MovieChat Forums > The Belly of an Architect (1987) Discussion > Am I the only person in the world that t...

Am I the only person in the world that thinks this movie is spectacular?

posted 17 years ago by Zeppelin90210
27 replies | jump to latest

Every person I have shown this film to has either felt nothingness that was turned into a dislike once I probed them for further opinions or have disliked the film from the beginning. I however think this film is one of Greenaway's best and even one of my favorite films overall. Just to further my point, when I came to see other people's opinions on the film, I find that there isn't even a single topic on the message board. Wow, so voice your thoughts please. I want to hear what others thought of this film.

[–] tonymurphylee 17 years ago

I enjoyed it and thought it was cool. Generally everybody hates because it just isn't appealing to a mainstream audience. I thought it was a fine film though.

[–] Zeppelin90210 17 years ago

good to hear

[–] tonymurphylee 17 years ago

Absolutely

[–] CounterPaul 17 years ago

I've thoroughly enjoyed everything I've seen by Greenaway. Perfect blend of the highbrow with the lowbrow - and you can always expect to get a "Did you know...?" tidbit in the dialogue. His films always require more than one viewing, because you're bound to miss a piece in the intricately woven cinema puzzle no matter how attentive you are.

Italy was captured beautifully in this film. And such a tragicomedy - as we commiserate with Signor Kracklite we also find ourselves strangely smirking over the pathos of the interactions ("Cassssspasian!").

"POWER TO THE PEOPLE WHO PUNISH BAD CINEMA!!!"

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SeisCinemaSeis 15 years ago

IMO TBOAA is Greenaway's most 'mainstream' movie. Which 'per se' is not a bad thing, however the truth is that it's the weakest of his films that I've watched.
Sure, it's still better than your average Hollywood flick but it's not even in the same league than The Draughtsman's Contract, A Zed & Two Noughts, or Prospero's Books, just to name a few of his most mesmerizing works.

6/10

[–] Xcalat3 15 years ago

it was a good movie but i don't think it was spectacular

When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

[–] BlueGreen 15 years ago

To be honest, I am almost sure I dislike it, too - but this dislike if of that peculiar sort that makes me watch it again and again.
I relish watching this film... well, I relish watching Brian Dennehy in it, that's certain.
Because I too (like a poster in another thread) thought that Chloe Webb - and most of the cast, for that matter - was appallingly bad.

The thing is, at this point I am not yet sure WHY I dislike it.
It cannot be the subject matter or the dialogues (the "lines") themselves, so I think it is really about the pompous pathos of the dialogues and their delivery. But I am not quite sure if they weren't SUPPOSED to be like that.
Either way, the strange "italophobic" (please, note the quotation marks) pathos and the delivery of the dialogues I do find off-putting.

But Brian Dennehy is a gem.
I cannot stop watching him in this film.

P.S. Oh great, I see the OP hasn't visited the boards since March... Just my luck. ;)
I hope somebody else will care enough to keep this thread alive?
I'd really like to read more of people's impressions and thoughts about the film.

[–] sundog4 15 years ago

I think this is Greenaway's most emotionally resonant film (for me at least)

it doesn't resemble many of his other works, as it eschews the twisted humor that normally accompanies them

I definitely won't say it's my favorite, but it moved me more than any of his other films - I found it tragic & poignant

I have to agree with many others that Chloe Webb was horribly miscast... she didn't suit the subject matter

[–] BlueGreen 15 years ago

Any spontaneous emotional resonance is valid by its very nature, I suppose.
But was it even supposed to be emotionally resonant?
I thought the "pathos" kept getting in the way of the very "resonance" you're mentioning.

Anyway, I don't know about you, but I found the "late spring death" dialogue especially poignant, especially because the emotion of it was so unexpected at that point (to me, at least).

I don't know how or why Greenaway thought of casting Dennehy, of all people, but it was a truly excellent choice.

[–] sundog4 15 years ago

put it this way - I always enjoy the Greenaway's characters

Dennehey's Kracklite was the first of Greenaway's characters that I actually cared *about*

"Belly" was one of the few films that Greenaway didn't shoot through a thick lens of absurdity

that lens of absurdity is actually what I like most about his films, but it always manages to keep "reality" at a somewhat safe distance

without it, we are left dancing around issues that are closer to the common human experience (jealousy, insecurity, infidelity, sickness, despair etc)

though these emotions are often thematically addressed in his other works, his technique often divorces them from being emotionally resonant - by the same token (strangely enough), his "absurd" works are more ripe for logical analysis

[–] BlueGreen 15 years ago

Interesting.
Although I suspect that "absurdity" being more amenable to rational analysis isn't necessarily all that strange. It may only appear to be a paradox. In order to present - and therefore, see - something as "absurd", the context has to be viewed through a rational lens... so there. ;)

[–] moviefool09 15 years ago

I am a fan of Greenaway's, more or less. He always seem to talk down to his audience though and many of his films are so esoteric, that they're unreachable for viewers. I am not just talking about mainstream Hollywood movie fans. I consider myself a serious cinephile and many of his films go completely over my head.

Sometimes I get the feeling that Greenaway is directing for no one but himself. But "Belly" is very watchable, thanks to Dennehy's amazing performance, the creepy and atmospheric music, and the beautiful setting.

[–] LPurch6636 14 years ago

>>Sometimes I get the feeling that Greenaway is directing for no one but himself.<<

I had to watch this movie a second time before I came to this conclusion as well.
My first reaction was that the writer might just as well written the script as personal Diary to himself and whose writing no one else would be interested in. There were Shakespearean elements to it but at least Shakespeare had comedic relief...

The only reason I watched the movie the first time was because I like Dennehy. I had never before even heard of Greenaway...

I hate movies which show only selfish, mean people in them. Not a single unselfish "Melanie" to counter-balance the self-absorbed "Scarlet."
I meet enough "Scarlet"-types in daily life to want to watch a movie about more selfish people.

I am not familiar with Greenaway though I am a writer myself and a teacher of writing. Does he work from a knowledge-base of "art" or "geometry" or "architecture" or "Italy" or -- from where?

I am glad that somebody started this conversation; I keep thinking that there is something important here, but I have yet to figure out what.
Or did I just spend a wasted 2-1/2 hours X 2?

Flanagan

[–] megArnold 10 years ago

Besides his directorial/stage design work, he is originally an accomplished painter (studied at Walthamstow College of Art), multimedia artist, has directed experimental documentaries, and has designed exhibitions as well.

Of course, you could have looked that up yourself.

--
Grammar:
The difference between knowing your sh**
and knowing you're sh**.

[–] Fishelakh-In-Vaser 12 years ago

I am a fan of Greenaway's, more or less. He always seem to talk down to his audience though and many of his films are so esoteric, that they're unreachable for viewers. I am not just talking about mainstream Hollywood movie fans. I consider myself a serious cinephile and many of his films go completely over my head.

Sometimes I get the feeling that Greenaway is directing for no one but himself.

And here's one of the reasons why I enjoy Greenaway's films so much, because he works with the same passion and personal isolation that a novelist would work with. If an artist chooses to create art that is personal to them, that isn't intended to be widely understood by any observers, then that's their stylistic choice. Who ever said that art had to appeal to as many people as possible?

Like a kiss, soft, and wild with the delicate steps of petals fallen in a stream

[–] AccidntlTourist 12 years ago

"... the creepy and atmospheric music..."

Wonderful music - lots of impact; great with all those contemplative moments.

[–] AccidntlTourist 12 years ago

"I don't know how or why Greenaway thought of casting Dennehy, of all people, but it was a truly excellent choice. " - BlueGreen

Absolutely. Dennehy was terrific (put fire in the belly).

[–] mister-mike 14 years ago

This is a great movie, with a standout performance by Brian Dennehy, a vastly underrated actor. Visually, the sets and photography are well above-average, and there is a brilliant score by Wim Mertens. Normally I wouldn't care much for this kind of "modern" sounding score (which sounds very much in parts like Philip Glass), but it is exactly suited to the film.