As a fan of Gaspar Noé, I enjoy his movies even when I feel sick of what I see in his movies. I'm also pretty sure that the most catchy element of his movies is the visuals. So far, i've seen his every feature films except Love. Climax, Irreversible and Enter the Void, which are mostly the favorites of the audience, achieved giving fancy visuals. Strangely, visuals of Lux Aeterna does not make you satisfied since the story leads to literally nowhere worthy. Instead, this time Gaspar Noé tries to introduce a point of view to role of woman in film industry and also in history. I can say that he does it well. Lux Aeterna is a "must watch" for Noé fans because in every second you will feel the style of Gaspar Noé. But if you are not a fan, this movie is a pure boredom and agony.
18 Reviews
painful to watch, as usual with Gaspar Noe, but for different reasons than you'd expect
kay-212-42661619 May 2021
First off, I'm quite a Gaspar Noé fan, and I have watched every movie since "I stand alone" - I liked every single one of them, and especially Climax really surprised me with how good it was.
This movie however leaves me with very mixed feelings. 90% of the movie consists dialog which is either meaningless or leaves alot of room for interpretation, but, in any case, wasn't very entertaining to watch. The other 10% make anyone familiar with Noé's work instantly recognize his trademark visuals. These 10% are really painful to watch, but not for the reasons you might expect from a "classic" Noé movie. In the end, the movie left me pretty unsatisfied. The visuals were pretty interesting at times, yes, and would have been perfect for a music video, but they don't save save the movie from feeling dull.
I would still recommend it for fans of this director, as it is definitely an unusual movie, just don't expect anything mindblowing or truly disturbing!
This movie however leaves me with very mixed feelings. 90% of the movie consists dialog which is either meaningless or leaves alot of room for interpretation, but, in any case, wasn't very entertaining to watch. The other 10% make anyone familiar with Noé's work instantly recognize his trademark visuals. These 10% are really painful to watch, but not for the reasons you might expect from a "classic" Noé movie. In the end, the movie left me pretty unsatisfied. The visuals were pretty interesting at times, yes, and would have been perfect for a music video, but they don't save save the movie from feeling dull.
I would still recommend it for fans of this director, as it is definitely an unusual movie, just don't expect anything mindblowing or truly disturbing!
Interested with an unexpected turn
carro81510 February 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This is the first Gaspar Noe film I watched and, for a first impression, I feel it may have been too intense with the flashing lights that almost gave me an epileptic seizure. Which may have been different on another day, perhaps without a hangover the experience is better. I am not usually a huge fan of films about making films, they often feel as though the director does puts too much focus on the film-making process and drama within, which is personal. However, this film in particular managed to keep a lot of its content open to interpretation, making it somewhat more relatable to the viewer. The beginning was much more easier to get into, while the rest evolved into an disturbingly unsettling art installation. When watching alone, making sure you are not the slightest bit epileptic unless you honestly enjoy the thrill of seizures.
To be a witch in the 21st century
jsartsreview18 July 2023
The "Lux Aeterna" (18+) is one more cinematic experiment from Gaspar Noé. Noe gained the worldwide fame in 2002, thanks to the scandalous film "Irreversibility" with Monica Bellucci and Vincent Cassel.
"Lux Aeterna" grew out of a collaboration between Saint Laurent and Gaspar Noé, the master of light and audience reactions, it is a surreal and hysterically beautiful narrative of a day on the set of a film about the Inquisition in the underground aesthetics of the 1990s. The shimmering light and quotes from Dostoevsky, Godard, Fassbinder and other iconic figures add contrasts to the film.
Two icons of French cinema of the last decades, Beatrice Dalle and Charlotte Gainsbourg, are the driving mechanisms of the film. At first, they improvise in the dialogue, where they are ironic and exaggerative, but they tell about the creative underside of almost any film or production, and later they heat up emotional tension to the level of the atrocities of the Inquisition or hellish cauldrons. The aesthetic is amazing: crosses and bonfires, Charlotte in a Saint Laurent dress and the insane energy of Beatrice, covering even the madness of light and music at the end of the film. Beatrice is the witch in this story: charismatic, bright, even weird and uncomfortable for others, and the film within the film is her brainchild, which others are trying to appropriate.
The film turned out to be stylish and a bit provocative: about fashion and its victims, about vices and the fact that not everything is so simple with them, and, finally, about human selfishness. A neon beam pierces the "Lux Aeterna" with the truth that witches have a hard time even in the 21st century, because the crowd is always ready to lynch.
"Lux Aeterna" grew out of a collaboration between Saint Laurent and Gaspar Noé, the master of light and audience reactions, it is a surreal and hysterically beautiful narrative of a day on the set of a film about the Inquisition in the underground aesthetics of the 1990s. The shimmering light and quotes from Dostoevsky, Godard, Fassbinder and other iconic figures add contrasts to the film.
Two icons of French cinema of the last decades, Beatrice Dalle and Charlotte Gainsbourg, are the driving mechanisms of the film. At first, they improvise in the dialogue, where they are ironic and exaggerative, but they tell about the creative underside of almost any film or production, and later they heat up emotional tension to the level of the atrocities of the Inquisition or hellish cauldrons. The aesthetic is amazing: crosses and bonfires, Charlotte in a Saint Laurent dress and the insane energy of Beatrice, covering even the madness of light and music at the end of the film. Beatrice is the witch in this story: charismatic, bright, even weird and uncomfortable for others, and the film within the film is her brainchild, which others are trying to appropriate.
The film turned out to be stylish and a bit provocative: about fashion and its victims, about vices and the fact that not everything is so simple with them, and, finally, about human selfishness. A neon beam pierces the "Lux Aeterna" with the truth that witches have a hard time even in the 21st century, because the crowd is always ready to lynch.
Far From Bewitching...
Xstal26 September 2022
... though it may just get you twitching.
A number of patients in a high security psychiatric hospital decide to make a short film. Conscious of the fact that in medieval times they would most likely have been considered witches or warlocks, since their behaviour could only be interpreted as such during those times, they place the punishment for such behaviour at the centre of their creation.
Fortunately, as luck would have it, the split screen personality allows the viewer to gorge on twice as much pagan pantomime than would normally be recommend but, since this piece occupies slightly less than an hour, they just about get away with it, although that may depend on the medication you're currently prescribed.
You'll be pleased when the credits role, although it's unlikely you'll make it through to the end.
A number of patients in a high security psychiatric hospital decide to make a short film. Conscious of the fact that in medieval times they would most likely have been considered witches or warlocks, since their behaviour could only be interpreted as such during those times, they place the punishment for such behaviour at the centre of their creation.
Fortunately, as luck would have it, the split screen personality allows the viewer to gorge on twice as much pagan pantomime than would normally be recommend but, since this piece occupies slightly less than an hour, they just about get away with it, although that may depend on the medication you're currently prescribed.
You'll be pleased when the credits role, although it's unlikely you'll make it through to the end.
Intense and open to interpretations
Topher-2616 December 2019
7 months after its premiere in Cannes (which I attended), I can't believe there is still no review of Lux Aeterna, so here is mine:
I think this film is admirable in many ways although not devoid of flaws, the main one being that for the nth time, Noé pulls the same expectable tricks with colorful lighting, flickering images and references to his classics (even just the title, "Lux Aeterna" is the György Ligeti eerie choir piece used in "2001: A Space Odyssey"), etc. So that does get a little unimaginative, especially since the atmosphere and development are very close to his latest long feature, "Climax".
That said, everything else is interesting. From the Dalle / Gainsbourg improvised dialogue (made hilarious by Dalle's very personal way of saying things - let's hope that won't get lost in translation) to the creative ways in which Noé uses the screen space. I couldn't stress this enough: *This Must Be Watched In A Movie Theater* ! Although I do enjoy smaller screens, I'm afraid a small screen won't cut it with this one. As usual with Noé, the experimental elements are present and the big screen is a must in order to enjoy them fully.
Many references are made throughout the film to Carl Dreyer's classic "Vredens Dag" from 1943, also using footage from it. It does serve a purpose but cannot really be discussed without spoiling.
I believe many interpretations of the film are possible. From mysogynistic to feminist. I'm definitely going with the latter. The end scene is intense in symbolism, deafening sound, flickering visuals and a creative use of the screen. If you suffer from epilepsy: STAY AWAY. As usual, Noé tries our patience and is into trying to shock us - but that's getting a bit old. Nothing gory though, so the faint of heart can watch. The camera flies from room to room as the crescendo builds up progressively until smothering hysteria. The film only lasts 50mn but it wouldn't necessarily have made more sense to make it any longer.
This is also definitely a film about film-making and how things go, on and off set. It's a film about actresses - how some can impose their strength or choose to go with what is asked of them.
This film will divide. Some will see it as arty, vaccuous and pointless. Others will find depth and meaning in it, but not necessarily the same meaning. I believe this is the best Noé film in a long time. Overall better than "Climax" or "Love". If you can get past Noé's antics, it is not only enjoyable, it is mostly an undeniable breath of fresh air in contemporary cinema.
I think this film is admirable in many ways although not devoid of flaws, the main one being that for the nth time, Noé pulls the same expectable tricks with colorful lighting, flickering images and references to his classics (even just the title, "Lux Aeterna" is the György Ligeti eerie choir piece used in "2001: A Space Odyssey"), etc. So that does get a little unimaginative, especially since the atmosphere and development are very close to his latest long feature, "Climax".
That said, everything else is interesting. From the Dalle / Gainsbourg improvised dialogue (made hilarious by Dalle's very personal way of saying things - let's hope that won't get lost in translation) to the creative ways in which Noé uses the screen space. I couldn't stress this enough: *This Must Be Watched In A Movie Theater* ! Although I do enjoy smaller screens, I'm afraid a small screen won't cut it with this one. As usual with Noé, the experimental elements are present and the big screen is a must in order to enjoy them fully.
Many references are made throughout the film to Carl Dreyer's classic "Vredens Dag" from 1943, also using footage from it. It does serve a purpose but cannot really be discussed without spoiling.
I believe many interpretations of the film are possible. From mysogynistic to feminist. I'm definitely going with the latter. The end scene is intense in symbolism, deafening sound, flickering visuals and a creative use of the screen. If you suffer from epilepsy: STAY AWAY. As usual, Noé tries our patience and is into trying to shock us - but that's getting a bit old. Nothing gory though, so the faint of heart can watch. The camera flies from room to room as the crescendo builds up progressively until smothering hysteria. The film only lasts 50mn but it wouldn't necessarily have made more sense to make it any longer.
This is also definitely a film about film-making and how things go, on and off set. It's a film about actresses - how some can impose their strength or choose to go with what is asked of them.
This film will divide. Some will see it as arty, vaccuous and pointless. Others will find depth and meaning in it, but not necessarily the same meaning. I believe this is the best Noé film in a long time. Overall better than "Climax" or "Love". If you can get past Noé's antics, it is not only enjoyable, it is mostly an undeniable breath of fresh air in contemporary cinema.
If You Find Constant Arguing and Flashing Lights Entertaining, This Is For You!
oz_13_was_taken27 April 2022
A 51-minute film filled with people shouting and arguing on the set of a movie. The final 5-10 minutes contributes flashing colors and a high pitched ringing to go along with the shouting. Throw in pointless side-plots (if you can call them that, since they aren't really relevant or resolved) and you've got a movie snobs will call "high art" just because it came from Gaspar Noe. Waste of 51 minutes. Glad I didn't pay to see it. Stunning poster art, though.
You Are Not Watching The Movie, You Experience It
Duhanakdmn9 August 2021
While watching the movie You are definitely feeling the stress on the set. If you want to watch a regular cinema and if you don't know who is Gaspar Noe you might say "what was that ? What happened ?". As in the previous films of Gaspar you are not just standing there and watching the movie you feel what characters feels.
When art becomes stressful
awaked-110 July 2021
Even with this short runtime, the movie is stressful work, its overly pretentious, nearly a self-parody. The last minutes are just suffering for viewers and characters. Its bland and overly symbolic, does not create any character arc, every one of the characters is just a cut out paper, not even two dimensional. L'art pour l'art, right? But in this case, its just artificial. Meaningless. And the worst: It does not entertain. Not one moment.
Welp still a bit to self-indulgent
Verdigri28 February 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Still haven't seen Enter the void (and not interested about Love) but I did see every other Gaspard Noé movie. And I must say that, even though I really like " Seul contre Tous " (" I stand alone " for english speaking folks) I'm not a huge fan of his style, especially in his later effort, Climax. " Wow look at me, beautiful camera works and sequence-shots eh ? Wow this is brutal, do you see ? I am brutal. Doesn't matter whether the movie is about nothing and the actors are mediocre, there is a cool music and a cool choreography".
I was hoping Lux Aeterna wouldn't be as awful as Climax ; maybe this time Gaspard Noé would have something to say ? And indeed this time Gaspard Noé want to talk about cinema, and more particularily the chaos surrounding the creation process of a movie.
The first third is a dialogue between a film director played by Béatrice Dalle and an actress played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. It really sounded and was filmed like some kind of interview but it allows the characters to extensively discuss about cinema. Sober but sharp directing, interesting discussion. Didn't expected that from Gaspard Noé but it really worked quite well. After that it's the downfall until the end. The second part of the movie show the gradual dive into madness during the shooting of Béatrice Dalle's movie. It's not a bad idea by itself but it is actually done with no subtelty whatsoever. You get the point after 5 minutes and then it just drags on forever. Didn't expect I could think a medium-length film is too long. Finally, the last act of the movie is pure chaos. But. Stroboscopics lights. This is what I hate the moste about this movie and Climax. " Style " over substance . And what I hate even more is that Gaspard Noé fans will tell you there is some deep meaning behind this choice of using intense stroboscopics lights. Welp it highlights the chaos of the shooting, yeah sure we got that. Does this justify to put the spectators through 10 minutes (not sure exactly but it was really long) of pain ? And even the man himself told in an interview that a knew the spectators would like stroboscopics lights, that's it. He just knows how to please his fans. Not sure this a really " artistic " way of creating a movie.
So yeah, the first part was great, I liked the direction Gaspard Noé took but then he came back to do the worst that he can do. I don't really recommend this movie, except if you are curious to see this really, really painful ending or if you are looking for a reliable way to diagnose epilepsy.
I was hoping Lux Aeterna wouldn't be as awful as Climax ; maybe this time Gaspard Noé would have something to say ? And indeed this time Gaspard Noé want to talk about cinema, and more particularily the chaos surrounding the creation process of a movie.
The first third is a dialogue between a film director played by Béatrice Dalle and an actress played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. It really sounded and was filmed like some kind of interview but it allows the characters to extensively discuss about cinema. Sober but sharp directing, interesting discussion. Didn't expected that from Gaspard Noé but it really worked quite well. After that it's the downfall until the end. The second part of the movie show the gradual dive into madness during the shooting of Béatrice Dalle's movie. It's not a bad idea by itself but it is actually done with no subtelty whatsoever. You get the point after 5 minutes and then it just drags on forever. Didn't expect I could think a medium-length film is too long. Finally, the last act of the movie is pure chaos. But. Stroboscopics lights. This is what I hate the moste about this movie and Climax. " Style " over substance . And what I hate even more is that Gaspard Noé fans will tell you there is some deep meaning behind this choice of using intense stroboscopics lights. Welp it highlights the chaos of the shooting, yeah sure we got that. Does this justify to put the spectators through 10 minutes (not sure exactly but it was really long) of pain ? And even the man himself told in an interview that a knew the spectators would like stroboscopics lights, that's it. He just knows how to please his fans. Not sure this a really " artistic " way of creating a movie.
So yeah, the first part was great, I liked the direction Gaspard Noé took but then he came back to do the worst that he can do. I don't really recommend this movie, except if you are curious to see this really, really painful ending or if you are looking for a reliable way to diagnose epilepsy.
Visually Stunning. Interesting Look at Cinema and Humanity
Reviews_of_the_Dead21 May 2022
This was a movie that when I saw it was from Gaspar Noé and coming to the Gateway Film Center, it had my attention. Reading through the synopsis and checking the genres, I thought that it could be horror or at least adjacent. It also featured Béatrice Dalle and Charlotte Gainsbourg, I was in.
What I should say next is that this isn't a horror film. It does have elements though. This movie is about making a movie. Dalle and Gainsbourg play themselves. The first part is them chatting about different movies and experiences they've been on. They are both in this production that is borrowing from Haxän, which is a documentary/dramatization of witchcraft throughout the ages. This moves into a surreal situation to end the movie as they film the scene with Gainsbourg, Abby Lee and another actor as they're 'burned' at the stake for the movie.
The movie has a feeling of dread. We see that the production of the movie is troubled. Dalle is the elder actor and she butts heads with the director who in turn wants her off the project. He takes this to the executive producer. We have a guy who is trying to pitch an idea of a role in his feature film debut to Gainsbourg and Lee. This annoys both as it is unprofessional. Gainsbourg learns a horrific thing might have happened to her daughter and she is torn what to do. The tension just builds until the climax. It is interesting as well since this runs 51 minutes.
This movie does get some of that Noé flair. He is a bit over the top at times, but I respect his style. The acting is natural as playing caricatures of themselves. The visuals here are amazing. That is the biggest take away for me. I enjoy the message we are conveying here both on the surface and underneath. This won't be for everyone though. This is arthouse. It is short, so keep that in mind. It is an interesting ride for sure.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
What I should say next is that this isn't a horror film. It does have elements though. This movie is about making a movie. Dalle and Gainsbourg play themselves. The first part is them chatting about different movies and experiences they've been on. They are both in this production that is borrowing from Haxän, which is a documentary/dramatization of witchcraft throughout the ages. This moves into a surreal situation to end the movie as they film the scene with Gainsbourg, Abby Lee and another actor as they're 'burned' at the stake for the movie.
The movie has a feeling of dread. We see that the production of the movie is troubled. Dalle is the elder actor and she butts heads with the director who in turn wants her off the project. He takes this to the executive producer. We have a guy who is trying to pitch an idea of a role in his feature film debut to Gainsbourg and Lee. This annoys both as it is unprofessional. Gainsbourg learns a horrific thing might have happened to her daughter and she is torn what to do. The tension just builds until the climax. It is interesting as well since this runs 51 minutes.
This movie does get some of that Noé flair. He is a bit over the top at times, but I respect his style. The acting is natural as playing caricatures of themselves. The visuals here are amazing. That is the biggest take away for me. I enjoy the message we are conveying here both on the surface and underneath. This won't be for everyone though. This is arthouse. It is short, so keep that in mind. It is an interesting ride for sure.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
There's an audience for this movie, and I'm not it.
I_Ailurophile17 November 2022
I keep trying. Heretofore I've seen three of Gaspar Noé's other films. I was extremely unimpressed with 'Enter the void'; while I might get more out of it if I watched again, I didn't think much of 'Irreversible,' either. On the other hand, most recently, I greatly enjoyed 'Climax.' It's largely on the basis of that one high note that I so far continue exploring the filmmaker's work, to see where my favor lands. Having now watched 'Lux aeterna,' I can only reflect that I'm still 1 for 4 when it comes to Noé - I don't much care for this at all.
There's the start of an idea here in the portrayal of a fictional film production that's an absolute mess in every possible way; if "God's craft" were real, it would be the laughing stock of the world. From this root there is potential for Something to happen, and it indeed seems like 'Lux aeterna' is building to something in its last minutes. But then it just ends. All that pervasive tension, conflict, chaotic split screen presentation, underhanded commentary, and mounting disaster leads to... nothing but a roll of credits.
And, listen - in 2022 (or 2019, as it were), I don't think there's any excuse for filmmakers to deliberately employ flashing lights of the variety that carry substantial risk of inducing epileptic seizures. I'll allow that every possibility of color and frequency can't be accounted for, but it seems like such conditions generally fall within a particular range. Are such visuals truly so important to the artistic vision of a project that it's worth putting potential viewers at actual risk of their health?
I congratulate those who get something more out of this than I did. Actually, genuinely congratulate, in the truest sense of the word. Only for the fact that I like Charlotte Gainsbourg do I feel like this wasn't a total waste of my time. There's an admiring audience out there somewhere for 'Lux aeterna,' but for my part, I don't know who they are.
There's the start of an idea here in the portrayal of a fictional film production that's an absolute mess in every possible way; if "God's craft" were real, it would be the laughing stock of the world. From this root there is potential for Something to happen, and it indeed seems like 'Lux aeterna' is building to something in its last minutes. But then it just ends. All that pervasive tension, conflict, chaotic split screen presentation, underhanded commentary, and mounting disaster leads to... nothing but a roll of credits.
And, listen - in 2022 (or 2019, as it were), I don't think there's any excuse for filmmakers to deliberately employ flashing lights of the variety that carry substantial risk of inducing epileptic seizures. I'll allow that every possibility of color and frequency can't be accounted for, but it seems like such conditions generally fall within a particular range. Are such visuals truly so important to the artistic vision of a project that it's worth putting potential viewers at actual risk of their health?
I congratulate those who get something more out of this than I did. Actually, genuinely congratulate, in the truest sense of the word. Only for the fact that I like Charlotte Gainsbourg do I feel like this wasn't a total waste of my time. There's an admiring audience out there somewhere for 'Lux aeterna,' but for my part, I don't know who they are.
Chaotic sensory overload
youngcollind2 November 2022
I support the evolution of art. In order for things to move forward, you need provocateurs to rock the foundation of what's deemed acceptable. Art made strictly to appeal to what already works is boring. Lvx Æterna embodies the rebellious spirit of creation, even if the results are borderline unwatchable.
Opening on a rambling conversation that lasts far too long then moving to a perplexing split screen where multiple scenes play simultaneously, often including different dialogue in different languages, all before a seizure inducing assault of light and sound. Gaspar Noé is screaming in your face, daring you to turn off his movie, and whether you do or not, you can't deny it's visceral impact.
The man is off in his own stratosphere, there really are no peers or precedents for this aesthetic. While his other work may offer more narrative meat, often coupled by more disturbing violence, this one seems to be a pure, unrefined shot of the disorienting bliss he's known for.
Like many forms of extreme music that seem to exist for the express purpose of pushing boundaries, it's a challenging experience that won't be for all tastes or moods. It's just a refreshing reminder that there's still untapped potential for defiant confrontational cinema.
Opening on a rambling conversation that lasts far too long then moving to a perplexing split screen where multiple scenes play simultaneously, often including different dialogue in different languages, all before a seizure inducing assault of light and sound. Gaspar Noé is screaming in your face, daring you to turn off his movie, and whether you do or not, you can't deny it's visceral impact.
The man is off in his own stratosphere, there really are no peers or precedents for this aesthetic. While his other work may offer more narrative meat, often coupled by more disturbing violence, this one seems to be a pure, unrefined shot of the disorienting bliss he's known for.
Like many forms of extreme music that seem to exist for the express purpose of pushing boundaries, it's a challenging experience that won't be for all tastes or moods. It's just a refreshing reminder that there's still untapped potential for defiant confrontational cinema.
No story, no acting, makes no sense!
mechler-6743219 May 2021
One of the worst "movies" ever! 49 Minutes of boredom and bad acting. Two women are talking nonsense and one of them wants to make a movie about witches - but she's not capable to do it. Gaspar Noé made a lot of "special" movies (IRREVERSIBLE), but LUX AETERNA is nothing at all!
The genocide of the witches
MiguelAReina23 January 2021
Possibly the film in which Gaspar Noé most clearly shows his concept of cinema. The shooting is hell, even more than the staging. The need to challenge the comfort of the viewer (in the images and in the narration) is again present, in the different points of view. His vision surrounds the campaign of a fashion brand with mystery, which continues with the short film "Summer of '21" (2020), starring Charlotte Rampling. Only a director like Gaspar Noé can turn witches into Yves Saint Laurent models. "Sexocide: the genocide of the witches".
(de)lux Assault
kosmasp24 July 2022
No pun intended - but that is how you may feel after watching the movie. But let's go through things one by one. Even by doing so, you may feel I am doing the movie a disservice. Noe himself says to experience his movies and not overanalyze. I have not made a plan on what I am going to write, but rest assured, I will try to head those words.
That being said, one has to acknowledge the feminist touch the movie displays. Hopefully that didn't make you cringe or go into a defensive stance. There is nothing wrong with that, quite the opposite. Especially when it is well told as its the case here.
Our main actresses have to endure quite a lot during this ... well "witch hunt" (no pun intended). It is not a witch hunt like the one they used to do. It is way more subtle and has to do with entitlement (mostly male entitlement).
Not every movie set is like that (I would hope so), but sexism is there and can not be denied. Trying to exploit women "best" they can. Be it through nudity or through "compelling" arguments to join other projects and movies (and how men talk about the women too).
Again I would hope that not every set is like that. On the other hand, I am quite certain that is not an issue that can only be applied to french movies (and I would also include photo/model sessions).
So far so good one may say. But as the beginning (title card) suggest ... there is something to come. Something that may make you sick. And while the Irreversible scene (not the one with the fire distinguisher, though that is tough to watch too) was hard to swallow to say the least, it was more something that went on inside your head. In this case you are almost physically attacked - the strobe effects ... I am talking about them.
While the movie is only 50 minutes long/short, when you reach the end of it, you will be drained as if you had just watched a multiple hour long ordeal ... if you are able to go through the last 10 minutes without going crazy. Do not watch it alone - know if you have issues with the effect used in the movie. No laughing matter to say the least - especially if you consider the sound effect this has too (which you hear to a degree in the main menu on the Arrow disc too).
So I was struggling what rating I would be giving this ... you may not agree with the one I chose, but that is how I feel after freshly experiencing it ... and having a few more French movies to watch today (Leon Directors Cut and the third Monsieur Claude movie too). Through it all, this was still a highlight ... even if one I am not able to stomach due to the "attack" ... but the message is clear and it is important. Almost a shame we are being "punished" while watching the movie too.
That being said, one has to acknowledge the feminist touch the movie displays. Hopefully that didn't make you cringe or go into a defensive stance. There is nothing wrong with that, quite the opposite. Especially when it is well told as its the case here.
Our main actresses have to endure quite a lot during this ... well "witch hunt" (no pun intended). It is not a witch hunt like the one they used to do. It is way more subtle and has to do with entitlement (mostly male entitlement).
Not every movie set is like that (I would hope so), but sexism is there and can not be denied. Trying to exploit women "best" they can. Be it through nudity or through "compelling" arguments to join other projects and movies (and how men talk about the women too).
Again I would hope that not every set is like that. On the other hand, I am quite certain that is not an issue that can only be applied to french movies (and I would also include photo/model sessions).
So far so good one may say. But as the beginning (title card) suggest ... there is something to come. Something that may make you sick. And while the Irreversible scene (not the one with the fire distinguisher, though that is tough to watch too) was hard to swallow to say the least, it was more something that went on inside your head. In this case you are almost physically attacked - the strobe effects ... I am talking about them.
While the movie is only 50 minutes long/short, when you reach the end of it, you will be drained as if you had just watched a multiple hour long ordeal ... if you are able to go through the last 10 minutes without going crazy. Do not watch it alone - know if you have issues with the effect used in the movie. No laughing matter to say the least - especially if you consider the sound effect this has too (which you hear to a degree in the main menu on the Arrow disc too).
So I was struggling what rating I would be giving this ... you may not agree with the one I chose, but that is how I feel after freshly experiencing it ... and having a few more French movies to watch today (Leon Directors Cut and the third Monsieur Claude movie too). Through it all, this was still a highlight ... even if one I am not able to stomach due to the "attack" ... but the message is clear and it is important. Almost a shame we are being "punished" while watching the movie too.
A superb, masterfully scripted and directed art film.
Scodelli12 October 2022
This is a great art film.
Like any art film, there will be a number of unperceptive people who rate it low.
Just go watch your Avengers.
The dialogue and scripting are superb. Masterful and innovative direction. It's amazing what Gaspar Noé is able to pull off here.
You see a chaotic and contentious film shoot play out before your eyes.
It's very well done. Very engaging. Unusually for an art film, everything is easy to understand until the end.
The characterization, acting and dialogue are on point. The dialogue is especially good. The film flows well and carries a sense of realism.
Now there is a photosensitive sequence. A number of people who would otherwise like this film will slam it for the photosensitive sequence. A number of people will choose to respond to it with annoyance and dismissal.
If you are watching a Gaspar Noé film you should expect it to be uncomfortable in some way. Did I find the photosensitive sequence uncomfortable? Yes. Did it push my boundaries? Definitely, but that is a good thing! And it really makes the film.
Apart from the artistic experience, this film explores themes of exploitation and dark aspects of the film industry. There's alot of commentary going on. But it's done well and doesn't get in the way of the story playing out.
The ending is mysterious and ambiguous. Gaspar Noé said that his films are meant to be experienced not analyzed. That is important to note here. The film is not meant to be fully understood, it is about the artistic experience, emotion and the meaning between the lines.
I found it to be highly effective.
Like any art film, there will be a number of unperceptive people who rate it low.
Just go watch your Avengers.
The dialogue and scripting are superb. Masterful and innovative direction. It's amazing what Gaspar Noé is able to pull off here.
You see a chaotic and contentious film shoot play out before your eyes.
It's very well done. Very engaging. Unusually for an art film, everything is easy to understand until the end.
The characterization, acting and dialogue are on point. The dialogue is especially good. The film flows well and carries a sense of realism.
Now there is a photosensitive sequence. A number of people who would otherwise like this film will slam it for the photosensitive sequence. A number of people will choose to respond to it with annoyance and dismissal.
If you are watching a Gaspar Noé film you should expect it to be uncomfortable in some way. Did I find the photosensitive sequence uncomfortable? Yes. Did it push my boundaries? Definitely, but that is a good thing! And it really makes the film.
Apart from the artistic experience, this film explores themes of exploitation and dark aspects of the film industry. There's alot of commentary going on. But it's done well and doesn't get in the way of the story playing out.
The ending is mysterious and ambiguous. Gaspar Noé said that his films are meant to be experienced not analyzed. That is important to note here. The film is not meant to be fully understood, it is about the artistic experience, emotion and the meaning between the lines.
I found it to be highly effective.
I've never feared for my own life when watching a film... Until now
anthallberg19 July 2023
Gaspar Noé is a provocateur. But its different with this picture.
Although is just shy under an hour, Gaspar Noé does pack a lot of content into that hour. With this hour, almost no dialogue has real meaning, even tho it has a lot of meaning. All is up for interpretation... Pretty much.
The quick pace of the movie, the double screen, and and the aesthetics are a beautiful move, even tho it's disorienting and disturbing.
I actually had to stand up and turn on the lights in my apartment during the last 10 minutes. The initial shock made me turn on the lights, but then i thought that to enjoy this movie, i needed to watch this in the darkness to get the reaction Gaspar wanted me to. And boy, did he make me fear for my life. And i love him for that.
Although is just shy under an hour, Gaspar Noé does pack a lot of content into that hour. With this hour, almost no dialogue has real meaning, even tho it has a lot of meaning. All is up for interpretation... Pretty much.
The quick pace of the movie, the double screen, and and the aesthetics are a beautiful move, even tho it's disorienting and disturbing.
I actually had to stand up and turn on the lights in my apartment during the last 10 minutes. The initial shock made me turn on the lights, but then i thought that to enjoy this movie, i needed to watch this in the darkness to get the reaction Gaspar wanted me to. And boy, did he make me fear for my life. And i love him for that.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
