Thursday, September 18, 2003
Irreversible

Irréversible

Skip the Movie. Read the Interpretation.

Gaspard Noé has produced an unwatchable film about how we watch films.

By .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) ::: philms ::: (7) Comments ::: Read the whole thing

Comments

1

Sad

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 22 Sep 03 at 09:28 PM
2

I thought it was pretty good…makes me want to see the film and be revolted.

Jim

Posted by Jim Rovira on 24 Sep 03 at 05:33 PM
3

PS I think another film that comments on the act of filmwatching is “Sliver.”  Came out right after Basic Instinct, about an owner of an apt. building with hidden cameras throughout the building….

Jim

Posted by Jim Rovira on 24 Sep 03 at 05:34 PM
4

think Irreversible was one of the most artistic films- its superb combination of cinematography sound and structure of the story.  I liked the movie cos it was stimulating, it ticked viewers, and it captured audiences. I wasnt too bothered by its simple plot. I think people could even enjoy the movie if they dont view it as a movie about rape. 

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05 Nov 03 at 12:37 AM
5

I thought the film did an admirable job of conveying how revolting real violence is and how blurred the continuum of human behaviour is.

In a world full or sanitised fantasy violence and convenient good vs evil sterotypes, it was an interesting comment. I loathe to say “welcome” of “refreshing” for such a disturbing work.

I’m glad I saw it, but I never want to see it ever again in my life.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 17 Dec 03 at 08:53 PM
6

Haven’t seen Irréversible…
But from this perspective, it seems much like Mullholand Drive. More concerning of what we’re expecting from films and how this is exposed and (de)constructed as we go along with the film itself. well, in other terms, post-estruturalistc rubbish (if mullholand dr wasn’t so freakin good…). Lynch maybe goes a bit further than Noe (considering your point) by making it as also a not-only auto-referentional projection, by dealing with identity, memory, dreams, hollywood and spectacle (of course some of these match quite well in the auto-referential scheme).

I only wish I could have seen these two films on the big-screen (the way they should be watched).

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 23 May 05 at 05:19 PM
7

and on another note,

it seems that pretty much every film is about the way we see films. People that write here in metaphilm seems to have a good grip on that.

you people are lovely. :)

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 03 Jun 05 at 07:46 PM

Post a Comment

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?