IMDb > X (1963) > IMDb user comments
X
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv schedule
Awards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotes
Fun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

IMDb user comments for
X (1963) More at IMDbPro »


kaleidoscope, 6 November 2009
Author: ruiresende84 (ruiresende84@gmail.com) from Porto, Portugal

I think there was an honest and valuable attempt in this film, at doing something ostensibly visual. The story is literally and uniquely about vision, about what people see, what they might see, and how that will affect their world. So we have the Frankenstein and the monster in the same body, a doctor obsessed with seeing underneath the surface. The metaphor is quite clear and basic, but nevertheless it's watchable: he who wants to see everything ends up seeing nothing. All the light equals none.

The problem, probably, is the huge gap between the ideas of the writers and the visual solution found by the filmmakers. I know this film is low budget, by the so called master of it, but i also think that money, or the lack of it, can hardly become an excuse for uninteresting attempts at making a film visual. It's not the cheapness of a set or the poor photography that deviates good filmmakers from trying interesting things. More and more, this film is not that cheap. But the thing is, the shots are conceived in an ordinary way, very by the book, made to deliver work instead of trying to be a little bit imaginative.

However, there is an interesting, yet failed, attempt here. I suppose because this was made in the 60's, psychedelic rock was appealing to youth, the major target of this film, there is an attempt to place Milland's x ray eye sight as a psychedelic delusion. So all the POV shots are seen as an abstract decomposition of reality into basic colors, adding to it a kaleidoscopic effect. The moments when those bits are inserted are made as delirious bits by Xavier. I don't think this is interesting enough for me to pay this film more attention, but i appreciated the effort, that's the best thing here.

Eyesight and transcendency. Science and religion. In this case, i would let go of that connexion, it's worthless here.

I appreciated the funny bits, when Xavier watches naked people dancing. It would work properly if they could show the whole thing, not just harmless bits, but that was OK.

My opinion: 2/5

http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com



43 comments in total

Add another comment


Related Links

Plot summary Amazon.com summary Ratings
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history