A Single Man (2009)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Después de haber varias películas de homosexualidad que me parecían muy malas, veo esta y pienso, bueno al menos alguien sigue haciendo buenas películas de este tipo. Al principio me estaba saturando. Todo era basarse en lo de siempre, sexo, sexo y sexo, pero luego se endereza y nos cuenta una película interesante en la que ya no solo es sexo si no que los personajes van profundizando se va avanzando en la trama y se cuenta una historia.Los actores están estupendos, te llevan todos por donde quieren llevarte. Se huele la sensualidad a flor de piel, sobre todo después de la primera media hora y sin necesidad de hacer esos planos a cámara lenta que tan malos son.La fotografía me ha parecido, estupenda, preciosa, te mete en la historia completamente. Cada momento tiene su fotografía. La parte fría tiene luz fría, la parte cálida tiene luz cálida, cuando la historia crece la fotografía mejora y se hace más cálida. No me gusta, al principio, cuando se empeña en hacer esos planos a cámara lenta de torsos desnudos, de solo ojos, como si ese personaje solo pensase en cuerpos, cuando tenemos un personaje tan culto, tan cuidadoso, tan elegante. El está presentado muy bien.El director que empieza muy mal, luego corrige la película y la lleva por un camino estupendo. La lleva sin prisa pero sin pausa, te lleva a ti con ella. No sabe poner la cámara, se conforma con observar la historia, pero al menos no hace planos feos.Es una película con estilo a la que remontaría la primera media hora para mejorarla. After having several homosexual movies that I thought were very bad, I see this and I think, well at least someone is still making good films of this type. At first I was getting saturated. Everything was based on the usual, sex, sex and sex, but then straightens up and tells us an interesting movie in which it is not only sex, but the characters go deeper and the plot is told and a story is told .The actors are great, they take you all where they want to take you. You can smell the sensuality on the skin, especially after the first half hour and without having to make those slow-motion shots that are so bad.The photography has seemed to me, great, beautiful, it gets you into the story completely. Every moment has its photograph. The cold part has cold light, the warm part has warm light, when the story grows the picture improves and becomes warmer. I do not like it, at first, when he insists on making those slow-motion shots of naked torsos, of only eyes, as if that character only thought of bodies, when we have such a cultured, careful, and elegant character. He is presented very well.The director who starts very badly, then corrects the film and takes it down a great path. He carries it without haste but without pause, it takes you with it. He does not know how to put the camera, he is content to observe the story, but at least he does not make ugly plans.It's a movie with style that would go back the first half hour to improve it.

Skipping the summary. Y'all know what it's about :) I am in two minds about this film.The problem: it's visually so flawless that it's dull.Clean frames, clean spaces, less life and more a homecare catalogue. Even Colin Firth sometimes stands no chance, fusing into the background like a bland aging model. The washed-out 60s palette doubles down on the impression.Make no mistake, it's kind of the point. Ford's work is to be watched through the main character's lens. And life is no longer exciting for George. Most of the time, he seems to be savoring the clean elegance of his surroundings with last-minute appreciation of a leaving guest. Rarely does his pulse speed up and the colors regain intensity.And you'll know it's not just my fancy wording once you see Ford play with the hue.Still, something feels off. I get the idea, but I don't get the message. It all doesn't move me much.Tom Ford is a fashion designer, and apparently a movie designer, too. So much so that in every scene I identified the effect at which he aimed and the detail, color, composition type intended to achieve it. It was like watching a series of artistic photos. You could pause at any moment, put the screen in a frame, hang it on a wall, and voilà!But it was so premeditated it lacked the flow. And it lacked life. A clock became a blank symbol of passing time; a pretty girl in a perfect 60s make-up - a metaphor of the epoch. Everything so universal and emblematic that I couldn't bring myself to care.And even now I'm still divided. Cause that might have been Ford's intention all the time. To have you experience first-hand how life feels to a person who's lost purpose. A washed-out collection of symbols.Yes, I have that much faith in him. I might be reading too much into it, but in some ways Ford's movies are a game-changer for me.This will be 7 out of 10. But it might well be a 6 or an 8, too. I don't know. What a maddening film.

What's up with all the single paragraph reviews of this movie? Usually single paragraph reviews on IMDb denote a spam of plugs by the filmmakers and their friends who make junk accounts to inflate a film's appeal. In this case "A Single Man" needs no artificial inflation, but I'm still perplexed as to why nobody has really dug into the guts of this film.And then I realized that it might be because this is a very challenging and somewhat abstract film that defies analysis. Well, that doesn't help you, so let's roll up our sleeves and take a whack at it.Beginning with the setting and look of the movie: It is set in 1960s Los Angeles, and appropriately it has a very dated, nostalgic look with a lot of browns and sepias. But it isn't just for show; the colors (and lack thereof) are designed to strongly convey the protagonist George's state of mind. In the beginning we learn that he has suffered a tragedy, and if you've ever experienced something life-shattering like that, you know that the world becomes bland to you. Technicolor bluejays don't come flying out of nowhere like in a Disney musical, but rather everything seems unspectacular and tasteless. I thought the inter-weaving of the 60s nostalgic look (going by those faded photographs of the 60s which, coincidentally, match the fading of memory with its color shift to monochrome) was well done.So if I haven't bored you to death with my (now 3!) paragraphs of unsensational writing, read on because there's a reason. The story itself is rather unsensational, and so it requires a decent attention span. If you bore easily, then this isn't the film for you. It's a mostly quiet exploration of a man's tormented mind; however it's spiced up by a nice little attention grabber right near the beginning. George plans to kill himself.Ah now that got your attention, didn't it? Although it shouldn't dominate the story (and doesn't), it's enough to keep you on the hook, knowing that there is an impending sense of finality. Call me a sucker, but I fall for this plot device every time, and I love movies that begin with the premise of the protagonist facing death because it adds value to even the tiniest details that unfold. Not to mention the whole morbid curiosity of wanting to see if the deed is done.Back to the story. George is a gay man in the 1960s who is not only alienated from people by his tragedy, but he is further excommunicated by the homophobic attitudes of the time. Don't worry, it's not bashed over your head like some pity party; the homophobia is shown with subtlety, so it's not a cartoonish farce. George is a respected, classy gent and there are no sensational scenes of bullying or hate, but perhaps more insidious than bullying, there's a sort of polite barrier that people (his family) construct.His one friend is "Charley" played by Julianne Moore. She plays a sort of deplorable socialite whom you can't help but love. Herself guarded by a facade of makeup and a contrived New England accent, she is a prisoner in her own sort of polite barrier. There's one scene I loved where George & Charley break down their respective oppressive walls of gentility and groove out to a hip 60s tune ("Green Onions" by Booker T Jones) which was the 1960s equivalent of pelvis-thrusting house music. The spectacle doubles as an interesting seduction scene, and you'll have to watch the movie to see how that turns out."A Single Man" has a artistic feel and visually poetic quality that could only be achieved by a brash cinema newcomer who hails from a different artistic discipline altogether. We got exactly that with debutante director Tom Ford, a fashion designer who revamped Gucci in the mid 90s, saving the company from collapse. I haven't seen his Gucci creations, but I was surprised that the look of this film is surprisingly dark and conservative. No flashy runway theatrics required.Tom Ford's vision reminds me of other stylish directoral debuts from art crossovers like Chanel/Dior model-turned-director Daniella Amavia ("A Beautiful Now") and dancer-turned-director Arielle Javich ("Look, Stranger"). It also reminded me very much of the excellent film by Sally Potter (dancer-turned-director) "Ginger & Rosa" which is similarly set during the 1960s in polite society while the Cuban Missile Crisis and threat of nuclear annihilation looms over the head of Ginger, a very troubled teen. In all of these films I've mentioned, the look is very distinct, graceful and memorable. If you like films like that which, in addition to providing lush eye candy, also force you to think about subtle themes rather than action & car chases, check out "A Single Man" and all the others.

I came a crossed this movie by accident on Netflix. Went in to the movie, all I know was the main character is Colin Firth. 15 seconds into the movie, I am already impressed with how beautiful the graphics is, I myself being a graphic designer/photographer, I had to see who is the director. And I am surprised and not too surprised it's Tom Ford. I am surprised cuz I have no idea he direct movies, not surprised because it is very Tom Ford, their photography is always stunning. Throughout the movie, the set, the costume, the makeup, the styling, all impeccable!!! That has to be a lot of work and it shows! I searched and apparently it's the same group of people that did Mad men, the quality just really draw my attention. The movie itself is intense at times, I wouldn't say it's the best film or the most interesting story, but again, it's very beautiful and Colin Firth is a great actor that pull the whole story together.Overall definitely worth the time watching it. Good job Tom Ford!