|Page 10 of 41:||               |
|Index||407 reviews in total|
Had I checked out the comments before actually renting the movie, I'm pretty sure they would have made me more eager to watch it. And let's face it, it's not so surprising that so many people just hated it and didn't even bother to appreciate what a great piece of art this film really is. This is really artistic freedom at its best. After all, which movies always make most money?
Probably most people who saw Eye of the Beholder only did so because they had seen some pathetic film like Star Wars: Episode I - the Phantom Menace. But Eye of the Beholder, was just not made for this narrow-minded audience, who enjoys itself with high-tech Hollywoodian explosions like every couple of seconds.
Well, let's put it this way, it might not be the greatest neo-noir film ever made, but it does have its great moments. With a limited budget of $11M, I'm sure director Stephan Elliot did some great miracles - the camerawork is just brilliant, and so is the score, but of course this might be too artsy and way too much unconventional for the narrow-minded mainstream movie-viewers. I cannot blame them though. Frankly, it does have some big grey areas too, like we're never actually told why Eye's (McGregor) visions of his lost child Lucy stop half-way through the film and why he becomes so obsessed with Joanna Eris (Dudd), the femme fatal of the movie, and more important than this, the ending is totally ambiguous. But again this is all left to our own imagination. Why should everything be so spoon-fed anyway?
Perhaps, if you rent the DVD and watch the movie with the director's commentary throughout the whole film after seeing it for the first time, you'll be able to appreciate it even more. Unlike what some people said that this film takes place over a span of 10 years, it's actually 3 years - Stephan Elliott says so in the beginning.
If your favourite movie is 28 Days, please do everyone a favour, and just don't even bother watching Eye of the Beholder, as you'd be wasting 100 minutes of your time and bucks on the rental. If you enjoyed every second of The Lost Highway and any other bizarre movie in the same vein, then this one is just for you. I'd give it a 7/10, but if I were feeling a little bit more generous, it could have easily got an 8.
I liked this movie a lot--it stirred my imagination, and I didn't care that the plot didn't make logical sense. I can accept that maybe the ambiguity of the ending was intentional, but usually when an ending is ambiguous I have some feeling about what happened, even if it isn't actually shown, but this ending...nothing, and I really wanted more closure. I think the ending is a big part of why people on this board are reacting so vehemently to this film. I rewound it and rewatched a couple of times looking for clues after he pulled her from the sinking car and was sitting holding her on the ice. I think she says "I wish you much love..." or something like that. Does anyone who has seen this know or have a strong feeling about what happens? Does she die?
Proof that even with two great actors can't support a terrible screenplay. Despite the fact I fell asleep during part of the story, I did enjoy the score/soundtrack... too bad it's not available on CD. The instrumentation was ear candy and I believe that was Chrissy Hind(s) on the vocals on the last song of the movie.
Ewan McGregor and Ashley Judd should be locked in a small room and made to watch this over and over. Maybe then, the both of them will come to their senses,and quit throwing away their considerable talents. This is the worst movie made with decent stars and budget I have ever seen.I saw a few reviews before I rented it, but couldn't believe it would be that bad. It could. Paint your toenails, meditate, take a nap, anything but watch this.
This movie not one enjoyable thing about. The story line was dull and annoying. It felt like we were watching it for days. I would have turned it off but I have this thing of wanting to give movies a chance. But take it from me this movie doesn't deserve a chance.
I'm surprised this film averages as low as it does in the IMDB scale. I
didn't think it was at all terrible; in fact, I enjoyed watching the film
very much. It has some incredibly memorable characters, some ingenious
cinematography, and the sense of emotional instability and detachment that
these characters is portrayed excellently throughout.
My one problem with the film was its lack of any kind of closure. The ending was weak and unsatisfying, but perhaps the point is that it wasn't about the end, it was about the journey. Play scripts do this all the time, but even the most famous of plays can still get famous with solid characters and a driving story. But this isn't a play, it's a movie, and I should have taken more away from the experience than I did-- which was, well, nothing.
It sure is a lot of fun to watch, though. Obsession was never played off so tragically... or so beautifully.
It seems that McGregor may have to wait forever before he hits it big. While a good actor, he fails, yet again, in getting himself into a good movie (save for Episode 1: The Phantom Menace). I love Ashley Judd and she is excellent in the role of a sexy, bitchy, suductive murderer. Sadly, the movie really doesn't follow a plot. Its confusing on why the private eye would drop his life and follow this woman (Judd is gorgeous, but not that wonderful). The mirage of the private eye's daughter is really stupid and you sense a connection between K.D.Lang and McGregor, but it is never explained. On a good note, Patrick Bergin plays a really surprising excellent performance as the blind lover of Judd. Overall, the movie was an utter disappointment. It lacked action, plot, and Judd has gotten nude in better films. I give it a 3 based on the acting.
"Eye of the Beholder" is no masterpiece. I almost didn't rent it after hearing other peoples comments. But it served me right to trust people who have an attention span suited for the "Star Wars" razzle-dazzle age of lots of action and no brains. I went along with the rest of the crowd in the beginning when I met up with the "little lost daughter" subplot, which could easily have been left out, for subtlety's sake. But as the movie unfolds, it becomes a very interesting story, full of subtle twists and turns. Not my idea of a perfect movie, but a perfectly well contrived crime drama (which reminded me incredibly of the french film "La Mortelle Randonée", by Claude Miller, which stars Isabelle Adjani and Michel Serrault). And it works especially because of the fine performances of the two leads. As I said before, if you have little attention span, rent something which has an explosion every couple of seconds and leave this one on the shelf.
Don't watch this movie. Watch the original. This is the same movie as "Mortelle randonnée", only worse. you'd be better of watching the real thing, featuring Isabelle Adjani, who is really great in this movie! http://us.imdb.com/Title?0084358
A private eye becomes obessed with a murderess (Judd) and follows her all over the country, because she reminds him of the little girl he lost and plus she is supposed to be nice!!!! The film starts off very confusing and when one thinks it is just about to get better, it doesn't. It actually get worse. Featuring very poor characterizations, and inept dialogue and situations. This is painstakingly uneven. It is glossy and features weird camerawork, but style can never ever replace substance. A real disappointment. My rating: 2 out of 10. P.S. The actors at times seem ashamed of themselves for appearing in such a pathetic film.
|Page 10 of 41:||               |
|Newsgroup reviews||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|