Sony Pictures Classics | Release Date: December 23, 2005
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 254 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
166
Mixed:
18
Negative:
70
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characteres (5000 max)
4
JackBlackAug 17, 2007
The movie had a good point, but that was about it. I thought the acting was horrible. The responses to the video "threats" and the drawings was not realistic. I think that this movie could be remade into a 30 minute movie if you take out all The movie had a good point, but that was about it. I thought the acting was horrible. The responses to the video "threats" and the drawings was not realistic. I think that this movie could be remade into a 30 minute movie if you take out all the really drawn out parts of silence. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MichaelG.Aug 9, 2007
The film is interesting and well done technically. That being said, I would go into it knowing that you will leave unsatisfied. When I realized that the movie wasn't going anywhere (about 1/3rd of the way in,) I kept giving it the The film is interesting and well done technically. That being said, I would go into it knowing that you will leave unsatisfied. When I realized that the movie wasn't going anywhere (about 1/3rd of the way in,) I kept giving it the benefit of the doubt. I think that was a a mistake. I wouldn't say it was overwhelmingly "creepy" like some critics. More: overwhelmingly frustrating. It gave me blue balls without even enticing me all that well. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
LucasKOct 26, 2006
Alright, if a very original idea and detail of the story, but I gotta say, TOO FRIGGIN SLOW!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MichaelL.Jul 16, 2006
I think the value of this film is that it encapsulates all that is intriguing and infuriating about French intellectual thought of the past thirty years. There is a deep intellectual pomposity - and, worse, - dishonesty, that permeates all I think the value of this film is that it encapsulates all that is intriguing and infuriating about French intellectual thought of the past thirty years. There is a deep intellectual pomposity - and, worse, - dishonesty, that permeates all of Deconstruction (starting with the fact that we're supposed to call it "Deconstruction" instead of "Deconstructionist".) If you are "hip" or "with it" you know that reality is a series of "narratives" that have no objective basis; all knowledge is fragmentary; and that anything vaguely American - like linear thought - is Very Bad. And yes, the French treated the Algerians badly and are closet racists, but that is really window dressing here. In fact, maybe some of the recent racial friction is caused by the lack of directness embodied by this film! The French want to pretend they believe in relative values and a subjective view of reality, but then why do they so emphatically defend the French language, culture, wine and cheese from foreign influence? I want to make it clear that I love slow, poetic films if their intent is to be dreamlike - Mulholland Drive is an excellent example of the genre. But this was simply a whodunit with the answers left out. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
JoeT.Jul 8, 2006
too pseudo intellectual.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DanB.Jul 1, 2006
It's fine throughout. Despite its very slow pace, it keeps a sense of creeping suspense. [***SPOILERS***] Unfortunately the end didn't really pay off. I think it might make more sense to someone who knows French history better, and It's fine throughout. Despite its very slow pace, it keeps a sense of creeping suspense. [***SPOILERS***] Unfortunately the end didn't really pay off. I think it might make more sense to someone who knows French history better, and their colonial experience with Algeria... at one point there is also a news clip in the background, given some fair prominence in the scene -- it talks about the Iraq war, and also has some footage about Gaza. It's hard for me to say how or why the film tries to tie that into this. Anyway. Really fine performances from the actors. But a let down at the end that leaves things way too unresolved. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DylanMay 25, 2006
i understnd that this movie has many underlying meanings, many of which relating to the racism in france etc. but it still does annoy me that i left the film not exactly knowing what happened, if the the two sons stnading in the stairs are i understnd that this movie has many underlying meanings, many of which relating to the racism in france etc. but it still does annoy me that i left the film not exactly knowing what happened, if the the two sons stnading in the stairs are talking does that portray that it is the people of the future who are requried to mend the wrong doings of the past? can some one help me? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
StephenMay 7, 2006
Thoughtful and stylish, but it is a stern test of patience. Firstly, I cannot accept Haneke
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ScottR.May 2, 2006
It had me but I did not get the ending. I understand that the whole film would feel much better if you knew about the french / albanian history. I didn't know either and it left me feeling stupid. I dont need to have everything wrapped It had me but I did not get the ending. I understand that the whole film would feel much better if you knew about the french / albanian history. I didn't know either and it left me feeling stupid. I dont need to have everything wrapped up in a nice litle package but let me know what Happend please. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DanC.Apr 25, 2006
A deeply disappointing and unsatisfying movie by an impressive director that should know better.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
TomO.Feb 25, 2006
Slow paced and opaque. Subtitles in white font are occasionally illegible.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
KenG.Feb 16, 2006
A true "critic's film", meaning it's a movie critics love to gush over to show how "smart and deep" they are, but if you're not a professional critic, you probably won't be nearly as impressed. Movie doesn't work as A true "critic's film", meaning it's a movie critics love to gush over to show how "smart and deep" they are, but if you're not a professional critic, you probably won't be nearly as impressed. Movie doesn't work as a thriller, because there's no real suspense, or edge, You see the actors going through emotions, but those emotions never really come through the screen. Movie doesn't work as a study on the effects this kind of thing can have on a marriage, because you don't get the feeling that their marriage was a particularily happy marriage even before this stuff starts. (In fact Auetail basically admits this to his mother in their scene together) And movie doesn't work as a study of guilt, because the dark secret that has "haunted" Auetail all these years simply doesn't seem that bad. He told a lie when he was 6. First of all couldn't they have made it when he was 12, when he could have been seen as more responsible for his actions. Second of all the lie itself doesn't seem that terrible. The parents overreated to it, which means the blame should have been on the parents, not the kid. I came out of this thinking the 6-year old Auetail wronged the poor chicken, alot more then he wronged the other boy. Overall, movie is the cinema personifaction of that old question "what's the sound of one-hand clapping?" Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful