Okay that doesn't accurately sum up the entire film, but it's what I thought during the opening party scene, which begins with a sub par attempt at copying the famous Goodfellas nightclub tracking shot, complete with cliché 70s anthem - Staying Alive by (Aussie Pop kings) The Bee Gees.
I thought at first - Wow how weird. Producer/Actor Salma Hayak is doing a Studio 54 in Iran.
Anyway as the movie wears on it does improve a little in recreating the original novel. Some negatives - The actors in it are noticeably younger than the middle aged intelligentsia that the novel depicts. Thats not a criticism really - film investors want pretty people, preferably pretty young people, but it's worth noting for those that have read the book. Also it was shot with the Bourne Identity shaky cam style that is no longer in vogue. I get the sense that the camera operator was trying to infuse this film with the type of realism that the screenplay failed to inspire.
This is not Iran in the 1970s. It's a Hollywood attempt at depicting Iran in the 1970s. The book was brilliant, this movie was not. The film presented a general overview of what happened in the novel without getting into the nitty gritty the novel depicted so well; a sort of precursory glance, nothing more. The result is yet another "the book was much better" situation. This film removed the New York chapters which gave political and cultural balance to the book. I thought that was a grave error.
I thought at first - Wow how weird. Producer/Actor Salma Hayak is doing a Studio 54 in Iran.
Anyway as the movie wears on it does improve a little in recreating the original novel. Some negatives - The actors in it are noticeably younger than the middle aged intelligentsia that the novel depicts. Thats not a criticism really - film investors want pretty people, preferably pretty young people, but it's worth noting for those that have read the book. Also it was shot with the Bourne Identity shaky cam style that is no longer in vogue. I get the sense that the camera operator was trying to infuse this film with the type of realism that the screenplay failed to inspire.
This is not Iran in the 1970s. It's a Hollywood attempt at depicting Iran in the 1970s. The book was brilliant, this movie was not. The film presented a general overview of what happened in the novel without getting into the nitty gritty the novel depicted so well; a sort of precursory glance, nothing more. The result is yet another "the book was much better" situation. This film removed the New York chapters which gave political and cultural balance to the book. I thought that was a grave error.