A 174 minute cut of “Bardo” had been exclusively shown at both Venice and Telluride, where it received mixed-to-negative reviews. Then Inarritu decided to go to war with film critics over the negative reactions, speculating the ill response to his film had to do with racism. Inarritu finally snipped 22 minutes of the original runtime, which now has the film sitting at 152 minutes. Reviews didn’t necessarily get any better. As it stands, the film has a 58 on Rotten Tomatoes and 53 on Metacritic. Don’t get me wrong, there are some out there who swear by “Bardo,” they claim it’s a misunderstood masterpiece, and I tried hard to give Inarritu’s film a fair shot. I stuck with it for its entire 150 minutes, but the “wisdom” this film seems to convey is just pure claptrap. In “Bardo,” Inarritu blurs fantasy and reality by telling a “personal” and “autobiographical” tale of his own personal struggles. The camerawork is always stunning, but that’s about it. The rest is vain, empty and soulless. A lot happens in “Bardo”, but most of it seems to be a construct of the lead character’s imagination — over-the-top musical numbers, dream sequences, battle scenes, and non-linear plotting. This is a film that is absolutely full of itself, a supposed “experimental” tackling of Inarritu’s inner-turmoil, his limbo status between Mexico and the United States, and his utter disdain for journalists. There’s also an overusage of fish-eye lenses that feels so dated by now. Nobody asked Inarritu to go full-existentialist on us … Contribute Hire me
Advertise Donate Team Contact Privacy Policy
