Its just OK. Don't fall into the trap of "4:3 ratio + BW = amazing" like the director wants you to

Rating: 5/10 (7 September 2018)

Pawel Pawlikowski was so flimsy and uncertain during the making of his "The Woman in the Fifth" (Ethan Hawke, 5.4 on IMDB) that the film ended up a huge commercial fail. It seems he's then continued his run of 85ish minute films by sticking to very simple stories told in frosty black and white and the 4:3 ratio. Why, they must be incredible arthouse films! Well, no.
This is not Kieslowski or Tarkovsky. There is no greater meaning or depth to be unpicked from a frame. The more you look, the more annoyingly shallow and superficial the film feels, like its been carefully constructed to hit enough notes to look like a worthy film. You can almost feel the director thinking "how can I shoehorn in a smoky jazz scene?" then "how can I shoehorn in some rock'n'roll dancing?" but there's precious little relevance to such scenes.
Its not a bad film. Its often nice to look at, and its fairly engaging (although it abruptly throws you out of a scene with the episodic 'jump ahead a few years' structure, when you don't feel like the scene you just saw was particularly relevant or substantial).
But what's the point? Love can't be stopped? Obsession transcends time and circumstance? Please. It gets to a point where it stops being relatable and never approaches the level of emotional maturity or intelligence that it pretends. I just don't trust or think that the director really has a clue what he's doing, and is simply throwing a lot of stuff at the wall in the hope that it 'looks' like a film. But its not more than the sum of its parts - the closer you look, the emptier it becomes.