Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
AndItsAllGone
Oct 8, 2003

Directed by: Mike Figgis
Starring: Julian Sands, Saffron Burrows, Stefano Dionisi, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers

Okay, I'll try to organize my thoughts coherently but the splitting headache this movie left me with is still ringing in my brain. "The Loss of Sexual Innocence" is--supposedly--an allegorical tale of the Biblical story of Adam and Eve. In reality it is two hours of vague and disconcordant imagery and insipid storytelling.

There is no plot to speak of. The film chronicles the events in a man's life as he grows up, but the details are so hazy that it's difficult to grasp any meaning in it all. There is a cast of loosly connected characters but since there is only about ten minutes of dialogue in the entire movie it's impossible to convey any kind of bond between them. Good acting might have allowed for this, but sadly none of the actors are up to this task. There are some awkward monologues towards the end that really highlight the wooden delivery of pretty much the entire principal cast.

The inexplicable nature of the story itself is countered in the heavy-handed "allegory" portion which is spliced throughout the film. Two actors, representing Adam and Eve, frolic throughout a forest setting, pissing into a catfish pond and devouring rancid plums. There is a lot of Biblical imagery, such as the snake in the garden and an oddly incongruent neon cross. All of this, incidentally, has no connection to the mundane events of the rest of the movie.

I've seen bad movies before, but this one takes the cake with the super-serious nature with which it presents itself. Mr. Figgis was obviously more focused on making "art" than he was on keeping the audience entertained, and it shows. I can think of no redeeming features to this movie at all, and would not recommend it to anyone under any circumstances.

RATING: 0.5

PROS: Some unintentional laughs
CONS: Too many to list

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0126859/

AndItsAllGone fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Nov 24, 2004

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Gookzilla
Apr 3, 2003

Hate motivates
Caught this on Showtime at around 3:00 a.m. It's pretty bad. As artsy as artsy gets with almost no dialogue and lots of classical piano as the only soundtrack. What little dialogue exists is actually muted and barely audible under the aforementioned music. Lots of artsy moments similar to the Family Guy and The Critic student films.

Gets a one for Saffron Burrows nudity.

Black Griffon
Mar 12, 2005

Now, in the quantum moment before the closure, when all become one. One moment left. One point of space and time.

I know who you are. You are destiny.


I watched this because someone told me that there was juicy nudity in it, but I wasn't satisfied. The movie itself was bad and pointless, and if there is any plot to speak of, it's not very good anyway.

I give it a 0.5, the only entertaining thing about it is chick getting murdered. Do I really need to spoiler that...

  • Post
  • Reply