SummaryA metaphysical love story that explores the space between what we know and what we feel. Like many fairy tales, Birth is part romance, part mystery, and part family drama - woven into a magical whole about love, mortality and the unknown. [New Line Cinema]
SummaryA metaphysical love story that explores the space between what we know and what we feel. Like many fairy tales, Birth is part romance, part mystery, and part family drama - woven into a magical whole about love, mortality and the unknown. [New Line Cinema]
The eerie tale is steeped in brooding atmosphere and psychological suspense thanks to Glazer's hugely imaginative visual style and creative use of music, sound, and silence.
I think this film is severely misunderstood. It's one of the most mesmerizing films I've seen, but that's not to say it doesn't have its flaws. It's far from perfect, but it's as close to bold filmmaking as anyone can get.
Director Jonathan Glazer's first film, "Sexy Beast", is one of the most underrated films of the aughts, and unfortunately, his sophomore effort "Birth" falls into the same category. I think it's a wonderful film and a true hidden gem. It's soft and simple with a fantastically nuanced performance from Nicole Kidman. The scene at the opera is what great acting is all about. Beautifully shot and featuring one of my all-time favourite musical scores by Alexandre Desplat, "Birth" is a gorgeous film to watch, but at times very unnerving.
Savides' subtle direction adds greatly to the film's mystery leaving us with much more ambiguity than this film has been given credit for (just in different areas). I'll never understand why "Birth" has garnered such hateful reviews, but I guess to each his own. I just happen to fall on the side of the field that thinks this is a wonderful tale of spiritual mystery that presents true human reaction to a situation that could easily have unfolded to become a corny work of science-fiction.
Definitely Grade-A stuff.
I find the the 1/10 ratings curious as I consider this movie effective, well-done and even haunting at times. Blockbuster? Certainly not. Sluggish at times? Naturally. But if you want to have a film stay with you for a few days, watch Birth.
Birth may be the most futile application of cinematic and acting skill I've seen all year. A little "Twilight Zone" flummery would have livened up the proceedings to no end.
Championed by many as a modern day master of filmmaking, Jonathan Glazer has still yet to make a film that has actually been what I would define as good. Artistically top-notch? Sure. Are they good beyond that? Absolutely not. Sexy Beast comes the closest, but still falls short and Under the Skin is one of the worst films I have seen this decade (though, admittedly, I avoid awful films, so do take that with a grain of salt). Now, why do I think this film is below average? Quite simple: plausibility. Telling the story of a woman who is set to re-marry after the death of her husband ten years earlier, Birth introduces us to a young boy who is ten years old and claims to be her dead husband. Throwing her life up into the air, the reincarnation bit is not the implausible part. The implausible part is the utter lack of emotion.
Stiff, unfeeling, and unrelentingly cold, Birth is another film by Glazer that seems to misunderstand humanity. He was smart in making Under the Skin's protagonist an alien because it matched his inability to conjure up real human emotion and feeling. Sure, Anna (Nicole Kidman) falls in love with this young boy and gets mad at one point, while her fiance Joseph (Danny Huston) gets into a tirade at one point, but aside from these outbursts, the film is a quiet meditative film that never displays the confusion of the moment. Joseph just gets mad and questions Anna about the boy. Anna, as Kidman plays her, just goes through the motions and never seems to capture the raw emotion that the boy is playing with when he shows up and says he is Sean. For a woman hearing from a young boy that her husband is reincarnated in a young boy, she takes it pretty laid back and just gets sad at times. There is no moment where Kidman plays Anna as anything less than an implausibly calm and breathy woman who seems to be viewing the ongoing events around her as an absolute outsider.
The plotting itself is also quite disappointing, especially with the ending, though it is a crisis of the whole film. Throughout, Glazer includes scenes of people speaking about topics that we are already familiar with. One such example is when Sean's parents are first told about what he said to Anna and then go inside and talk about what he said to her. This even happens in individual scenes where Glazer opts to explain every detail instead of just leaving it up to us to fill in the blanks, such as when Clara (Anna Heche) tells Sean that the real Sean had given her the unopened letters. Explaining why he had given her the letters, this sequence is one that shows Glazer carrying on a scene for too long with the extra information only serving to undermine the rest of the film due to its implications. On one hand, the new Sean opens the letters out of guilt maybe for cheating on Anna. However, if that were true, he would know who Clara was because she is what makes him feel guilty, but he does not remember Clara. On the other, he read them and quickly began to feel that he was Sean, but was not actually Sean. This, again, would not explain how he knew everything about them, considering they were love letters and would likely not include details about where Sean worked and lectured or about Anna's brother-in-law's work as a doctor and potential infertility. Thus, the film reaches an impasse. It has no idea whether Sean was Sean or was not with neither really making complete sense. This issue arises solely because Glazer over-wrote the sequence with Clara to include more details regarding the letters and the reason why she was given them. Had he left some information out of that scene, it would have left the film far more open to interpretation and, as a result, better and more in line with the film's ominous feeling.
The acting on display certainly does help the film's cause either. Kidman, though I love her more often than not, has a knack of playing these inhumanly emotionless characters in lower budget features and Birth certainly qualifies. She seems to be wholly disinterested in the goings on and, with the production resting on her shoulders, this is detrimental to the final product. For such a brilliant actress who can play solemn and can play emotional, she just becomes cold at the suggestion that her husband is back. This is a man she has mourned for a decade and now he might be back. Sure, her initial confusion makes sense, but she quickly believes him because she wants to and then just becomes cold and unfeeling. Compared to her dead husband, it seems like she has less blood coursing through her veins than him. Around Kidman, the acting is fine. Lauren Bacall is strong here in a late period role, while Cameron Bright does about as well as can be expected from a young actor. Yet, unfortunately, the film rests on Kidman and she does not sell it at all.
Anna, a young widow, is trying to move on with her life after the death of her husband. Engaged to be married, Anna meets a ten year-old boy who tells her he is her husband reincarnated. Though his story at first seems absurd, Anna can't get the boy out of her mind and slowly starts to form a relationship with him.
Birth is truly one of the dullest films I have ever watched. Every scene drags on for far longer than is necessary, often failing to move the story along in any meaningful way. I just about managed to stick it out to the end hoping for an interesting explanation as to the events taking place but was denied even this with a finale that fails to explain a number of factors.
This is one to avoid.
J’aime beaucoup l’affiche (française) du film, Nicole y est très belle, y compris avec les cheveux courts ! et dans le film lui-même également, bien entendu. Nicole à cette époque (en 2004…) est encore 100% naturelle, pas botoxée ni charcutée par les charcudocs de tout le pays !
Mais bref… oui, c’est d’autant plus dommage (du coup) que ce film (de merde) soit une grosse merde épouvantable d’ennui et d’insignifiance ! avec un tel sujet qui plus est… pensez donc, son mari défunt se serait réincarné dans le corps d’un morveux au visage ingrat et au regard bovin… ben voyons !
Et le gamin de la poursuivre un peu partout, et elle de s’en étonner et s’en irriter… à juste titre ! et après, je ne sais pas ce qui se passe éventuellement ou ce qui peut bien se passer parce que j’ai zappé l’étron de film de merde directum et j’ai tiré la chasse par dessus ! non mais putain, on n’a pas idée de torcher une chienlit pareille ! Nicole, tu devrais faire plus attention au moment de lire et d’accepter les scénars… franchement !
Worst movie I've ever seen. Nonsensical.
Nothing about birth nor reincarnation. Superficial. There's this little kid and he tells a woman he's her dead husband - and he's ten years old, whole movie him trying to convince her.