Review of Léolo (1992) by Emilie : — 05 Jun 2006

STANDARDIZED MOVIE EVALUATION.

(comments may contain spoilers).

I. CONTENT (out of 3 stars plus bonus, composite of sub-criteria bellow): ---> 3.25<---.

I. PHILOSOPHICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL DEPTH (out of 2 stars, where very shallow = 0; shallow = 0.25 or 0.5; somewhat deep = 0.75 or 1.0; deep = 1.25 or 1.5; very deep = 1.75 or 2.0).

---> 1.75 <---.

The film strikes me as existentialist to its core. The boy observes and is surrounded by an insane world. His father is an ignorant, bowl-obsessed ape, his sisters are severe mental retards, his grandfather is a catatonic maniac, his brother is a low-IQ big muscle wimp and his mother is a primordial oversized and overprotective cave-woman. Only he seems to possess a spark in his eyes and intellectual curiosity. He would've made a good naturalist had he gone to college, instead he is a ghetto "naturalist". At the end though boy's grandpas deleterious genetic endowment (which might had resulted from inbreeding) coupled I guess with a desperate environment, brings him in to a psychiatric state of no return. Then is this a strong argument for not only improving quality of life in poor neighborhoods, but also quality of genotype, perhaps through eugenic methods like selective in-vitro-fertilization and human cloning ?

Ii. SCREENPLAY ORIGINALITY (out of 1 star, where very banal = 0; banal = 0.25; somewhat original = 0.5; original = 0.75; very original = 1.0):

--->1.0<---.

The script is highly original ? one of the most original scripts ever.

+ BONUS FOR CONTAINING CONTROVERSIAL & UNPOPULAR TOPICS (up to 0.5 star, where controversial topics = 0.25; unpopular and taboo topics = 0.5).

--->0.5<---.

From enemas to patricide to bestiality, this movie isn't afraid to explore taboos.

II. PRODUCTION (out of 2 stars plus bonus, composite of sub-criteria bellow):

---> 1.75 <---.

Iii. ACTING (out of 1 star, where very ineffective = 0; ineffective = 0.25; somewhat effective = 0.5; effective = 0.75; very effective = 1.0):

---> 0.75 <---.

Given that some of the key actors weren't professional, the acting is amazingly effective.

Iv. PRESENTATION (out of 1 star, where very ineffective = 0; ineffective = 0.25; somewhat effective = 0.5; effective = 0.75; very effective = 1.0):

---> 1.0 <---.

The visuals and soundtrack are one of the best in cinema. The director, who tragically died in the plain crash, is a genius.

+ BONUS FOR PRODUCING ON LOW BUDGET (up to 0.5 stars, where up to one million dollars budget = 0.25; up to half a million dollars budget = 0.5).

TOTAL STAR RATING:

---> 5.0 <---.

GRADE & RECOMMENDATION (above 5.0 = A+," Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 5.0 & 4.75 = A," Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 4.5 = A-, " Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend"; 4.25 = B+, "Good Movie, Recommend"; 4.0 & 3.75 = B, "Good Movie, Recommend"; 3.5 = B - "Good Movie, Recommend"; 3.25 = = C+, "Fair Movie" ; 3.0 & 2.75 = C, "Fair Movie"; 2.5 = C-, "Fair Movie"; 2.25 = D+, "Poor Movie"; 2.0 & 1.75 = D, "Poor Movie"; 1.5 = D-, "Poor Movie"; bellow 1.5 = F, "Very Poor Movie") :

---> A, " Very Good Movie, Highly Recommend" <---.

IF YOU LIKE THIS MOVIE I ALSO RECOMMEND: ?God City? (based on its ?childhood ghetto? theme) and ?Mulholland Drive? and ?Magnolia? (based on its non-sequential dream-like structure).

BALANCED MPAA RATING (not biased in favor of violence and against sexuality, where G = no violence, no sexuality; PG = OK slight violence, OK slight sexuality; PG-13 = OK moderate violence, OK moderate sexuality; R = OK explicit violence, OK explicit sexuality; NC-17 = OK extreme violence, OK extreme sexuality).

--->PG-13 for moderate sex and violence<---.