The dark underbelly of Italian politics and mass media, full of bribes, escorts, and drugs, is depicted in a rather lackluster rehash of the tropes popularized in “The Wolf of Wall Street”. Sorrentino goes for a more international aesthetic, while a more distinctive Mediterranean flair could have made the difference. The parts with Silvio, on the contrary, felt a little too ludicrous and cartoony, as if we were watching a sophisticated take on old-school impersonator shows. Although this series of disconnected vignettes can be entertaining for a while, the absence of a compelling narrative arc, paired with the stilted delivery of the cast, leaves the audience with a sense of unfulfillment.
Still, it was interesting to see a faded and melancholic Silvio realizing that his prime is long gone. Furthermore, it’s worth mentioning that some of the most ludicrous episodes depicted here are based on real events. Those times you feel ashamed for being Italian.
The film loses steam as it progresses and it tries to justify the character.
Shout by Saint PaulyBlockedParent2018-11-04T15:05:12Z
That Loro is two films edited into one with an hour cut out is painfully obvious.
The first half (and the best, imo), was full of boobs (not a euphemism for politicians) and filmed in a flashy, vapid style which makes it difficult to distinguish from the political world it represents. Which is the point.
The second half, which focuses on Berlusconi, is more low key but also has a lot of boobs (the figurative sort this time).
There are many moments that drag, especially in the second part, but the sometimes spectacular cinematography and the flawless use of music (both the soundtrack and songs used in the film) make up for the uneven pacing most of the time. The proof being that I did not notice the 2h38m runtime in the slightest. Still, I can't help but wonder what Loro 1 was like...