The Catcher in the Rye (2008 Video) User Reviews

Absolute Garbage

[Moniter · 1/10 · 2 July 2009]

It is nearly impossible to critique this film as the term "film" does not even apply. Spoiler alert, nothing happens. It's just a blue screen. That's it. No noise, no movement, no surprise end with a scary face popping out of the background. Just seventy-five minutes of time-wasting blue screen and dead silence.

This isn't cinema and it isn't art. It's the desperate attention seeking act of some d-bag named Nigel Tomm, who's sole purpose seems to be making non-films like this and then spamming their comment sections and message boards on IMDb (yes, darkhero103 we all know it's you).

Do yourself a favor and actively ignore this absence of a movie. You won't be out any money viewing it (it can be seen for free here on IMDb) but your time can be better spent on more productive things like watching paint dry.

At least then the color changes a little.

Blue screen

[Rectangular_businessman · 1/10 · 5 July 2010]

This so called movie is only 75 minutes of pure blue screen. Nothing happens, there are no characters, no story, only a blue screen.

That is all. No, I'm not joking: Nigel Tomm made some stupid videos where he shows only a screen from a different color, and presented it as a movie, and refers to it as "abstract art".

What a bad, bad joke. Despite being named "The Catcher in the Rye", this don't have nothing to do with the book written by J. D. Salinger, is only a dumb blue screen with no plot no characters, and nothing at all. Just a dumb blue screen the whole time. This is not even a real movie and it doesn't deserved to be reviewed as one.

I don't give this any star, because this is not a movie and Nigel Tomm is not a real filmmaker.

WTF?!

[ToneeRhianRose · 1/10 · 25 January 2020]

Seriously? Why the hell would anyone wanna watch a movie w/ no audio or actors, & just a blue screen? I want to see a movie based on the book, not this crap! 😠

pretentious and phoney

[planmanosagogo · 1/10 · 20 September 2017]

first of all, I would like to say that i am an absurdist and that this is not absurdism, this is a get rich quick scheme. despite the claims that this is a "demonstration of the meaninglessness of the work" or the "artists" "personal interpretation", it really isn't. it would require no effort to create this film, and it serves as a demonstration of the "director's" narcissism more than anything else. despite my interest in experimental cinema, I strongly dislike pretentious films such as this or 'wavelength'.

Rip-off

[desi_en_gus · 1/10 · 8 May 2020]

This director tries to steal the most important work of Darek Jarman 'blue' which has genuine motivation & meaning, and poses it as revolutionary while trying to ride on the wave of one of the most famous American books in history.

Brilliant

[louy_is_god_11 · 10/10 · 6 July 2009]

What the creator of this piece is trying to get at is the overall message that Holden preaches throughout the novel. Ultimately if this was to be adapted to film it would go against everything Holden stood for, which is why this artist has chosen to give us 75 minutes of Blue screen. If this book was turned into a film it would defeat the entire purpose of the book in the first place, and could very well be considered the greatest juxtaposition in the history of cinema. The whole process of adapting novels into film is one of the highest forms of capital gain known to man and Holden, who would deem their creators "phonies", wants rid his world of these beings. So why this artist decided to use 75 minutes of Blue screen basically tells us to go read the book to understand his "movie".

Really depressing if you want to know the truth

[saskatchewanspacepirate · 6/10 · 25 November 2012]

If you really want to know the truth I thought this movie was nice enough and all, but I just wasn't in the mood. You have to be in the mood for these things. Anyways, I watched the whole goddamn thing, I really did. I watched it like a madman, but I just couldn't get into it to tell you the truth. For one thing, it was the phoniest thing I ever saw, I swear to god. It was blue and blue and blue and you could tell it was just going to get bluer because it was so blue and all. After it was done I started getting kind of blue too, you know just because it was so crazy blue all the time. It killed me, I swear to god it did. Anyways I thought it might knock you out so I reviewed it just for the hell of it. That made me feel better a bit, not so depressed anymore. I was sort of crying when I did it, to be honest. I don't know why. I figure you guys can watch it and you might even enjoy it, just because some of you are really into all that Hollywood crap. Goddamn phonies.

Interesting adaptation

[olliejcr66 · 10/10 · 1 September 2012]

This was a very interesting adaptation of J D Salinger's great novel the Catcher in the Rye. Of course some things had to be changed, both to fit the time slot and to make it work on the big screen, but it was overall very good. I found myself feeling the same way that I felt while reading the book. The actor who plays Holden was phenomenal, I couldn't have picked someone better. The only problem was that at points it lacked interesting cinematography but the was masked by the great acting, great cast, and the great screenplay. This is the type of movie that I will suggest to friends and family,. I could also see myself watching this film over and over again to get the full effect of this masterpiece of film!

Scintillating!...

[azathothpwiggins · 19 July 2021]

Blue! My favorite color used to be red. Now, because of this masterpiece, it is blue!

I watched in total astonishment as Smurfs danced before me! Riding blue ponies! Galloping through blue meadows! Ah! The blue on blue vistas!

"Brilliant" doesn't even begin to describe the majesty of this tribute to all things blue! The musical soundtrack, also blue, is so sophisticated and blue ocean-deep, as to call forth images of faery bluesmen playing their blue instruments at the Blue Note!

I sit here in tears, overcome by the blues, in my blue jeans, drinking my Blue Hurricane! I'm pondering that other esoteric film, THE BLUE LAGOON!

All hail the new maestro of cinematic ecstasy! Hail! Hail!...

"Fake Film"? Certainly Not!

[darkhero103 · 7/10 · 4 March 2009]

Several people on and off of this website have deemed this film as a "fake film" or a "false adaptation." As absurd as the concept inarguably is, I find "The Catcher in the Rye" to be a "real film" in the most true cinematic form. What the absurdist artist Nigel Tomm has presented is an adaptation that is entirely of the viewer's own. Within 75 minutes and 6 seconds, he or she is given the opportunity to envision the otherwise impossible. I myself do not enjoy Salinger's eminent novel, but I do still understand that so many have pondered (regardless of opinion) about what could have been, had the author allowed so. With this film, Tomm shatters boundaries and limitations, all the while unlocking the key to your imagination...as long as you are willing to watch pure blue screen upon your journey. As a filmmaker and a director, Nigel Tomm is imaginative in more manners than one. He is not only "imaginative" as in "creative," but also "imaginative" as in "emphasizing upon the importance of imagination." "The Catcher in the Rye," as well as Tomm's other films, roars a statement against everything that anyone has ever known about movies. When movies are conventionally shown to us, more often than not, our imaginations are limited. Such is never the case when watching these 75 minutes and 6 seconds of pure blue screen. Nothing less and nothing more.

A genius film

[jackabram · 10/10 · 13 May 2016]

This work of art demonstrates the purpose of the novel; life is pointless. The blue screen represents the minimal effort required to make art. Your continued viewing represents the the stupidity of the human race. While some may argue that this is not a true adaptation of the novel, as it includes literally none of the characters or events described in the novel it is adapted from, the film truly carries the same message;life is meaningless. The only meaning that you get form something is meaning in which you invent. This is why this film is the best ever made, it truly is the most interpretive piece of art ever made. This movie is therefore my favorite of all time and will continue to be for all of eternity.

Blue Rye Catcher is perfect in it's hue

[iriscutforth · 10/10 · 26 March 2015]

Paul Newman wrote Catcher in the Rye. White Rabbit said it right, "Red Queen was off with her head and the WHITE KNIGHT was walking backwards. Paul introduced a thought, just briefly, in preparation of the book, then stepped back. Wrote another note, then stepped back. One foot forward two feet back but with Catcher in the Rye, it was like, he really wanted not to be yellow, he really wanted people to know that he was the catcher in the rye but estimated the value of his ears, nose, fingers and feet, thus, he stepped back ten feet. He was in the shadows watching, listening, anticipating, hating...a lot...like a cat watching a mouse. He wanted to say that he was the catcher during a baseball game that wherein the pitcher was to throw the game for gamblers, but he didn't. He wanted to say that he followed an abduction of the child of the pitcher but he didn't. He wanted to say that he laid all night in the rye waiting to rescue that frighten female child he would call "little sister" but he sort of said it in a way that included her as a person of value. Here is a glass to yellow people who walk a very fine line and keep out of trouble.

Brilliant film is entertaining, Classy, and better then any film I've ever watched

[runjumpgame · 10/10 · 27 November 2022]

Don't listen to the troll reviews about it "simply being a blue screen". They're just mad that they can't comprehend the brilliance of this masterpiece. From start to.finish, this is a breathtaking, action filled film. It never has a dull moment, and its humor made me, my son, and my wife laugh out loud. It is so well crafted, this should get a 101/100. My favorite part was minute 61-65. It captured the essence and characters so well, and the emotions were beautifully crafted. I was in near tears with the ending, not because it was sad, but because I was so sad this masterpiece was over. But then again, I was able to rewatch it 😃. I hope this brilliant film gets a deserved sequel, preferably by the same director. She did such a good job and she is such a nice woman overall. This is a 12/10. It's life changing, inspiring, Wholesome, and other. This is a much watch for the whole family, or just you.

TFW you get your first editing program on Windows XP

[TheObjectiveList · 18 April 2022]

Consider this a review of Nigel Tomm's entire "filmography". This review requires 150 characters. Here is the bare minimum, just like the "movie".

0/10.