1. ChadS.

   7

   Five minutes into...hell, let's be honest here; thirty-seven seconds into "Slipstream", I was lost. I had to consult my Oxford Concise English Dictionary to look up the word "slipstream". According to the OED, "slipstream" is defined as "an assisting force regarded as drawing something along with or behind something else." That helps explain the seemingly arbitrary flashbacks that are hurled at the viewer in abundance, in places where no filmmaker has ever placed them before. Then there are the jump cuts, the off-kilter music cues, the lack of continuity, the external noise on the soundtrack, the Russian formalist style of editing, etc., etc., etc. "Slipstream" has the look and feel of a collaboration between Jean-Luc Goddard and David Lynch. It's art film damage. "Slipstream" makes both "Pierrot le fou" and "Mulholland Drive" seem less ardurous to sit through by comparison. Actor-turned-director Anthony Hopkins made a film that no ordinary person would want to sit through. Good for him. Who knew he had it in him to be a confrontational artist? "Slipstream" has the look and feel of a young man's movie. He's 71, folks. But then, in the final act, he shows his age; the funhouse thrill of disorientation wears out; the film's nonsensical presentation starts to make sense; all the looking glasses in the hall of mirrors are cracked except one. Unlike the work of Lynch, in which story particulars are open for debate, "Slipstream", decidedly slips off its French skin and walks around like an American during the home stretch. From dadaism to didacticism; the filmmaker makes the mistake of being too tidy, especially so during the end credits.… Expand

   • Helpful?

     0 of 0 users said yes
2. aryanrule

   3

   Cant say much. I cannot believe that such great man as Hopkins could do such twisted and sick movie. U need to be very focused to stay tuned with the fabula, and even then u are still questioning yourself what exactly are u watching. Only 3 stars for this, though i could give him 10 stars for composing music.… Expand

   • Helpful?

     1 of 1 users said yes
3. CurtisS.

   0

   This is the first zero rating I've ever given to a movie. What an utter piece of confused noisy trash this film is. Random visual and auditory interference scattered abundantly throughout, after about 15 minutes, I could watch no more. I think it qualifies as "unwatchable." The entire movie, according to others estimations of it on metacritic,com, is a bunch of confusion: real and fictional elements of an older (dying) man as his life flashes before him. This strongly seems like the experimental work of a first year, self-indulgent film student who wanted to bring one of his sleep-dreams to life, with absolutely no consideration for the audience's enjoyment or understanding. I think the relatively high rating of 7, by consumers and pro critics is due to some misplaced allegiance to Anthony Hopkins, (obviously a great actor in other films), who wrote, directed and comatosely "starred" in this embarrassment. Even he called it "a joke" at a screening. Please, Mr. Hopkins, stick to acting, or at least have a story if you decide to give it another go at directing, To sit for an hour and a half only to find out that the unpleasant mish-mash you've just endured is the fractured percepton of a dying man is a complete disappointment. It's like someone had played a cruel trick on you and wasted an hour and a half of your life. Not, funny, Mr. Hopkins.… Expand

   • Helpful?

     1 of 1 users said yes

See all 4 User Reviews