User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 70 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 53 out of 70
  2. Negative: 13 out of 70
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. Dec 7, 2012
    4
    This guy imagined a good movie, but he wasn't able to do it. He got lost in typical pretentious mystification of art-house European cinema. A simple e strong story about social disorder is wasted on the director's need to profess his affiliation to a Cannes-type cinema. Great photography and excellent camera operation wasted on scenes that result remarkably boring. Acting direction hasThis guy imagined a good movie, but he wasn't able to do it. He got lost in typical pretentious mystification of art-house European cinema. A simple e strong story about social disorder is wasted on the director's need to profess his affiliation to a Cannes-type cinema. Great photography and excellent camera operation wasted on scenes that result remarkably boring. Acting direction has many ridiculous and amateurish moments. Beautiful music is also wasted when it's not used on the proper moments. In short, a film that could have been good if the director was more concerned with the film he wanted to make then he was with the kind of cinema from which he intends to move away from. Expand
  2. RobertH.
    Oct 24, 2007
    5
    Tedious beyond belief. the interest comes in watching someone struggle unsuccessfully to manufacture art. the kind of allegory on display here because there is so little context just comes off as silly. the kind of film I love to hate and for that reason worth watching.
  3. Tim
    Apr 13, 2006
    5
    Not nearly as deep as it thinks it is. Overblown and ponderous.
  4. Mark
    Aug 22, 2006
    6
    This film deserves praise for the chances it takes. Its visual style and steadily mounting mood of dread are expertly done and hauntingly effective. These strengths keep me from rating this film below a 5. The same cannot be said for its exploration of its themes. It is a film that means to suggest more than is there, a laudable goal but one I don't feel was achieved. Its intentions This film deserves praise for the chances it takes. Its visual style and steadily mounting mood of dread are expertly done and hauntingly effective. These strengths keep me from rating this film below a 5. The same cannot be said for its exploration of its themes. It is a film that means to suggest more than is there, a laudable goal but one I don't feel was achieved. Its intentions are simply overmatched by its pretensions. After a while, the wooden performances and long takes become more than tedious and the overreliance on heavy-handed "symbolism" insulting. Ultimately, this film is nowhere near as insightful as it pretends to be. Expand
  5. PrenK.
    Aug 23, 2003
    4
    Simplistic, pretentious, tedious. The only reason people have given this film good reviews is to flatter their intellects and justify the amount of time they've just spent watching a remarkably boring film. Successfully maintains an illusion of artfulness and intelligence without any real substance to back it up.
Metascore
92

Universal acclaim - based on 8 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 8
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 8
  3. Negative: 0 out of 8
  1. This is as challenging as movies come, alluding to everything from philosopher Thomas Hobbes to the history of Western music.
  2. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    90
    A stunning feature -- another hypnotic meditation on popular demagogy and mental manipulation.
  3. 80
    A work of bravura filmmaking.