. Every loss of the protagonist occurs in a sudden, forcing her to slowly begin to try to understand the world that was once too simplistic, and at this level, the theme of the movie it is quite traditional. The boundaries between nature and drama are gradually blurred as the characters change, and this low-key design ultimately achieves the perfect blend of emotions and themes.

Clouds of Sils Maria is about a renowned actress, Maria Enders (Juliette Binoche), who must confront her past demons as she reluctantly prepares for the part of an older woman in the same play where she once had the young starlet's role.The problems with Clouds of Sils Maria are many. Here are just a few:1. The writer / director is male. Men should not write female dialogue because they cannot get inside our heads. All three actresses come off highly masculine-sounding. The result? They show no vulnerability and give us nothing female movie-goers can relate to.2. The direction. Kristen Stewart and Juliette Binoche showed no range or femininity. Especially, Ms. Stewart. This is the director's fault. 3. Editing. Scenes abruptly stop. Scenes go nowhere. Example: Are we to guess that because Stewart's character is vomiting on the side of the road, she is pregnant? And why does Stewart's character just abruptly disappear from Maria's employ? Why does Maria's hair go from shoulder-length to butch? For her part in the play? Of course that is the reason. But we shouldn't see her head of hair just go from point A to point B with no explanation. It's little things like that...Clouds of Sils Maria would have been much better if told without a lot of the unnecessary extraneous nuggets the writer included like the boyfriend and his wife's attempted suicide. Both unnecessary characters.Clouds of Sils Maria would have rolled in like the real Clouds of Sils Maria had a female directed. A female director would have been able to help find the actresses' unique voices in their characters' flaws, and strengths, as women.In addition, the story would have been richer if Chloe Grace Moretz's character had physically come into the story much sooner, and the writer had nixed the storyline about the boyfriend and his wife's suicide attempt, focusing more on- and building up to- Binoche and Moretz's confrontation and collaboration. Lastly, if the director was trying to show us at the end of the movie that Maria DID have an epiphany, he definitely didn't allow Ms. Binoche proper time and acting to transform herself to show she had that epiphany. The movie just abruptly ends. Don't waste your time with Clouds of Sils Maria. Just because it was officially selected in three film festivals doesn't mean it is a well-written or a well-directed movie. In this case, it probably means the film festival directors selected the film to draw in audiences using the stars' names and popularity.If this were a perfect world, and people gave a crap, they would insist more female writers/script doctors and more female directors are at the helm of every movie where the subject involves more than one female.

This is about a middle aged actress who spends in the Swiss Alps with her personal assistant while preparing for the upcoming project. During that time, she receives a news that the author of the book which was adapted for the screen 20 years ago where she play a main role and now in its remake, she's doing another part, while a young sensation playing the main part. This is more like the evolution of cinema. The 20 years is too soon for her, while the cinema and its trend advanced rapidly. Precisely to say, the commercial films and young actors taking over the art films and true artists' places respectively.If you at least 30 years old, you would get this film more than others. Because while I was growing up in the 90s, the cinema was so different. I'm not talking about the technology like computer graphics, but the story and how it was narrated for the screen. Now the science- fiction and dystopian themes taking over with the young audience and social media support. I think it was a quite meaningful film, particularly if you adore films like the recent evolution in cinema was so faster than ever.The negatives were, the film was too long, slow pace and too simple drama. The positives were, the actors and their performances, the locations, theme and some of the dialogues. Directed by a French filmmaker, this is an international project with a few guest appearances. Most of the film was set in the Alps. Totally different than what I was anticipating, but I still like, except in a few parts where I got bored for its weak development. So this is for the selected audience, that mean it will be appreciated by a very few and I'm kind of neutral with mostly in its favour.6/10

As soon as I noticed that Juliette Binoche was teaming up with Kristen Stewart for this movie, I was enticed. Two talented actresses with the opportunity to bring a great script to life. It was highly naturalistic at places, which I think played to the strengths of the performers.Juliette's "Maria Enders" was a complex, fascinating character who is faced with an opportunity to take part in a revival of the very piece that made her career...only in a role that is completely opposite. During a personal tragedy, she begins working on her character, even though she already dislikes her. It's a wonderful performance by a seasoned actress and I expected nothing less from her.As for Kristen Stewart, I was blown away by how much she has grown as an actress. As with somebody tied to a popular literary figure, Kristen hadn't quite managed to make it out of the Twilight spotlight...until now. She plays Maria's assistant "Valentine", who gives Maria a youthful outlook on life, as well as her honest opinions. Val should have been two-dimensional, if not for the incredibly authentic portrayal by Kristen Stewart. It wasn't a performance which fought for the spotlight, but it was a fully fleshed out supporting turn which is arguably the best of her career so far. She shows a lot of promise for her future now that Twilight is behind her.Some of the landscaping shots were incredibly beautiful, showing the scenery at its finest.One of my few complaints was with Chloe Grace Moretz in the role of Jo-Anne Ellis. In a part that wasn't particularly highlighted, Moretz didn't do a lot to make it memorable, as with the likes of other performers who do a lot with little material. Her portrayal of the controversial Hollywood starlet Jo-Anne didn't bring a lot to the screen. It merely seemed like she was playing herself at times. She was severely outclassed by Binoche and Stewart.Overall, I enjoyed this movie a lot more than I thought I was going to and I recommend it, even just to see Binoche and Stewart as a proficient on-screen duo.