Watching anything by Sorrentino is a treat; but this isn't really that sweet or memorable as most of his other productions.
The series of dozens of small scenes and characters could both bring life to a story and allow for endless possibilities - but here we are rarely left wondering who these people are or what story hides behind the few minutes of their screen time. Mainly, these pieces feel disconnected from the rest, badly acted or inessential for the plot. Most of this might be good material for dozens of shorts, not for this movie.
Indeed lots (not all fortunately) of these scenes/characters/homages don't feel linked together (as in "Nashville", "Amarcord", "Once upon a time... in Hollywood", Kusturica or even "La grande bellezza" that now come to mind) and unintentionally feel like ruining the pace/unity of the film more than anything valuable they bring.
At his best this is a lesser Amarcord. The detached gaze of the historian documenting the life of a woman we found in "Roma", here becomes something that doesn't really achieve anything except over-indulgence towards oneself's feelings. Which aren't as powerful, poetic and well represented as those that Cuaron had for his nanny. It seems like Sorrentino didn't try to show us what he loved and why: he just showed his past expecting us to love it unconditionally.
Photography and scenography are exceptional as the director has got us used to and some scenes are incredibly elegant, powerful or funny. Still it feels like possibly the worst of his works: messy, overlong, complacent, apparently unable to cut what is unessential (which could have deserved a place of its own, just not in this movie).
Finally, Maradona had a more relevant place in "Youth" than here: we don't get why he is so important for the writer, the director, the main character, everyone involved and the city fo Naples. He's as inessential as most of the other stuff.
Pity.
The series of dozens of small scenes and characters could both bring life to a story and allow for endless possibilities - but here we are rarely left wondering who these people are or what story hides behind the few minutes of their screen time. Mainly, these pieces feel disconnected from the rest, badly acted or inessential for the plot. Most of this might be good material for dozens of shorts, not for this movie.
Indeed lots (not all fortunately) of these scenes/characters/homages don't feel linked together (as in "Nashville", "Amarcord", "Once upon a time... in Hollywood", Kusturica or even "La grande bellezza" that now come to mind) and unintentionally feel like ruining the pace/unity of the film more than anything valuable they bring.
At his best this is a lesser Amarcord. The detached gaze of the historian documenting the life of a woman we found in "Roma", here becomes something that doesn't really achieve anything except over-indulgence towards oneself's feelings. Which aren't as powerful, poetic and well represented as those that Cuaron had for his nanny. It seems like Sorrentino didn't try to show us what he loved and why: he just showed his past expecting us to love it unconditionally.
Photography and scenography are exceptional as the director has got us used to and some scenes are incredibly elegant, powerful or funny. Still it feels like possibly the worst of his works: messy, overlong, complacent, apparently unable to cut what is unessential (which could have deserved a place of its own, just not in this movie).
Finally, Maradona had a more relevant place in "Youth" than here: we don't get why he is so important for the writer, the director, the main character, everyone involved and the city fo Naples. He's as inessential as most of the other stuff.
Pity.