# 538

506

500

#545

A brilliantly self-referential concept. It was fun spotting the connections and recalling things that would be recreated in the third film. The more Kiarostami I see, the more I like the cut of his jib. I do have to say that if you divorce the film from its meta-narrative role in the trilogy, it could be considered dull (always an issue with Kiarostami). But I wasn't bored by it. There's a lot of human drama here, it just isn't played out with operatic outbursts or grand gestures.

A very slow film that suffers from an underwhelming lead, but there's a lot that can be extracted from it if you give it a chance. The film's temporal setting is its strong suit, giving us a glimpse into moving reactions to the massive tragedy of an earthquake. It manages to avoid the forced sentimentality such a film could have, however, by framing it as a father and son road trip in search of an old acquaintance. Seeing "Where is the friend's home?" first isn't required, but it does add a bit.

A beautiful and slow film about how people move on after a serious earthquake. It's told in a very charming way through a father and son road trip. In the devastated cities they pass on their way they randomly meet different people, and we get the story told through them. The visual language is very uniqe, and especially the heavy use of POV was brilliant.

Another superb Kiarostami.

Both observational and introspective, as in Kiarostami's best works.

Even among the greatest tragedies, life goes on, and we must go on with it...but seriously is he gonna get up that hill?? The suspense is killing me.