Raetsonwe Redundant and unnecessary.

Nonureva Really Surprised!

Steineded How sad is this?

Dotbankey A lot of fun.

sandgrainday I'm quite upset that this film is rated so low and so few people are interested in the film. Youth Without Youth is a masterpiece. The story is thought-provoking, even though it doesn't really provide answers to the philosophical questions it raises.I guess that's why many people don't like this film—everything is so vague. It doesn't explain the scientific reasons behind those many weird things in it, because it's not Marvel Comics. It doesn't have a complete, detailed, linear story line, because it's not a telenovela. It's all about philosophy and religion. (The original writer Mircea Eliade was a philosopher and historian of religion.) Some people must have this deep fear that their life is meaningless—I know I do have this fear—your very existence is meaningless, you have lived in vain. Then what gives meaning to life? Dominic Matei's search for the origin of human language is more than an academic research, is a search for deeper understanding of humanity itself. From a religious point of view, because "in the beginning was the Word" and language was given to human (not created by human), it's also a search for metaphysical knowledge.Almost inevitably, Dominic fails; worse, he can never be with the love of his life. To some extent, his attempts and failures represent any person's attempts and failures.It's a good film that leads to some musings about life.

Svetlana Silina If I didn't realize it's the same very Coppola, the creator of Dracula(1992), I wouldn't even consider watching any more of his movies after seeing this one. All the way from the second 0 to full 2 hours of the movie it felt like the legend of the big screen got stuck in 1970th and still speaks the language of unreasonably long scenes, heavy sounds and arrays of the "meaningful" blurry images interrupting the narrative to let us know of the character's deep complex feelings. Not that I ever mind the old movies aesthetics or complex feelings. But if a director uses ancient techniques and clichés I'd expect those artistic tropes to be at least a little more intricate than a ticking clock standing for… time. How's that for obvious? Besides the master touch of evident, the movie is loaded with no-bullshit past-life rhetoric with seeking for ultimate answers. Not that I mind a good eternal love story or totally scientific reincarnation. But if a director insists on big-time over-discussed perpetuating stuff, I'd expect it to give me at least a new angle, something that opens my eyes and changes my point. Well, at least something I could discuss at some advanced Soul Transmigration party, not that I go to. Some people tend to put up with any flaw wherever a plot looks mad enough to be called "deep" and cinematography is amply odd to be considered art, read - "not for everyone". Speaking of not for everyone, perhaps the most embarrassing in the movie was long monologues in Gibberish. Jokes aside, it is claimed to be a new artificial language. For the sake of art, perhaps I could put up with half film of Gibberish. If only the whole thing finally communicated at least one of the big ideas that it tried to talk about. If only the main character, a professor who lives to find the origin of languages, the beginning of times and can see Shiva by holding his hand above his sleeping girlfriend, didn't end up - spoiler! - "knowing very well that I'm dreaming" and contemplating on "mutation of human species" as the true meaning of nuclear catastrophe. How's that for deep?

cinnamon de mars i didn't see it all, and it was on a TV screen too, and it was late at night, and i was a little tired after another long days work, but for the first time in years i was transfixed and spellbound by cinema. as it should be. transfixed and spellbound. i forgot how tired i was, i forgot everything, i was so moved by it. first and foremost i saw a love film. and i would suggest i saw the director, as well, through this. a message from him and others about what is important in life, in the final analysis. if you ever read this, those involved in making this enthralling production, there is an old literary novel that, in my humble opinion, you have the sensitivity to portray...

oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx A note first on style, to me, Youth Without Youth, is one of the most gorgeous modern films, it's one of the few films where the production team are exerting control to the extent when they can be described as using a palette. In this case the colours orange and blue predominate beautifully. There has been some suggestion in modern criticism, particularly in Sight & Sound, that "orange & teal" is a ugly fad that no-one will miss, I think Youth Without Youth is definitely deserving of special treatment. Certainly the blue here is less dingy than elsewhere in the "orange & teal" canon. The film is about a once brilliantly gifted scholar, Dominik Mattei (played by Tim Roth), who appears to have wasted his life, and is now an old man, when suddenly he gets a second chance and returns to youth. The film is interesting, how did he waste his life? Is it because he didn't complete his life's work, a great book which was to contain a grand unifying theory on consciousness and the origins of language, or because he didn't pay enough attention to his beloved Laura?There are two main points of interest in the film for me, one relates to the allure of the situation Mattei is in and the dilemma it presents, and the other to the structure. As a teenager I read Daniel Keyes' 1959 novella Flowers For Algernon, which, in two different forms, has the rare prestige of having won both of science fiction's key writing awards, the Hugo and the Nebula. It's about an experiment performed on Charlie, a man with a very low IQ, who as a result of the experiment, progressively becomes the most intelligent man alive. At one point he criticises the scientist who performs the experiment, mentioning that the best rebuttal of his theories yet written has come from India. The scientist says he has not ever heard of the document which he discovers was written in Hindustani, and which he was therefore not in the position to read anyway. Charlie records, "I asked Dr. Strauss how Nemur could refute Rahajamati's attack on his method and results if Nemur couldn't even read them in the first place. That strange look on Dr. Strauss' face can mean only one of two things. Either he doesn't want to tell Nemur what they're saying in India, or else - and this worries me - Dr. Strauss doesn't know either."One key point of Flowers For Algernon, and also this film, is the allure of supernatural intelligence: what would our thoughts be if we had IQs in the thousands and could read books at a glance? The key tone of the Flowers is sadness, as we find that Charlie's new found faculties are temporary in nature and subside gradually. This tone dovetails with the film as well, because another of the key features of both artworks is the conflict between intellect and emotion. Is it more important to love, or to embrace aloof intellectual pursuits? My slanter tells you all you need to know about my position! In any case it's a very sad story, and I believe that is the heart of Youth Without Youth as well, it's an elegy.The parts of the film where senile Mattei is shown are very poignant and remind me of Mr Blank from Paul Auster's book Travels in the Scriptorium. Both men are vaguely aware of their past mistakes, and also both men are utterly alienated. A kind of tender nastiness pervades these bits if that isn't too oxymoronic. Francis Ford Coppola has mentioned his identification with Mattei, particularly regarding his failure to complete his sci-fi project Megalopolis.My other point concerns the structure. There's a passage towards the end where the Mattei describes an oriental tale of a dream where a prince dreams that he is a butterfly which dreams it is a prince, who dreams he was a butterfly (et cetera). It's not clear in this film just which parts are dreamt, and which not, or whether that matters. It's more that the overall aesthetic conception of Mattei's story of the prince and the butterfly is what matters. In this sense it is similar to the Saragossa Manuscript or the 1001 Arabian Nights, where it is, to a large extent, the structure itself that intoxicates.There is also the issue of familiar to readers of Watchmen, of whether demi-god powers should be used for good or evil (whether indeed it is right to interfere in human destiny at all), or whether they should be directed internally towards solipsism. This makes Roth is well cast, he is a typecast baddie, and this aura of badness here allows this ambiguity to take root. The film also sounds wonderful, and this is mainly due to the ethereal tone of the cymbalom. If you liked Tim Roth in this film I suggest you watch another movie in which he stars, The Legend of 1900 directed by Giuseppe Tornatore, which is also wonderful in a similar enigmatic way.And this review is dedicated to Claire, who is the first rose.