The Artist

User Score
8.1

Universal acclaim- based on 485 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 32 out of 485
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 1, 2012
    5
    It just goes to show that you should read more about a movie before you go and see it. I was expecting some uproarious comedy, not some derivative hommage to 'Ollywood. It was mildly amusing, with a winning performance by the dog, but the 'plot' was slight and I'm not sure I got it. "The Woman In Black" was more enjoyable, "The Descendants" more worthy of recognition.

    As for the silent
    It just goes to show that you should read more about a movie before you go and see it. I was expecting some uproarious comedy, not some derivative hommage to 'Ollywood. It was mildly amusing, with a winning performance by the dog, but the 'plot' was slight and I'm not sure I got it. "The Woman In Black" was more enjoyable, "The Descendants" more worthy of recognition.

    As for the silent gimmick: give me talkies.
    Expand
  2. Feb 27, 2012
    4
    The Artist is one of the most overrated movies of all time. Some people call it a tribute, but is nothing more than a rough copy. Getting started, all the value of the film is due to the year it was made, in other words, if The Artist was from 1930, would have been a film of the bunch and nothing more. The plot it is absolutely simple and you cannot say that it has the common structure:The Artist is one of the most overrated movies of all time. Some people call it a tribute, but is nothing more than a rough copy. Getting started, all the value of the film is due to the year it was made, in other words, if The Artist was from 1930, would have been a film of the bunch and nothing more. The plot it is absolutely simple and you cannot say that it has the common structure: intro, development and conclusion. Third, the award winning performance of Jean Dujardin, is totally misjudge, all what he did was laugh and dance, that is not an Oscar. Fourth, the direction is poor, Hazanavicius has a lot to learn; he had not a chance to beat the great filmmakers, like Allen, Scorsese, Payne and Malick, something is wrong here. And for worse, the soundtrack was stolen from **** picture: Vertigo.
    The good part of the film was when the protagonist suffers in dreams because of the appearance of sound in movies and in his life. Another interesting thing is that it was filmed as a silent movie and for telling what the characters said, they use signboards. But the cinematography was awful.
    Awarding this picture the Academy is losing prestige and for me, this entity is no longer believable.
    Expand
  3. Feb 20, 2012
    4
    The Artist for a film student as myself is little more than a self-congratulatory concept piece that lacks the authentic charm of real silent movies. This is not 'City Lights'! The Artist, revels far too much in its own cleverness, allowing neither a connection to the characters to form or a true sense of wonderment. The plot is recycled from several films, most obvious elements of courseThe Artist for a film student as myself is little more than a self-congratulatory concept piece that lacks the authentic charm of real silent movies. This is not 'City Lights'! The Artist, revels far too much in its own cleverness, allowing neither a connection to the characters to form or a true sense of wonderment. The plot is recycled from several films, most obvious elements of course being from Singing in the Rain, and whilst the sets and acting are deserving of their commendations the overall arcing plot and characterisation is poorly dealt with. This will most certainly win all of the Oscars, so Hollywood itself can receive a lifetime achievement award (thanks a lot France!). Irregardless, if this type of feature starts a new trend in the silent gimmick and reflection of the past then I am not looking forward to the casting or should I even hope for an appearance of minorities within a format which celebrates its white exclusivity and achievement in a medium. This is merely an average film which disguises itself through the crowd-pleasing and tiring 'homage to...' genre for acclaim. Expand
  4. MJT
    Dec 26, 2011
    4
    I'm sorry, but this movie is terribly overrated. What I can't get over is how it doesn't even approach the best old silent films in the way it is shot and edited. It really plods along in places. A decent editor could have cut out about 15 minutes and given the movie some snap. All I can say is it sure made me want to go back to the great old films...and the dancing sequence--well,I'm sorry, but this movie is terribly overrated. What I can't get over is how it doesn't even approach the best old silent films in the way it is shot and edited. It really plods along in places. A decent editor could have cut out about 15 minutes and given the movie some snap. All I can say is it sure made me want to go back to the great old films...and the dancing sequence--well, Astaire and Rogers they aren't. It's a likeable, but way overrated movie. Rent a Harold Lloyd or Buster Keaton or Charlie Chaplin and see what real film making looks like. Expand
  5. Dec 30, 2011
    4
    This is a disappointing movie. The emotions are superficial (as in almost all silent movies), the ending is predictable, and frankly, the plot is somewhat boring and uninspiring. The critics and I strongly disagree about this one. Perhaps they are too nostalgic to take an unbiased look at this movie...
  6. Feb 3, 2012
    5
    Just seen this. I went from initially impressed ("wow look how authentic it looks!") to bored . . . to amazed, excited and hopeful (at the talking dream part) . . . to slowly bored again and then disappointed, as the film ended.

    A few points that struck me.During the movie I was struck by the beautiful, ever so slightly familiar, string theme. On reading up after the movie I learnt this
    Just seen this. I went from initially impressed ("wow look how authentic it looks!") to bored . . . to amazed, excited and hopeful (at the talking dream part) . . . to slowly bored again and then disappointed, as the film ended.

    A few points that struck me.During the movie I was struck by the beautiful, ever so slightly familiar, string theme. On reading up after the movie I learnt this wasn't an original composition. I know the whole thing is sposed to be some kind of "homage to cinema" but thats really stretching it a bit for a Best Picture Nominee. Minus one point there.

    I think the film, while technically excellent, didnt take enough risks. As I said, I thought the 'sound dream' but was fantastic and really got me excited for how the rest of the film would play out - maybe it would get surreal, maybe there would be colour, maybe matrix style SFX, even 3D as we see the evolution of film! (ok maybe not 3D, but you get my point). Instead there was nothing else of note.

    The plot was wafer thin. I find it ironic that many critics who marvelled at, say, Avatar's fantastic technical aspects but berated its poor, predicatable generic plot, are willing to overlook that crucial aspect in the case of The Artist. Double standards?

    Overall, and most importantly, the reason this film should NOT win best picture is that it simply has nothing to offer the viewer on repeat viewings. The first time round has its moments- "wow look how authentic it looks!" - and there's the excitement of not knowing what to expect.
    But on repeat viewings all you've got is a mediocre silent film - a bit dull in places, with a wafer thin plot.
    Expand
  7. Dec 27, 2011
    5
    This film is nothing special short of being a silent movie in 2011. The story has been told many times over in the past. I found myself just hanging in to see if my predicted conclusion would hold true, which it did. The story of The Artist is essentially covered by sections of "Chaplin" with Robert Downey Jr. I applaud the filmmakers for taking a risk. Its worth a novelty viewing,This film is nothing special short of being a silent movie in 2011. The story has been told many times over in the past. I found myself just hanging in to see if my predicted conclusion would hold true, which it did. The story of The Artist is essentially covered by sections of "Chaplin" with Robert Downey Jr. I applaud the filmmakers for taking a risk. Its worth a novelty viewing, but hardly worth Best Picture consideration in any country. Well, unless they have a Best Silent Picture category. Expand
  8. Dec 25, 2011
    4
    While the basic idea of this film is creative and has the potential of being a powerful experience, it is not realized. This is not a great film, as the creators did not actually study what makes silent film great. Silent films have a great depth but a different rhythm, more like opera than film, and this movie clearly has no knowledge of what makes silent films tick, so it is an academicWhile the basic idea of this film is creative and has the potential of being a powerful experience, it is not realized. This is not a great film, as the creators did not actually study what makes silent film great. Silent films have a great depth but a different rhythm, more like opera than film, and this movie clearly has no knowledge of what makes silent films tick, so it is an academic exercise, done with passion, but which ultimately fails. The story within the story is ultimately not very interesting. Expand
  9. Jan 30, 2012
    6
    My mind kept wandering. It wasn't the silence or the dated plot but the lack of meat on the bones. A remake of Tugboat Willy would be as blah. It's a nice artistic conceipt for 15 minutes then it just continues to grind on into endless repitition of self love.
  10. Jan 31, 2012
    6
    What a novel idea for a film, make it like they used to be. It wears thin soon but the acting is flawless while the story, well, you know it. The ending did hold a surprise and that's a plus. In summary, well done, kudos to all, it should be seen. Hopefully the critics have not gone gaga over it just because it is different and they are forced to see the 80% of films that are boring andWhat a novel idea for a film, make it like they used to be. It wears thin soon but the acting is flawless while the story, well, you know it. The ending did hold a surprise and that's a plus. In summary, well done, kudos to all, it should be seen. Hopefully the critics have not gone gaga over it just because it is different and they are forced to see the 80% of films that are boring and usually a waste of time; but of course, that is their job. Expand
  11. Dec 2, 2011
    6
    Wow -- really? As a lover of silent film and films set in that period, I just don't get what the excitement is about (with the exception of the novelty). Characters are underwritten, direction all over the place, plot and direction have anachronistic issues. First Act is exciting, Second Act meandering and lost, Third Act charming...but by THAT time... Plays like an AFI student film.
  12. Jul 1, 2013
    5
    Our review panel was mixed as well on this move listen to our podcast on itunes to find out why.
    Listen to our full review of this movie and others that are beloved by critics,
    Critically Acclaimed, Publicly Reviewed on itunes.
    https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/critically-acclaimed-publicly/id660700036?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4
  13. Jul 5, 2013
    5
    This isn't a bad film, but it's not worth all the buzz it's been getting. Yes, it's a silent black-and-white film but it doesn't feel like one due to the two lead actors outstanding performances. However there are too many misses to make this an Oscar-nominated film. George (Dujardin) is plummeting into his own demise due to his pride and inability to accept change. Peppy (Bejo) is theThis isn't a bad film, but it's not worth all the buzz it's been getting. Yes, it's a silent black-and-white film but it doesn't feel like one due to the two lead actors outstanding performances. However there are too many misses to make this an Oscar-nominated film. George (Dujardin) is plummeting into his own demise due to his pride and inability to accept change. Peppy (Bejo) is the love-struck mega movie star trying to help him. Her affections (obsession?) for him seems to make no sense. The dialogue cards are few and do not help much to move the story along. The music, an integral part of any silent black-and-white movie, seems to be, at times, irrelevant to the plot. All this makes the film seem way too long. The final dance sequence, however, is truly delightful. I expected a masterpiece that, I did not get. Expand
Metascore
89

Universal acclaim - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 40 out of 41
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 41
  3. Negative: 1 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Jan 20, 2012
    100
    If nothing else, this is a cinematic high-wire act.
  2. Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    Dec 28, 2011
    88
    Hazanavicius isn't just making a "silent movie," he is attempting to enter a time warp and craft something that would fool all but the most studious and scholarly into believing it could have been a lost film from a bygone era. If his tongue is sometimes a little in his cheek, that's all part of the fun.
  3. Reviewed by: Joe Williams
    Dec 22, 2011
    88
    May be too cute to qualify as high art, but it's highly entertaining.