The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976) User Reviews

Scary monsters

[Prismark10 · 6/10 · 9 January 2017]

Maybe Starman David Bowie was born to play the title role in The Man Who Fell To Earth, an avant-garde disjointed sci fi film from director Nicolas Roeg.

Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) is an alien who lands in New Mexico with some precious rings, a British passport and some rudimentary knowledge of patents. He needs to make money so he can build a rocket ship that can transport water to his dying planet.

Newton quickly makes money through his advanced business patents, he recruits a chief scientist (Rip Torn) who discovers that he is not what he appears to be and falls in love with hotel maid (Candy Clark) who also introduces him to the delights of gin & tonic.

The government intelligence service and rival businesses decide to look closely into his activities. They throw his patent lawyer and business associate (Buck Henry) out of the window and then hold Newton captive in a hotel plying him with gin.

The film plays with time as years go by and other characters age. We have flashbacks of Newton in his home planet with his family. The most memorable scenes is that of an alien with a British passport and the famous scene of Clark urinating her underwear when Newton reveals himself as an alien.

The film has a cult following but it is not a great film. It is too trippy and unstructured leading you to ask more questions than get any answers from it. Still I cannot think of anyone else who could had played the title role in that era and Bowie goes for it full frontal.

However the combination of Bowie and Roeg makes this a landmark science fiction film of the 1970s just as worthy as Close Encounters of the Third Kind.

An under-appreciated gem

[radioman390 · 8/10 · 18 January 2005]

Bowie is perfectly cast as an alien who seeks water for his dying planet. This film is so sparse as to be misleading as to the depth of its development, and it takes considerable time to grasp the message on the screen. But when you do, it is devastating: it haunts me 30 years after seeing it. Bowie's character has, of course, super powers...but not of the comic book kind...which he uses to amass a fortune in order to finance his goal. He is drawn to earthly ways, seeks emotional contact, but is unable to connect on any level. Earthlings use him mercilessly, and he is truly alone. His failure to save his family seals his doom; he will outlive all around him. Science fiction of the best kind.

Is it art, or is it pornography?

[yucel81x · 8/10 · 11 October 2003]

I have just watched "The Man Who Fell to Earth" from beginning to end after seeing several scenes here and there from years of flipping past the sci-fi channel or whatever other channel this film might've been shown on. I must say that I think it is one of the most interesting films I've ever seen. Now before you start thinking this is going to be a review of blind worship, stop for a moment and remember that just because something is interesting doesn't mean it's likeable. Art is not meant to be appealing. It's meant to cause a reaction, it's meant to make you think, it's meant to make you uncomfortable. Art forces feelings upon you that you might rather not experience, so whether you like it or not, this film is a work of art. But some art...in fact a lot of art...is trash. Is this movie trash? Some say yes, some say not. Some think it's brilliant, others think it a waste of time. Some think the narrative's dependence on visual stimulus as opposed to linear storytelling is a touch of cinematic beauty, while others dismiss it as experimental tripe.

Somebody wrote a scathing review saying that if you like junk like "Lost Highway," you might enjoy this movie. Well, no offense meant, but I'd like to say that this person has made clear that he can't see past what's appealing. Why watch something that's unappealing you might ask? Because that's what art's supposed to do...it challenges you and your values. Sometimes it reinforces them, and sometimes it will blatantly attack them. You have to draw your own conclusions and interpretations. "The Man Who Fell to Earth" is no different. Yes, the film seems to jump from time to time, one scene juxtaposed with a scene that takes place 20 years later, a flashback that may or may not be a flashback, it is confusing. I know I was confused. It's not a linear narrative...it's telling a story through pictures, with occasional words just to make sure you have a little more than an inkling as to what you're supposed to be seeing. Personally, I would be interested to see the movie without dialogue...like "Aeon Flux," a story can be told philosophically and artistically without words.

What is the story? Well...quite simply, David Bowie, in his first and probably one of his best on-screen performances, is an alien on Earth trying to find a way to get water back to his world. Is it as simple as it sounds? Not by any means. But you have to believe it to see it. You will be confused, you might even be offended (there's a lot of sexually explicit scenes that border on pornography), but one way or the other, this film is meant to be visually stimulating. What you see will make you think...if you're repulsed by it and feel the urge to turn it off, then it's simply not your kind of movie.

On the whole, I like this movie, though I must be in a certain mood to watch it. It is not easy to watch, there are long stretches without dialogue, and when there is dialogue, it's often confusing. But no matter what, I like what I was seeing on the screen. I do feel like watching it again because I know there is more to absorb and take in, there's more to think about that I missed before. But that's the kind of person I am...I want to think, and I want that discomfort this movie gives me because I am alleviated by the need to solve it, not dismiss it. Bowie is in fine form, probably used to alienation being a Brit in America, and having played his own Ziggy Stardust character in the past. The rest of the cast performs rather competently, although nobody's performance shines as much as Bowie's (although Candy Clarke is pretty good in some scenes, and Rip Torn's deadpan performance is a bit of dry humor).

Dispute me if you must, I give this movie ***1/2 out of ****.

visually a real trip. emotionally something else

[Quinoa1984 · 7/10 · 21 February 2008]

Nicholas Roeg is a little tricky at times when it comes to narrative. Sometimes he experiments with it excellently (Bad Timing), and other times he slightly dulls the senses in an experimental kind of way (Dont Look Now). The Man Who Fell to Earth seems to be told mostly in a linear fashion, and there seems to be something of a story going on, but... I never felt it completely click. Maybe that is part of Roeg's point with the material, to create a kind of alienation that the alien, no pun intended, feels whilst gathering up the billions he needs to get supplies back to his home planet. But something just doesn't feel like it goes the way it should, even when things are fascinating in a scene, maybe even brilliant, and the actors do end up trying their best along with Roeg's knack at capturing a mood in a specific, strange but bewildering way.

It isn't totally clear where the plot could be headed, aside from the usual oblivion of the protagonist to the wretched TV, excess of alcohol, and some drugs to boot. Which is fine as a route of a plot. But it's perhaps that there doesn't seem to be a sharper satirical stabbing motion being made in the context of the story, of what Bowie's "man" is doing on Earth, except in bits and pieces. Perhaps he's a reflection of how some of us act right here on our planet, or that there's even a sorrow to the state of affairs with Thomas Newton, who is sensitive, sometimes weak, and at least a little unnerving in his detachment via the almighty dollar. Maybe there are some valid points made in connection with the suffering of a human being, in what it does to his soul the longer they're on some strange planet, by way of a horrible and dehumanizing marketplace. But the way it's presented, to once again pop up a word that gets tossed like a beach ball at a concert, in a pretentious manner.

Or, to amend that with another tired cliché: the parts are better than the sum or the whole. I did enjoy very much just looking at the Man Who Fell to Earth, with some scenes, some shots, some transitions, some jabs at "real" cinema, displaying Roeg's natural gifts as an auteur at the peak of his powers. Just seeing that New York skyline, for instance, is a minor thrill, or in the cutbacks Newton has to his old world. Hell, even the sex scenes, much lauded in some of the more negative reviews, have a certain messy charm to them. And who doesn't love seeing Rip Torn as some smart but dangerous scientist who moves on from a penchant for young students in the sack to Newton's possible rocket-ship? Seeing scenes with Bowie and Rip Torn are, indeed, exciting in their indescribable link (Bowie, of course, so fits into Newton it's hard to figure anyone else in the part). I even loved the quirky, old rock and roll/jazz type of music Roeg used, when the first assumption would be Bowie would glam-rock the whole place up.

If there's anything that keeps the Man Who Fell to Earth from being a truly spectacular cult item though, if only for this reviewer, it's a certain mood overall to the piece, an uncertainty as to what to do with everything in the book and how to make it so unusual a piece of science fiction that its own alienation could potentially affect the viewer in unexpected ways. It's got guts to go where it does, to be sure, but it's a tough journey along the way, with romance, wonderment of the unknown, mental deconstruction, and corporate fables all entwined. Whatever you have to say about it there's nothing else like it.

Obtuse and frustrating sci-fi art film

[Red-Barracuda · 7/10 · 1 April 2011]

The Man Who Fell To Earth is ultimately a frustrating film. The phrase 'the sum of its parts is greater than the whole' definitely applies. At times it's brilliant and original, but it's effectively brought down by its overlong running time and relentlessly obtuse presentation. It begins very promisingly but falls away in the final third, where it just loses focus and direction. Visually, as can be expected from Nicolas Roeg, it's often quite excellent, with his usual bold editing techniques in place too. The cinematography is very good and David Bowie certainly looks the part. Roeg certainly had a thing for using singers in lead roles. He also utilized Mick Jagger in Performance and Art Garfunkel in Bad Timing, and Bowie like those other two is used to good effect. He doesn't really need to act very much; Bowie in the mid 70's was an almost alien-like creature to begin with. I thought Candy Clark was very good as Mary-Lou. She brought some warmth to the proceedings which was appreciated.

Like Roeg's work in general, there is hardly any humour here. He was primarily a visionary auteur and The Man Who Fell To Earth is undoubtedly a work that allows him to express himself in a highly personal way. But unlike in Performance, Walkabout, Don't Look Now and even Bad Timing the technique never seemed to achieve an overall whole. My feeling is that I would need to re-watch this movie in order to develop a better appreciation of it. On first impressions, it's a collection of great moments within an impenetrable whole. A very strange film though.

Fainted?.......Mister, I thought you were dead!!

[freemanist · 9/10 · 13 December 2003]

Cinema, once in a while, can provide frustrations of the highest order. You watch with interest, only to have your train of thought switched elsewhere by a movie that steers you off course. You are perplexed, through missing something, but this is even more annoying when you don't quite know what that something is.

This is precisely the criticism leveled at The Man Who Fell To Earth, which carries the hallmark of a controversial directorial style. Nicolas Roeg directs this science fiction/drama/love story with one eye on the main event and another on the various sub plots that weave their way in and out of the principal tale. By creating passages of snipped time that do not knit together as logical flashbacks, there is a somewhat disjointed narrative which is seen as a personal indulgence. Many were puzzled enough to claim that the whole project was flawed and that, chronologically, it simply didnt "work". That is a harsh judgment; the film is highly stylized, but this does not detract from it's undoubted quality. You have to 'want' to understand it and invest a bit of patience. See it twice (I had to) and it will sink in, or read the IMDB reviews to get a taste before you digest it wholeheartedly.

Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) lands, as surely all self respecting aliens would choose to do, in New Mexico. How come he is wearing 'normal' clothes? Where did he get the precious metal rings that he wastes no time in trading so eagerly? Why is he carrying an Englishman's passport? These are the kind of questions that confront you at the outset, causing many to bark in dismay. To get the maximum benefit from the film, you simply have to take these unexplained occurrences - and also the rapid and disjointed passing of time - on board, because the whole is more significant and understandable than its component parts.

Newton arrives on Earth to suck on the capitalist system, recruiting a top patent's lawyer (Buck Henry - superb as Oliver Farnsworth) along the way to help quickly mould his business idea, World Enterprises, into an immense scientific and commercial colossus. He proceeds to convert the Earthman's physical cash into an enormous scientific solution, in the hope that it will reverse the desperate decline of his own, remote world - and save his family - light years away. A disillusioned college professor, (Rip Torn, magnificent as Nathan Brice) stale with the stench of academia and tired of bedding his female students joins Newton as a chief scientist. He is actually the closest to understanding the man, but he ultimately fails him. The mocked time lapses in this film are, in my view one of it's strengths. It enables us to see Mary Lou (Candy Clark) pass from young humble hotel maid to alcoholic old wretch, via live-in lover and 'Tommy' worshipper. Clark & Bowie share a key scene where Newton decides to reveal his true self: Newton discards his human-eye contact lenses, strips away the false body hair and fingernails. Mary Lou goes hysterical with fear as the real Newton appears in all his extra-terrestrial glory and this is made all the more grotesque when he starts to exude a complete bodily slime during the ensuing love ritual.

A special mention should be made of Anthony Richmond's photography, particularly in the spectacular terrain of New Mexico. Indeed, the whole film is a technical masterpiece and the acting is also of the highest level.

Of course, the Man Who Fell To Earth is himself beaten at the outset. The Intelligence Services, jealous, as opposed to curious, of his corporate success, want this weirdo brought to order. They achieve this by hounding Farnsworth and infiltrating the company, finally spoiling everything.

Imaginative, vibrant, different, ambitious and memorable: class comes in original packaging. So, open it up....and immerse yourself in an adventure

creative, interesting, visual movie.

[mdelvecchio · 5 October 2003]

so, it seems to me there have been a lot of negative reviews. they break down into two categories: 1) those that say its got "too much sex". blah. grow up. 2) those who say "it's a mess". okay...we can work with that.

this really isnt a plot-based scifi like Star Wars. its not about linear events with obvious cause-and-effects, good guys and bad. its part scifi, part art film, and part trippy 70s movie. these movies dont speak with dialogue, they speak with images, and with mood (ie, "How does this sequence make you feel?" warm? uncomfortable? etc) thats just what this movie is. if you dont like these types of movies--movies in which you may have to do some interpretation--you wont like this one either. simple. its not Star Wars, people...Lucas isnt here to hold your hand.

for instance, one of the "gratuitous" sex scenes near the end, after Mary Lou has aged, was not gratuitous but in fact grotesque. it made me uncomfortable. which i am certain is exactly what it was supposed to do--to show me what a sham Newton's relationship with Mary Lou had become. it had become merely a drunken-memory, for them both... and their sex-scene-revisited depicted that, perfectly.

the whole movie is like that, speaking in general feelings and mood rather than black-and-white dialogue. and its more powerful because of it.

so...put it in perspective as you critic it. dont like romantic comedies? then youre not gonna like the latest Hugh Grant film. but that doesnt mean it isnt good. capese? (btw, i think hugh grant movies suck).

Bowie as prophet and martyr

[gershomgale · 7/10 · 26 April 2005]

Several things about this film make it worth watching... beginning with the premise that Earth's abundant water is what makes it rare in the galaxy.

But more intriguing is how the alien visitor, landing with absolutely nothing but the clothes on his back and a gold wedding ring, and knowing absolutely nothing about Earth culture, "gets up to speed" with astonishing, ruthless, clear-sighted rapidity...within days raising the $10,000 he offers a patent attorney for one hour of the latter's time. In that hour, Bowie's character outlines three basic patents -- including two which we can recognize today as digital cameras and music.

A particularly fascinating scene has our newly rich and already bored alien watching about 20 TV sets at once, while holding a small, battery-powered propeller. Repeated viewings will reveal that the disparate programs (presumably actual images of television shows) occasionally "come together" to form coherent messages... at which time our hero spins the propeller.

Don't bother seeing this film unless it is the director's cut

[michaelf · 9/10 · 23 July 1999]

I first saw "The Man Who Fell to Earth" when it was first released, and found it to be a jumbled mess. There were plot holes galore, and scenes that went nowhere or had no connection to anything.

A few years back, I saw the director's cut, and it was an entirely different film. The plot holes were filled and all the scenes fit together perfectly. As bad as the original release version was, the director's cut is great and worth seeing.

"Well you're really hooked on water, aren't you?"

[classicsoncall · 6/10 · 24 March 2008]

I was hip enough in the Seventies to consider David Bowie one of my favorite performers, and managed to catch him in concert a couple of times in major arenas. I guess what I was expecting in "The Man Who Fell To Earth" was something on the order of Ziggy Stardust, but if that was the only thing missing I wouldn't have been nearly as disappointed. It's not that I mind non-linear storytelling, but at least there should be a coherent story to tell. Nominally, the story's protagonist is on a mission to Earth to figure out how to bring water to his home planet where he's left his family. That never actually happens, and you have to wait out the entire story in all it's excruciating boredom to find that out.

Unlike virtually all sci-fi stories involving aliens from another planet, this one doesn't go into a lot of pseudo-scientific rationale about how Thomas Jerome Newton (Bowie) arrives on Earth in human clothes with perfect command of the English language. Even though he reveals his true appearance later in the picture, I found it odd that he bleeds red blood, gets the heaves, and has the same reproductive organs as the male of the human species, thanks to an overly gratuitous sex scene with his female companion Mary Lou (Candy Clark). Can someone explain this to me - how is it Bowie's character can whiz across the vast reaches of space to arrive on Earth, and then have trouble adjusting to a taxi cab speed of forty five miles per hour, or the erratic motion of an elevator? That just doesn't make sense.

I think the concept for the film was sound; it reminded me a bit of the genre classic "The Day The Earth Stood Still", particularly relating to the mathematical concepts that Oliver Farnsworth (Buck Henry) parlayed into a handful of patents that made Newton a rich man. That's about as far as it went though, as Bowie's character descended into the depravity and decadence that thwarted his original mission. The occasional flashbacks to the alien's home planet only added to my bewilderment, as it was made to seem that the only inhabitants that resided there were his own family, trekking around through the desert in that makeshift tent. All very maddening but boring at the same time, and just about enough to make a lad insane.

Much better if you've read the book

[Pi72 · 5/10 · 21 January 2005]

That is sadly the truth behind this quite interesting adaptation of the book. If you've read the book, and you liked it, then you'll love the movie. If not, then bad luck. Because the weakest point in this movie is the lack of explanations and logic behind the main character's actions. In the book, it's all beautifully described as the blue transformation of the alien into a human, and his loss of motivation to rescue his planet from a severe draught. In the movie, you just see an alien doing things without much reason or thought about them. This lack of understanding of the main character makes the movie kinda dull and void. However, having read the book, you'll understand what and why is he doing. That's not much help because the majority of the viewers will be lost...

That said, it's a nice movie, maybe a bit on the surrealist side, it has an oniric touch (or maybe the daze of a hang-over after too much booze) which goes well with the atmosphere of the book and story. David Bowie, the obvious star, does very well on the skin of an alien, clearly helped by his quite particular lookings. The supporting actors do well too, but in the end it's just an above-average movie. Not bad, but thousand light-years of the quality and depth of story which the book has.

In short: could have been great if the script was at least decent. Worth a watch, still.

Moody, Understated, Strange

[judithwolf · 9/10 · 27 June 2005]

Of all the movies I saw as a teenager (I am now middle aged) this is the one that has remained with me the most, more so even than the highly acclaimed "Deerhunter," which came out 2 years later in 1978. I have not seen it since 1980, so if my memory fails me, please excuse. This eerie, moody movie encapsulated for me -- an alienated kid, I'll grant you -- the perils of living in, and partaking of, the modern world. An alien falls to earth in search of water for his planet, and somehow loses his way, corrupted by materialism, sex, alcohol, the physical world.

I recall Candy Clark's cool, almost southern voice (just saw her in a cameo performance tonight, playing Christopher Walken's girlfriend in the 1986 "At Close Range, another great) purring at Bowie after he has built a little house for her at the end of a dock, "You're such a nice man," and there is something so unsettled about the cinematography -- cloudy and dark and too still -- in the scene that you know he is definitely NOT a nice man, but deeply troubled and unable to respond to human emotions. The other reviewers noted the somewhat disturbing sex scene towards the end of the movie, but for me, at least, that was not needed. I didn't need slime or removed eyeballs (although that is a great scene) to tell me the man is a freak who is human enough to lament his own inability to connect with these creatures from Earth. For the most part the movie was understated, unfolding in its own, detached time.

Loving the alien

[Lejink · 6/10 · 25 January 2017]

I like Nicolas Roeg's films although I don't claim to always "get" or enjoy every minute of them. They're always fantastically shot in a crisp, realistic style, he often pushes back the boundaries, particularly with the censors, and they frequently have scenes which stick long in the memory. However, they often seem to have just as many longueurs, with off-beat characters and non-linear narratives. Maybe I'm the problem...

Anyway David Bowie here plays a part which seemed to haunt him for years to come, in the aftermath of the film alone, he used images from the movie for two of his album covers, a 12-inch single sleeve while it also seems to inspire tracks on his "Station To Station", "Low" and "Scary Monsters" albums not to mention the famous "Ashes To Ashes" video. Bowie was at an artistic peak musically although off stage he was hopelessly hooked on cocaine, in fact just watch the contemporary BBC Arena documentary on him, "Cracked Actor" and he looks here as if he's just walked on-set from there. So can he act then...?

Well if there was one part he was born to play, it was this one, the alien misfit who conquers the world, but to be honest, while he certainly has a presence, you wouldn't say he was extended much. Looks great though.

The film stop-starts its way on his space invader odyssey, as he leaves his family life on Mars (or wherever it is) to start inventing items which quickly become society's new fashion must-haves. He picks up, (or rather she does him) an adoring if simplistic hotel chambermaid and garners a back-up team to make him a vast fortune, his target being to amass enough funds to build a spaceship to take him back home. But something happens on his way to heaven as unsurprisingly, he's abducted by government officials, where he's subjected to excruciating tests which wouldn't be out of place in an animal cruelty lab. Resistance however is futile and the mysterious Mr Newton by the end is a washed-up drunk, still resigning himself to his earth bound fate. In one of the film's most telling lines, he forgives his captor-torturer, as he admits his own race would gave treated a visiting earthling in the exact same way.

There's solid back-up to Bowie's central role with a variety of convincingly portrayed stock characters. Roeg pushes the permissive button pretty far here with more than a smattering of nudity in the sex scenes, not ignoring the fact that males frequently get naked too when being intimate.

I would still say there were too many scenes which for me played like Bowie's own cut-up method for lyrics at around this time, by which I mean I found them puzzling, strange and unconnected. And why no Bowie soundtrack?

Still, an interesting if confounding movie, as strangely addictive in its way as television is to Newton.

Not for everyone and not for me

[Glodar322 · 3/10 · 24 September 2020]

Its not what I expected, I can see why some people like it but its just not for me.

I like when things are explained, why he knows what he knows as soon as he comes to Earth, how does he do things, I want to see it from alien perspecitve as that I why I was looking at this movie, but this is not it, and because of it, for me, it is boring, I don't like time jumps as solution to now show you some things because they don't know how to write it or show it, so they leave it to you to imagine it, I don't like that and because of all these things, this movie is just not that good in my opinion. Not for me at least.

Fantastic, severely under-rated film

[Huffman1 · 8 June 2006]

This movie is definitely one of my favourites. First off, the acting is wonderful. David Bowie is awesome, I could not have imagined a better choice of actor. He plays his role to perfection and with just the right emotion. Candy Clark is also incredible in her role. Then comes the plot itself. Sure the plot is a little hard to follow but it is so brilliantly rendered and the cinematography is perfect. A very strong atmosphere and mood is created and the whole thing all together is just mind-blowing. Very original. Very artistic. Go see it if you haven't already.

I would also like to add that this cult science fiction film is however not for everyone. The way it was created and the way the scenes are shot resembles an experimental film. The style is also out of the ordinary and the plot may seem to be a little strange and confusing to some. Most people either love it or hate it.

I wanted to like it.

[genedietz · 6/10 · 4 January 2022]

I thought perhaps i missed so major esoteric meaning to this film so i watched it again. I would have never done so if it were not for Bowie being in this film. On second viewing I walked away thinking this was flat and droll and gave no real outcome. All six stars go to Bowie.

A Strange, Moody Sci-Fi Movie

[Aly200 · 7/10 · 19 August 2016]

Directed by underrated director Nicolas Roeg and starring in his first lead role is David Bowie, comes this oddball science-fiction of an alien who comes to Earth to find water to save his desolate home planet.

David Bowie as Thomas Jerome Newton is fantastically subtle, brooding, gaunt yet handsome, intelligent and mysterious. His motives are sketchy to the film's other players, but become clear by the film's mid-point when his true identity is unmasked by the smaller players in the cast. Bowie keeps his profile low, rarely delving into over-the-top expressions except for moments of intensity. His chemistry with fellow actors Candy Clark (playing his love interest, sometimes to insufferable lengths of whining or trying to play the victim), Buck Henry (playing Bowie's business partner/lawyer-type) and Rip Torn (as a former teacher turned scientist-type and later husband to Candy Clark by the climax) is genuinely believable and maintains humanity as he balances subtle emotion with little reactions (keeping his alien nature present behind his human disguise).

The atmosphere is surreal as expected in a Nicolas Roeg film. Ranging from the remote deserts of the southwestern United States to the scenic lakeside home that Thomas Newton builds in the mountainous region of upstate New York , there is a sense of trying to find home. The effects are pretty cheesy in the 1970s standards in being a "B movie", but it works to the degree of being weird; particularly when David Bowie actually showcases his alien makeup which is unsettling.

If you need a good science-fiction piece, give this little known gem a watch.

Brilliant Sci-Fi

[Kerrigor · 10/10 · 13 March 2004]

The Man Who Fell To Earth is one of the few sci-fi films that can justifiably call itself brilliant. But what makes it so brilliant, you ask? It's certainly not the story, which is merely about an alien coming to earth in order to save his dying planet. The performances are excellent, but actors alone cannot make a film brilliant. Perhaps what makes The Man Who Fell To Earth brilliant is the thing that causes people to despise it: it has no plot. That's right. It's alot like a David Lynch movie; there are bizzare characters, bizzare dialogue, and bizzare situations, but barely any trace of a followable plot. The film manages to carry a thin story with almost no plot whatsoever and be consistently interesting and entertaining throughout. On top of that, it's all stunningly photographed. There is quite a bit of sex in this movie, but the sex is done so stylistically we hardly notice how pornographic it is. For instance, in one scene near the end of the film, Bowie wields a pistol loaded with blanks like a phallus. The scene than erupts into a bizzare sex scene filled with flashing strobe lights, full frontal shots of Bowie, and the gun firing randomly off. The Man Who Fell To Earth is essential viewing(unless of course movies that are hard to follow or a naked David Bowie aren't your thing).

space oddity

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 1 January 2017]

Something falls out of the sky. A strange man claiming to be British citizen Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) walks into a small town. He begins a rise with only $200. He hires lawyer Oliver Farnsworth (Buck Henry) and creates a giant high-tech company worth $300 million. It's still not enough for his mysterious goal. His motion sickness gets the best of him in a small town hotel elevator. He is rescued by hotel worker Mary-Lou (Candy Clark) who begins to help him acclimate. She becomes his companion. Meanwhile, scientist Nathan Bryce (Rip Torn) is suspicious of Newton. He gets fired for his womanizing among other things. He gets hired by Newton's company. He's invited to meet Newton out of the blue.

On the one hand, it is ambitious in its snap editing, otherworldly jumps, and David Bowie is the perfect alien man. The writing is intriguing sci-fi. On the other hand, the directing is not exactly good. It's trying to do something but there is no drive or intensity. David Bowie is compelling mainly because he's playing an odd spacey David Bowie character. This deserves its cult status and it's a fascinating watch for Bowie.

Bowie's entire idea of himself?

[Polaris_DiB · 9/10 · 13 March 2006]

I went into this film expecting something more like Walkabout, because that is all I had seen of Nicholas Roeg's work previously, and the thought of David Bowie being in it enticed me. Really, though, I had it backwards... It's David Bowie's creation with a little bit of Nicholas Roeg in it.

The whole "human alien" thing is very much Bowie's schtick, and to a degree I found it hard not to imagine that this was Bowie's entire idea of himself. A sort of silent tragedy encompasses his character, expressed mostly in the scene with the eye-test where Bowie says very smally and pathetically "Oh... now I'll never get them out." Bowie sees himself as an alien that just can't escape being human.

On a broader sense than this one artist's idea, however, this is a fascinating science fiction film because it points out a side of human nature not often developed very well in other science fiction films. Instead of dissecting the alien, which is what everyone always expects humans will do, the humans do everything in their power to make him more human. Where not actually working towards constructing this "other" as a human, they try to own him, via capitalism or politics or, yes, even love.

It's interesting then the space they put him in, with all of the various rooms like different human-empathetic places. On one hand, it's a self-reflective look at the "set" of the movie, showing that we are designing this alien to look human, but secondly a lot of it is surreally natural, as if to imply that even nature is forced to be human at our hands.

--PolarisDiB

Not that much a fall from grace

[videorama-759-859391 · 7/10 · 28 April 2019]

Although the cover poster for this movie intrigued me, the movie's nothing special, and slightly dull, it's in over 2 hour covered length. It's relieving, or saving grace, comes in the splendid, packaged performance of the late great Bowie, in a complex role, not many actors could sucessfully fill. The intriguingly cryptic music score from this cult film, is still embedded in my brains, weeks following, another highlight. The other plus was Rip Torn, again showing fine acting, a face who at first, I didn't recognize, one naked bedroom scene, I thought I'd never see someone like him in. This sci fi cult film does have a lot of sex in it, and only a shred of violence. Bowie plays an extra terrestrial in a human facade, who's lazy entrance, stumbling down a mountain, is one image that stays with me. Even though you've been informed of the story,and you get the outline, it becomes hard to follow, as to Bowie's intentions, where he becomes a corporate giant, and Torn's character doesn't clear up, where Bowie's taking the story. Fascinating yes, but TMWFDTE is ultimately disappointing me on a medium plane. Not a remarkable feat, but bloody intriguing. Bowie's fine variety performance, is something to really gander, at and take note in which he must be praised. This film does drag on toward the end, which was worrying.

The Man Who Fell... Asleep

[kirksworks · 1/10 · 26 October 2008]

I love good science fiction, and I don't mind slow paced films like Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey," as long as you are given new ideas to think about as you watch, but TMWFTE is both tedious and annoying. The theme of the film, about how an alien of superior intellect gets destroyed by the culture of greed, capitalism and corruption, comes to light very early. What follows adds very little to embellish that idea, and we are stuck watching characters we don't really learn that much about get consumed by the said theme and wallow in the misery of excess.

Roeg, who was a far better director of cinematography than he was a film director, made some interesting films, "Insignificance" and "Bad Timing" among them, but TMWFTE isn't one of them. There are those who praise the film and compare it to "2001," but it doesn't have the clear focus of Kubrick's film, nor a character half as interesting as Hal 9000.

David Bowie is visually interesting, but in essence he's just playing a variation of his rock stage persona. Candy Clark's character was like being immersed in a backwoods opera with redneck hicks, and the actress gives it her all, but the role is so ill-defined, with great leaps of unexplained personality changes that no actress could have pulled it off.

Roeg's style is so convoluted it just becomes a chore to figure out what's going on. And making the main character an alien who comes to earth to get caught up in the whirlpool of contemporary society, doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Why an alien? It could have been someone from a completely different culture or someone with an unusual upbringing (like Peter Sellars in "Being There") and been just as effective, if not more so. The sci-fi element works with Bowie's physicality, but not much else. Other than the alien makeup I found little else visually interesting. The whole production just seemed low budget, with corners cut in all the wrong places. Locations and character motivations for being in these odd locations just come across as arbitrary, as do the plot turns themselves.

I first saw this film on its initial release, a cut version, which, like other Roeg films (namely "Performance") was butchered by the producers before release. I thought this full length restored Criterion edition would have made the film easier to follow, but all it did was make it drag even more.

As others maintain, some respond well to this film, suggesting it has much to say about how people get swallowed up by our capitalistic notions, and the film's prescience of future inventions such as the digital camera, and an mp3 type music device being ahead of their time, and those things are there. Yet, as a dramatic story that pulls the viewer in and gets them caught up in unusual characters lives, I found it to be a failure. To me it was an unfortunately shallow, tedious take on an interesting and worthwhile theme.

A Near Impossible Movie To Review

[statuskuo · 8/10 · 7 April 2020]

I loved this movie. I mean, it strikes to the core of a simple concept, an alien to Earth who sees how awful we are as a species. Isn't that great? Same most likely is said about immigrants. Legal ones anyway. The culture shock, the distant confusion. It's a beautiful thing to see how we relate when we have nothing to relate to. In other words, without our preconceived prejudices, how do we view humanity. In this case, inspired casting of David Bowie was the answer. Even resembling an alien, Bowie glides through this movie with the ethereal quality of part angel and part alien. He is baffled by our culture but understands it's function: commerce. To that his ingenuity to trade gives him untold wealth. But it's for a greater cause which is revealed much later. Along the way, he seemingly falls in love with a woman (played perfectly by Candy Clark). Whose neediness and somewhat frail emotional character (alcoholic) makes her latch onto the alien even after discovering his truth. A scientist is also pulled into the story (Rip Torn) who uses a moment of a career adjustment to re-evaluate his self-destructive behavior. And thus is Nicholas Roeg's tossed salad of a film beyond the core concept. Because it is so strong, the rest in surreal wild cinema makes it a mesmerizing gem. To those who are expecting entertainment, I would say skip it. It isn't what I would consider "entertaining" It is a study on mankind thru the eyes of an alien whilst babbling offbeat dialogue and contemplating our existence. To a lot of people, this is a slog. To others, it will touch deep.

Loving the Alien

[monkfishlee · 7/10 · 11 August 2016]

I remember watching it in the late Nineties, when I was 20 or so. I never really got the film back then, feeling that the film made sense up to a point about two thirds of the way through and then seems to lose focus and narrative structure.

Having watched it again recently I still feel the same, only now I realise why the film gets so confusing. I won't go to far into it, only to say that there is a jump forward in time towards the end of the film but the world still looks like the mid Seventies. So this passage of time passed me by the first time I watched.

Anyway, I digress. The Man Who Fell to Earth features a great turn by David Bowie, who was beginning his coke fueled Thin White Duke period. This really plays into his performance and it's hard to tell where Bowie ends and Thomas Jerome Newton begins.

In fact I rate all of the performances in the film highly. I also like the how the film looks. The opening 20 minutes of the film are very atmospheric and really portray how isolated Bowie's alien is.

Overall I would recommend the film, with the caveat that this is really science fiction that is particular to the time, as in just before Star Wars came out. It is slow, weird and confusing, and all the better for it

The Emperor's New Clothes

[andrew-huggett · 1/10 · 8 November 2016]

Aside from the vaguely intriguing start with Bowie's arrival (it's not clear where he got the clothes, the rings to sell and the British background, or indeed how long he'd been on earth – where did the car and the chauffeur suddenly come from?). This is a long disappointing mess of a film. I tried very hard to get into this and enjoy it but the narrative structure is confusing and disjointed. I think the film just tries to be clever and art-housy but I found it a complete bore and very frustrating to watch – the Emperor's New Clothes you might say. There is absolutely no chemistry or sex appeal between the two main characters. Visually, it's quite stylish, the best part is the first 30 minutes or so with the frailty of the alien character shown and the interesting and amusing idea (from a digital photography age perspective) of self-developing film.