|
Irréversible (2002) Directed by: Gaspar Noé Starring: Monica Bellucci, Vincent Cassel, Albert Dupontel, Philippe Nahon, Jo Presti tl;dr: If you're interested in unconventional film making and can appreciate finding meaning beyond shock value, go see this pretty grusome piece of work. This is gonna sound a bit high school essayish, but since this is a little known, but rather ground breaking movie, I won't reveal some of the pretty grusome details contained in the film - I recommend you go see it for yourself, and if you don't stop at the start or half way through.. then you'll want to watch it again. Anyway, although best classified as an independent film for our purposes, this is an emotionally stunning 'film-noir' drama from the modern french cinema. With Monica Bellucci in a leading role, I wondered how I never heard of the movie prior to my friend casually mentioning the shock value. In fact, I don't believe the movie had a theatrical release outside of a number of Film Festivals, because they hardly managed a DVD release in the US given the subject matter. The movie is told in reverse, much like Memento, but taking the idea all the way through, including the end credits played in reverse at start time. Camera angles swirve around the screen as the dramatic opening scenes play out, leaving you with what should logically be a revenge-climax to the storyline. The content of these scenes will shake you up, but together with the fitting, underground techno music and shooting technique, the nausiating effect is further 'improved'. While the plot, under normal circumstances, would hardly surpass a violent revenge crime / thriller, told in reverse with Noe's unique, subversive style, you get a film-noir unlike any other. After an incredibly grusome first half of the movie, the sotryline and cinematography center around the focal point in the middle, a sort of climax so to speak - it makes clear the emotions and motivations behind the characters thus far, as well as tops off the brutality. I won't spoil it, but let me say, the movie takes on a whole different perspective afterwards. Irreveresible's second half would be a first-half build-up of plot and characters in a normal movie. Although on surface Irreversible does the same, having witnessed the brutal revenge and crime already, you're left pondering the deeper meanings, seeing the same characters on an entirely different plane of existance. As such, you come to understand Noe's theme, 'Time destroys everything'.. in a way, you never really knew what you were seeing, with the characters and over-the-top events at the 'beginning' until you know it's all gone and you come to learn who they really are, and what they could have been if not for the twist of events. It's easy to dismiss this as an overly violent, artsy independent production. However, it's all the pieces coming together, that imo, make this a really unique movie that will have you thinking long after it's over. Noe's style, the atmosphere he creates, filiming techniques used to capture each seperate scene really add up to something you have to see more than once to appreciate beyond their shock value. The plot alone leaves little to wonder about; it's how the story is told, and the themes Noe portrays that make it shine. There is a lot of artistic value you can dig into here, and the rough execution of those values/themes makes this film worth seeing. 4.5 PROS: Original; rich in cinematography, artistic value, emotion; disturbing and explicit, yet remains meaningful CONS: Difficult to grasp, shocking to most, hard to follow on first viewing, not for the casual viewer ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: I would recommend to stop reading here and just see the movie (if what I wrote interests you at all) before trying to read up on the plot or more in-depth reviews, just to formulate your own ideas.. people seem to either love it or hate it. But be warned that it's both brutal and sexually explicit. If you want to read up more, including a lot of spoilers, here is an excellent article: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-1120933/reviews.php?critic=columns&sortby=default&page=1&rid=849005 esky fucked around with this message at 05:00 on May 4, 2004 |
#
?
May 4, 2004 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
Disgusting, thoroughly repugnant film so desperately mired in its own miserable existence that any possible message or value that could be gotten from it is horribly scarred like a victim of surprise plastic surgery. One of the few films I've wanted to vomit from watching, and not in the good "dead alive" way but in the "gently caress this movie" kind of way.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2004 04:16
|
|
|
quote:]-[ate_Sandwich came out of the closet to say: This pretty much sums up my thoughts as well. What's even more distrubing is that a lot many people watch this just to see the rape scene. :shudders:
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2004 04:18
|
|
|
As repulsed as i was by the first 30 mins of the film, i can't help but acknowledge the craft involved. 4/5
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2004 04:27
|
|
|
Maybe the best movie I've seen in recent history. This is definatly not a movie for everyone, and its main feature isn't the gruesome, very graphic rape scene. In fact, I think this movie would have gotten a much better reception in the broad audience without it. Many wanted to watch it only for the rape segment, witch is nothing but sad. In contrast to a lot of action flicks, this one doesn't promote the "Hero got his wife/daughter/puppy killed, one man against the world, vengeance is good!11" line of thought, but quite the opposite. Besides this simple interpretation, there exist a ton more for it and it has a bunch of references to other movies from Gaspar. Example: http://fi.somethingawful.com/is/img8/136/film-review_irreversible_02.jpg The last shot of Bellucci hints that all of this might have been a story she read. A dream, a (sexual) fantasy that she had. Great to discuss wich your drunk friends. Once again, this is not for everybody, but if you like gritty,intense yet deep movies, give it a try. 5.5/5
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 17:46
|
|
|
This is the first film I've ever seen that had scenes so graphic that I will never watch it again. However, this is more a credit to Noe's film than it is a detraction. The rape and murder scenes are both graphic to the point that they almost force you to look away. However, Noe plays with elements from other movies in such as way as to make the film's ending (beginning) non-linear. If I could stomach it, I'd probably give this film another chance. All those who think Noe made a violent film for the sake of violence haven't read between the lines. Judging from his other films, he's smarter than that. 5/5 Rabid Koala fucked around with this message at 17:58 on May 5, 2004 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 17:55
|
|
|
My friends and I were close to vomiting, but we pressed on! The last hot is amazing though, see it just for that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 19:33
|
|
|
Irreversible is a challenging film in its violence, story and structure. Strangely enough, they have a point and aren't just gimmicks. The point is that time destroys everything, and the movie is shot backwards to illustrate this well, starting in the ruined lives of three friends and working back to the fantastic final shot set to Beethoven where everything was so bright. It's only in that beauty that you can truly recognize the tragedy. The problems I had with the film were, first and foremost, the camera angles in the beginning. There's a school of thought that the shots are supposed to be done so that you don't notice them unless you're trying to, that they drag you into the movie. The other idea is that shots are supposed to grab you and demand your attention. The camerawork of the first twenty minutes demand your attention, but they jerk you so far out of the events and into the realization that you're watching a movie with actors playing pretend that you may never find your way back into the illusion. My other complaint is of the rape scene, not because of how graphic it is, because I'm fairly desensitized, but Alex first appears she isn't anything more than Monica Bellucci pretending to be raped. There's no established character, she's nothing more than an image of a victim. Her existence in the film, at this point, is defined only by her attack, which makes it hard to have any sympathy for her, especially after being taken so far out of the film by the annoying camera movements up until this point. It's only after this that you start to give a poo poo about Alex. I give it a 2.5, because while it was an above average film I still didn't like it. Oh, and I jerked it to the rape scene. quote:takeshi came out of the closet to say:
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2004 20:33
|
|
|
I took a girl to go see this and she liked it, as did I. I thus fell in love with her and we love the crazy poo poo. I really liked this movie. It made me feel uncomfortable during it because I thought that this girl would be pissed off that I took her to see this. The fun part was recommending it to other couple to see as a date movie, I might have lost a few friends but gently caress it. Monica Bellucci is beautiful in it and I too jerked too it, and so did she!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2004 14:32
|
|
|
There are few movies that can really disturb me like this one did. I'm not talking about fear or cheap scares like we see in horror movies, but ones that make you watch startingly realistic, terrible things that happen to good people. This movie contains two major scenes that are unbelievable. It's played in reverse order, Memento-style, in order to make it a little different than your usual revenge movie. It mostly works, and the director and writer toy with the idea that the things that happen to these characters were set in stone long before they happened. It doesn't really do this all that well, as I didn't really pick up a profound sense of anything really. I was still shocked at this movie's unrelenting violence. I found the subtitles in this movie hard to follow, as for quite a lot of it, multiple characters talk at once and the subtitles just had a lot of trouble keeping up. I felt I was missing big chunks of conversation in the French-to-English translation. This movie is worth trying, but if you felt sick and dizzy from watching the Blair Witch Project, then skip this one because the hand-done camera work will make you throw up - and the violence isn't going to help either. I enjoy watching movies that are considered "difficult" to watch, and this is no exception. It strives for some higher philosophic goals that just didn't work for me, but it's still a powerful story. 4/5
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2004 11:16
|
|
|
Excellent film; it's tragic, and gut-wrenching, and beautifully shot. As already posted, it's not for everyone, but anyone who can stomach it should definitely experience (that's the only word for it, really) this film. Good (not great; some of the improvised lines were a bit hokey) performances throughout, especially from the three main players (Bellucci, Cassel, and her friend). The Memento-gimmick was used to better effect in Irreversible than Memento, mostly because it changes the way you view the characters as opposed to a novelty to hide a fairly shallow story. This isn't to say that Irreversible has a really deep storyline or anything, but the emotions that are evoked by the structure are more striking given the structure than they would have normally been. For example: In the first scene, we see the boyfriend (Alex?) and his friend trouncing the pimp (who, incidentally is the wrong man--which you don't realize until the end of the movie), seemingly without reason or cause. We follow his anger for several scenes before his motivation is made entirely clear. The focus, then, shifts from the raw outburst of anger to the reason behind it. This is a pretty amazing shift, given the brutality demonstrated at the beginning of the film--how motivation can turn blind rage into something meaningful. It also makes the scenes at the end of the movie that much more heartrending. Also checked out "I Stand Alone" after I saw this movie, and was impressed by it as well. Good thing, too; I was ready to write off French cinema after seeing the travesty that is "Baise Moi." 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2004 08:23
|
|
|
Interesting movie indeed, although the rape scene was a bit extreme and uncomfortable. 4/5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2004 01:21
|
|
|
Ah, yes! Irreversible: the porn film where instead of splattering jizz we get splattering skulls. I am not squeamish when it comes to violence, but I do like it served with a point. And the more graphic the violence, the more important the point should be. Given the nature of Irreversible's set-pieces I expected nothing less than the answers to life, the universe, and everything. Instead, I witnessed two of the most horrific acts I have ever seen so some guy can tell me, in effect, poo poo happens. Yes, Irreversible flies in the face of decency by showing the most vile poo poo ever put on film, whilst paying lip service to a half-assed piece of sophomoric pseudo-philosophy: "Time Destroys Everything". Director Gaspar Noe even slaps it on a title card, as if the gimmicky backwards chronology and predictable ironies that develop weren't enough to clue the audience into the manipulative game. Because that is the raison d'etre of Irreversible: it exists solely to connive the audience into feeling as physically and emotionally uncomfortable as possible. Everything from the plot to the cinematography to the sound design is in aid of this end, from the nauseating masturbatory camerawork, to the seizure inducing strobe lighting, to the PC speaker sine-wave soundtrack. Sure, Noe's cinematic epilepsy eventually abates, but only because he has something really cool he wants to show you: Monicca Belucci squirming and screaming for ten minutes. With this set-up, the second half of the film becomes the punchline to a sick joke designed to make you squirm: complete with witless parallels between the rapist and the boyfriend who wants to gently caress her in the rear end and a predictable twist to up the fatalistic ante. But really, with the paper thin, unengaging characters and crappy improv dialogue, these post money-shot scenes are just sideshows to the main attraction: fags and rape and smashed faces. Strangely, the reasons why I hate the film are the same reasons others champion its greatness, that it's effective puppet-like audience manipulation constitutes good cinema. Of course, these same people no doubt reject the sentimental manipulations of Spielbergian endings or Robin Williams films. And really, that's what Irreversible is: the lovely ending of A.I. except with shattered skulls and anal rape by gay pimps. EDIT: Oh 1/5, pryed from my hands for technical achievements. legstump fucked around with this message at 11:32 on Jul 6, 2004 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2004 11:00
|
|
|
quote:legstump came out of the closet to say: First off, I'm not going to say that your Spielbergs or your Michael Bays of the world aren't talented - they are. They're your Sasha and Digweed, your Paul Oakenfold of filmmaking - excellent selection of cast (as far as screen presence goes), compelling stories, mood control, audience control. These are not easy things to do. Does that qualify good filmmaking? Not in my opinion. Would I accept it as someone else's? Sure. But I want cinema to create new thought, to challenge an audience, rather than reward their sense of expectation. I'm more excited being shoved out of a film rather than being drawn in. In Irreversible, I was aghast at my own role as a viewer; I suddenly became aware of my own presence in the cinematic experience, I felt uncomfortable sharing such intimacy (both violent and romantic) with other people, people I didn't know. I was made fully aware of my role as a viewer, rather than being taken to a place where I forget that role entirely. Is this a fair comparison? Maybe not. Is it actually pretty unfair to compare your Spielbergs and your Noes? Certainly. But if I had to pick, I'd take Irreversible over Catch Me if You Can any day. But if you put Jaws on the block, I'd probably take the fish. Rating: 4/5
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2004 13:47
|
|
|
quote:legstump came out of the closet to say:
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2004 21:33
|
|
|
Firstly, didnt much care for the camera work second it was definately something different, although not as shocking as i thought it would be (then again Im a big hellriaser fan  ) Ill give it the most points because the 3 friends remind me of nights me and my friends went out, imagining one of my own nights ending the way irreversible did gives this film personal weight. Id like to say in Monicca's defence that she did an excellent job in the infamous scene, I mean its not an easy thing to ask any actress is it? Monicca screams violated to me (no pun there btw)
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2004 16:01
|
|
|
Like I Stand Alone, this is another highly stylized and intensely brutal film from Gaspar Noe (it even opens with the same character, and provides a kind of epilogue for him). The manically swooping and swirling camera really enhances the uneasiness you feel (though surprisingly doesn't make you feel that dizzy). It's an ugly, disturbing movie, but like his other feature, I think it's also very important. One rarely gets to see something so dark and bleak. Rating: 4.5
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2005 00:55
|
|
|
While I can see the craft involved in making this film, I have to say that the end result is pretty weak. The rape scene was not meant to turn you on but disgust you, however I couldn't help but think while watching it that there are sexual predators out there with this film in their library and they beat off to it. Belucci's rape scene was around 10-15 minutes, it was an insane amount of time to focus on this one event, I am not squeemish in any way, but the constant anal pounding left me wondering "is there a point for the length of this? is this supposed to be cinema or low grade porn with nice camera angles to still call it art?" The rumble through the gay club WAS nightmarish, but too drawn out IMO. As a matter of fact if you were to edit the rape scene down to 3 minutes and tastefully show what happens, the club scene down to 3 minutes, and eliminate all the swirly camera shots i think the movie would be around 1 hour long. There wasn't much substance to the movie, other than to establish that Vincent was kind of a jerk, Monica was pregnant, and Pierre was still in love with her. The anger escapades through the seemy underground of France was kind of cool, and the acting in every scene was pretty well done. I was just underwhelmed at the pointlessnes of it all. There is nothing to take away from this movie other than "well that was seriously messed up thanks". 1/5
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2005 13:27
|
|
|
Personally, I loved this film. The ways the film pushes the audience's sensibilities to their outer limits does something, emotionally, that no other film has ever bothered to attempt. The film perfectly juxtaposes beautiful, touching images of love and contentment with violently graphic, unforgettable sequences above and beyond what you'll see anywhere else. The camerawork is alive and electric, constantly moving and as nauseating as the psychotic fugue the main male characters embark on in the opening moments of the film. The sound, meticulously crafted to help hammer home the tone and emotion of the film, was actually engineered to increase anxiety (low frequency hum that builds and is known to freak out animals). The soundtrack was perfectly scored by Thomas Bangalter (of Daft Punk fame) and beautifully implemented. For me, the film perfectly accomplished what I believe it set out to prove, and (defending the grotesque opening sequences), it needed the disturbing, lengthy murder and rape scenes in order to, basically, scar you and remind you of what's lost in the beginning of the film (end of the story) when you see the beginning of the story (end of the film), with the two lovers in bed together sharing nothing less than tenderness and hope for the future. Moreso, I feel like this film is an excellent portrayal of the ways that vengeance always has it's cost as a perpetuation of hate and violence. Despite what many critics have said, I do believe this film has a very apparent, very strong philosophy, but many critics have opted to address the manner in which the arguments are presented (using violence and unflinching images) to attempt to discredit the film rather than address those issues directly; this is a typical post-modern approach to argument dismissal whereby messages are ignored because the audience didn't care to try and understand the meaning but rather just attacked the messenger. I would be among the first to attack a film for useless violence for the sake of sensationalism, and I do not believe "Irreversible" shows up on that radar for anything longer than a moment if you can accept the violence as a medium by which a very powerful, very honest and emotional life story is unfolded. p.s.- Belucci's rape scene only lasted 7 minutes. If the scenes were edited down any further, you would lose the real-time longshot nature of the film. Furthermore, if he just walked into the club and instantly found The Tapeworm, or if Monica Bellucci's rape only lasted a minute or two... well, then you'd have the Americanized version of both story elements: rape doesn't ever take very long, and everyone finds their man instantly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2005 15:16
|
|
|
Gaspar Noe is one very brave director. Irreversible made a lot of noise when it was shown at the Cannes' festival, obviously most people expecting a happy-go-lucky movie experience walked out on it, people cursed (notably Cassel's brother) at Gaspar Noe in the middle of the showing, and very few reviews dared to consider it as I can see it now, a very finely crafted piece of cinema. With a simple life-like plot, extremely long sequences, most of which were shot in one take (the greatest achievement of this movie in my opinion), and three of the greatest French actors together before him, Noe transcends what cinema is and how a fictive piece of film can make you feel. Sick or in awe; it depends on your dispositions. As I said the fact that most sequences, often over 5 minutes of length, were shot in one take, makes the movie for me. If you never cared for Snake Eyes' opening sequence, you wont see the beauty in this film, at least not the technical one. The other feat of Irreversible, is that beside a very raw idea of who the characters were and what they did (along with the 'thin' plot elements of course), not a single line was written beforehand, and all dialogue was improvised by the actors as they went by during the shooting. The Belucci-Cassel couple is charismatic as ever, and Albert Dupontel proves again that he can play anything, in any circumstance. Silly trivia: During the party scene, Vincent Cassel is dancing with Dupontel in the background. At one point a girl asks him his name and he answers a bit too fast 'Vincent!', when his character's name is actually Marcus. He takes it back clumsily, pretending he was drunk (or was he, really?), so as to not waste the work they had put in that shoot. voted 5 because I watched at home while alone, and while I'm not insensitive, I never felt sick or anything. I just found the acting spectacular and the direction amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2005 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
I have to give this film a 5. I honestly believe that the backwards chronology, the incredible acting, and the merciless film-making make you feel and think things that you just won't get from any other film-making experience. The distinction between this, and "playing the audience, manipulating their emotions", is that I feel like the approach taken in Irreversible is much more open-ended. I don't feel like Noe was saying "HERE'S MY loving MESSAGE, SWALLOW THIS", he just told us a story. The way in which he told the story got some intense and interesting emotional responses from me. I would compare it to a film like "Dogville" - you don't really know what to think at the end of the film. poo poo happens, but was the revenge justified, what would have been the right way to respond, will the good times or the horrible ending persist in history and in memory? I'm very wary of films adopting "post modern" story-telling techniques, because I think often they wind up feeling very gimmicky (see Memento), but in Irreversible, you get a distinctly different and unique emotional journey because of the structure of the film. Add to that camerawork which was pretty amazing and well done, some loving AMAZING acting (the boyfriend's sheer aggression and determination), and just about everything else, and you have a film whose achievements cannot be ignored. TCC: Dude, you gotta play miniature golf.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2005 06:54
|
|
