High art or just junk?


Of course it is up to the individual to make that decision, but I wouldn't classify this as much more than mildly disturbing and even that wasn't the plot, but simply the way it was filmed.

To top it off, whoever wrote the English translation did a pretty poor just of it, or as I read in the subtitles, uncareful.

I'm sure there are those will disagree and I respect that, but if there wasn't a controversial rape scene I don't think it would nearly as popular as it is now.

reply

I think the film has such staying power, because people are undecided whether it is art or junk. To this day, I'm not even sure how I feel about it.
Irreversible is definitely a polarizing film.

I didn't like the translation either, but I don't think the dialogue was stellar to begin with. It definitely bothered me that the dialogue wasn't more fleshed-out.

Overall, I find the film very disturbing due to the rape scene, but the overall tone and visuality shook me up as well.

reply

High art. It is disturbing, often disgusting and almost unwatchable in places. However it presents us with a certain patriotic spin on French life. The movie seems to scream these messages at us: 'There is something wrong with France! All is not as it seems! France is two countries in one!'
It worried me, I must admit. In effect Bellucci's character represents the potential for beauty, kindness and hope. She stands for the future of France. Symbolically it's smashed to the ground. Whereas Venus de Milo lost her arms, she loses her face ('face' obviously means 'honour'). That's extremely potent. The pretty strange idea of honour vanquished by battle (as indeed honour and patriotism are partners). All that's good is perverted and corrupted in the course of this movie. It's a damning (and quite possibly deeply unfair) critique, if not an indictment, of modern France.
I see this movie as belonging to the tradition of French art cinema, deeply influenced by the movies of Gaspard Noe, especially Seul Contre Tous.

reply

"The movie seems to scream these messages at us: "There is something wrong with France!"".

Indeed - they give morons from Argentina money to produce masturbatory sh-t on their soil. What`s next? Hire Maradona as their national head coach?



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

almost unwatchable in places


"In places"?? It was unwatchable all along because of that drunken cameraman! You call that art?? I call it crap. I actually like unusual movies, but one dizzying sequence after another, making you wonder half the time what the hell is going on, is just crap. I switched it off after about 20 Minutes.

reply

UncleMouse, ^

Exactly! Well said!
This movie totally disrespects its audience, both visually and aurally.

I do not believe it should be censored, but rather properly marketed as gimmicky, gross-out Horror. I get the feeling Noé must still be giggling to himself having presented this pretentious polished turd as Art.
Art shmart, it's dross!

Don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining.


Some things are better left unsaid. This movie is better left
unseen, or at least better left within the first ten minutes.
There are far less masochistic ways to spend your time.

reply

"Dizzy" is the word. I wound up giving up on it half-way through because the photography was giving me motion sickness (something I don't get either on a rough sea or a bumpy airplane ride). Pretty impossible to appreciate any artistic merit it might have had when you are getting an upset stomach. And the fire extinguisher at the end (beginning) looked too inflatable to me to suspend disbelief. I never made it to the infamous rape scene so I can't comment on that. Screw this. I figured out years ago that life is too short to watch bad movies. You can't get those hours back. Finally, one thing I did get out of this film was that it got me to this message board and this thread, where I discovered for the first time the brilliant metaphor "polished turd". Who coined that, anyway?

reply

It's a gross-out horror? All of the "horror" happens at the beginning (end) of the film. The rest? Not horror. The film actually gets far more beautiful and peaceful as it progresses.

And how the hell can something be a "polished turd"?

reply

Hemorrhage911,
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and even to their ignorance in their youth.

This movie seems to get more 'peaceful as it progresses' because, like the far superior 'Memento', it is shown in reverse chronology. However IMO, as stories go, there's not much to 'Irréversible' but gross-out horror, nauseating audio and dizzying camera work. Not to mention the sickly giggling of gimmicky director Gaspar Noé behind the curtain.

May Mythbusters disabuse you of your ignorance regarding polished turds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiJ9fy1qSFI >Do try this at home!

You're welcome.

reply

Director's have their own visual styles? Who would have known!

Noe knows exactly what he is doing. Both the visuals and distortion are used to put you on edge more, and seeing as how many people find this movie to have two of the most disturbing scenes in history, I'd say the style worked (Worked even more in Enter the Void). But the fact that you think all this film has is gross-out horror makes me question if you actually watched the entire film. There is a reason why this movie is in reverse and why it ends on a peaceful note. It's showing us life changing in an instant.

And don't you dare use ageist *beep* on me, make a better counter-argument or don't respond at all.

reply

Okay, I won't respond to the angry person anymore, Angry Person. You do sound immature, and that's meant without agism.

In My Opinion

Don't get your undies in a twist. It's just a message board.

reply

said the person that considers memento superior to irreversible, gives birdman a 4, frozen a 2 and transcendence & lucy a facking 7. damn, you even gave "neighbors" a 7 and have the balls to call someone immature? xD

maybe you should refer from watching films that you shoudl know in advance are not your cup of tea to begin with.

reply

therefdotcom,
Maybe YOU should 'refrain' from posting half-baked, ill-informed, misspelled not-quite-clever retorts. Or maybe next time, ask mom for help.

reply

"In places"?? It was unwatchable all along because of that drunken cameraman! You call that art?? I call it crap. I actually like unusual movies, but one dizzying sequence after another, making you wonder half the time what the hell is going on, is just crap. I switched it off after about 20 Minutes.


And therefore missed that it was only a portion of the film's aesthetics, then you came here to complain about it.

While I agree about the camerawork and what effect it had on me... it was only used for storytelling purposes in only the moments it needed to be used. I myself would've downgraded this film significantly had it persisted, because it would've been not only annoying, but it would've lost all effectiveness. Those who saw the film and still complain about the portion of the film with that camerawork - maybe you just missed the point of it all.

:: filmschoolthrucommentaries ::

reply

[deleted]

I thought it was great. I say its high art.

reply

It's clearly not junk, the two scenes that define it may be the reason for its cult success but the film has a much greater emotional depth than most extreme cinema, and more than most mainstream cinema actually. I think besides that the film is fascinatingly imaginative, everything from the camera-work, colour scheme, special effects to the soundtrack, format and script. Gaspar Noé's style remains distinct from any other director in cinema.

reply

It's not art nor junk. It's just a highly overrated movie.

It surely has a disturbing rape scene, but it's just that. A movie built around a disturbing rape scene. The drunk camera work it's not art... it's simply annoying, the soundtrack and dialogue are also minimalist, so minimalist that is almost underdone.

So, I think they explored (or exploited) well the dramatization of that scene, not in an artist sense but in a commercial value. It was well done indeed, but there are several other movies with "better" shocking value and several others with a more intense story.

reply

[deleted]

In France, everything can be call ART!


Classics are names that everyone heard, yet most have never seen!!

reply

[deleted]

I'm French and it's true that we hear some pretty horrible stuff on the news as far as rapes and murders are concerned, but you know, I think it's quite the same everywhere...so the critic of French society or whatever is not really that relevant I guess...a movie like La Haine(1995) by Mathieu Kassovitz is much more concerned with the social disorder that exists in our country...

Here, I'd say that the film is very good in that it really shows violence and rape for what they are: horrible things(and quite dehumanizing as well)...

The desire for vengeance that one feels after such horrible events as rapes and its absence of results at times are also stunning and really powerfully conveyed in my opinion...

Some scenes are very hard to watch yes, due to their length and a camera work which is quite difficult to follow but I think that movies like this are necessary: one should be faced with violence to try and understand it( but not justify it though, and in other cases, fight against it...

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Agreed, ChristopherJohnson09.

And La Haine is definitely for you if you liked Irreversible. It might be less disturbing but it is still very powerful and it is food for thought too...

reply