No

García Bernal is great and the vintage shooting works, but the script becomes just a string of commercials leaving the people behind them very one dimensional.

I'm torn about the decision to shoot this film in a low fidelity, 1980s style. On the one hand, it allows the filmmakers to seamlessly integrate stock footage into this dramatization; on the other hand, it makes the movie a little hard to watch. Overall I found the story interesting but I didn't see the need to make this a dramatization rather than a regular documentary. I didn't get any particular insights into the protagonist this way; he came off as static and strangely emotionless.

Difficult to invest feelings in because of the lack of complexity in the characters, but an interesting insight to the political situation in Chile in the 80s.

Such a monotone drama. I appreciate what they did with the cinematography but it was really quite boring otherwise. It really felt like no one was trying. Everything from the writing, to the acting was just bland. I don't think I could call it bad either. Its just that it was so dry. The lack of a proper film score or soundtrack also did not help much either. This could have and should have been a much more interesting film. Better yet they could have just made a documentary.

Much to like here, especially the formal choice to make the film look ugly. In doing so, Larrain grounds the film in the harsh political reality of the day, which serves as a point of contrast with the thrust of the campaign. All of this creates tension between speaking out about the past and hoping for a better future. The film is also quite funny--surprisingly so--especially in the first act.

A lot of fun, but suffers from that affliction of filmmaker-types giving themselves way too much credit for affecting social change.

Good story, but forgettable.

An immersive, moving, and triumphant celebration of hard-earned democracy. Shot on grainy 80's style video which lends additional veracity to the fictionalized proceedings and which ensures a seamless blend with archival footage, the film successfully captures the tense and volatile atmosphere of its historical basis. Bernal gives a tremendous (I'd even say career-best) performance.

84.00

A riveting film, ranging from political commentary to family drama to action-packed thriller.

Fascinating study of how to use advertising to achieve political goals. All those earnest ultra-lefties I had to deal with as a trade union lay official ought to watch this and think about how one can be right and effective.

I liked the idea of this film. I thought it was a good subject and I learned a lot. The character work whether it was the actor's fault or the writer's fault was pretty bad. I didn't really care about anyone in this. I was hoping that the No team would win but I didn't share any of the triumph with the people. I also didn't like how the movie ended. Gael Garcia Bernal just looks bored after the whole thing is over. I also didn't like the camera they used, it made everything yellow and look old.

Not a gimmick.

sıkıcılık

This was surprisingly compelling. It follows the campaign to vote "No" on the 1988 referendum in Chile that would have allowed Augusto Pinochet to continue in office. I liked it a lot more than I expected to. It's shot in a unique technical style, making it look like it could have been made with 1980s technology (from what I understand it wasn't; it just looks that way, but it is clearly a deliberate design choice). Well acted, well scripted, well directed.

The low resolution and the archive footage merge so seamlessly, I didn't even notice people were playing themselves in the film, 25 years later. I'm kinda bummed about that now.

Better this time around, more ambivalent about role of advertising. Really good closeups

I loved this. Visually, it's marvelous--they formed the perfect marriage of the look of archival footage and the look of footage shot for the movie by using, as I understand it, a "vintage" video camera from the '80's. Good script, and a most compelling story of a country shaking off a dictatorship with some help from some ad men. Too much sentimental crap about the kid, though--did Bernal HAVE to keep dragging it to work and demonstrations where riot police were sure to show up?

The last film in Larrain's Pinochet trilogy, No is also nominated for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film at this year's Oscar's. I saw this film first before watching the other two, Tony Manero and Post Mortem. Gael Garcia Bernal is a television ad executive who is hired to make campaign films to use against Pinochet during the 1988 elections. I found this the easiest to watch of all Larrain's films set against Chile's police state. I liked the visual style and found out that La

1998 senesinde Şili'de 10 kişiden sadece üçünde TV varmış (yani 10 sene sonra), 88'de buna tahminen 1 diyelim. Filmin sadece reklamcının kampanyasına odaklanıp, diğer mücadeleleri yok saymadığını düşünmek isterdim ama kampyanın etkisi argümanı baskın.

amusingly examines the cynicism of advertising strategies (and an easy analogy with film-making) regardless of their virtuous ends, as well as the disassociation accompanying the manipulation and decontextualisation of images and concepts, but ultimately follows a more straightforward arc than i wanted. still, the home-VHS aesthetic seamlessly spliced with archival footage is ostensibly authentic while constantly reminding of its manipulation -- a potent extension of the film's themes.

Power to the people!

Gael García Bernal is a really great actor. This is a very solid movie. An interesting look at how advertising effects people and can be used in nearly any situation. Also shows how often fluffy entertainment is more effective at getting people to actually do something than facts, no matter how eye opening they may be. I liked the grainy style of film making as well. Recommended.

It doesn't praise or prioritize political marketing over political idealism or grassroots activism. It is a very realistic depiction of politics in mass media era -cynic maybe- (surely, the yes vote made possible in Chile not just because of a single ad. But this is a movie=dramatization). A viewer can and should watch a movie critically. It's a quite intelligent, thought-provoking, self-reflexive product; & especially relevant for Turkey at the moment; before a constitutional referendum.

Buyuk bir nafilelik - politik olarak da sinematik olarak da cok yetkin bir film.

Excellent movie, well executed, very much of its time (though set three decades earlier). Alfredo Castro is extraordinary.

filmekimi 2012 & http://biletsiz.com/no

Was the film technique gimmick used just to make the archive footage blend in more seamlessly? Can't decide if it was a good move to make it feel more realistic, or just a horrible unnecessary gimmick.

After a slow start this became quite a compelling watch about an interesting subject.

the Medium Cool of our time.

We had been in same situation and couldn't say NO!

How advertising techniques influenced the outcome of the 1988 Chilean plebiscite which led to Pinochet's resignation. I'm not sure if a documentary on the subject wouldn't have been just as good, but Gael Garcia Bernal is fine as the marketing wizard with an unusual product. In any case, the film is shot to match the grainy, slightly faded late-80s TV footage that is central to the story (a very nice touch), and the script is a witty one, with a particularly amusing subplot involving microwaves.

Is this a good movie ? NO If this movie showed up in 1988 Pinoched would have won the referendum. Yeaap, it is that bad

Somewhere in there there's a more interesting movie about the relationship between publicity and politics. This settles for a subdued anti-Pinochet tirade, but a tirade still. Laughed a lot about how the government mocked the NO commercials. García Bernal's detachment was about the most interesting thing here, but the movie didn't go there. Why is it called "No"?

1105: nice job!