Cinematic pretense of the highest order doesn't even begin to define this mysogonistic waste of celluloid. It's been a long time since I HATED a movie but this was the most pointless excuse for movie making I've ever seen. Two hours of my life I'll never get back. What's really galling is the craft of production was impressive. I guess this is the European version of "Independence Day" Big buck production wasted on an utterly worthless story and script.
shareI don't usually post on IMDB but I just had to say something about this movie.
First of all, I think it is bad, reaching for average. I don't see how people can enjoy this. Maybe the movie doesn't do the book justice, alas I am talking about the movie here and not the book. I have not read the book.
If it is the visuals or the way it was shot( e.g. the way the lights hit the faces, or something along those lines), that gives this movie quality, then I can not appreciate it. I don't really care about those things. I'm more interested in the characters and the story.
In my opinion the story is bad. As far as I can understand it revolves around the fact that certain despicable acts such as murder are sometimes acceptable as long as they lead to a certain greater good. That true visionaries are always condemned in their own time and praised by the generations to come as pioneers.
Yet, this idea alone is not enough to carry a movie.
Where is the inner conflict? Where is the struggle? The hero has everything handed to him. It is so easy. Even the fact that he sacrifices himself so that those people could be happy is pointless. Everything up to that moment shows us that he was driven by instinct and not by ambition. He didn't create the perfume for himself or for the world, he created it because he felt he had to. Like we feel we have to eat. He sacrificed himself because once his desire was fulfilled, once his instincts were satisfied, he could die. Nothing more.
There is no intelligence here. Not in this movie. You'd find more intelligence in a Scooby Doo episode. As for depth. What depth? Just one layer, so easily penetrated.
If you like it, I can only imagine it is because of the visuals and production values. Or you might have convinced yourself you like it because in your mind you become, somehow, smarter just by liking it. But that is false, and claiming other people are dumb because they don't like it is ignorant. It proves you are the dumb ones. Saying Americans are dumb is ignorant as well. I pity all you high horse, intellectual wannabes. Those who are truly wise are aware, above all, of their own ignorance.
And for the record, I am European.
Many people are failing to understand this movie.
The main character was only interested in bottling that specific scent. And in the end he only wanted to die, not in the slightest to make others happy, but because he didn't want to live anymore.
Thru-out the whole damned book he hated people. And in the middle and the end, he couldn't stomach their scents anymore.
He never really felt anything towards persons except hatred.
And Hollywood's fault is that they were trying to romanticize certain scenes that weren't supposed to have a hidden meaning or message at all. Regardless, I still fail to take note of any hidden meaning or message. It's just a story about a different sort of serial killer, and what drove him to do it. And what drove him to do it was a scent. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less.
In the book, the main character only cared about himself, and bottling that scent. At first he wanted all scents, and at last he just wanted one. I believe the movie conveyed that pretty accurately.
But also. For those bashing people for liking it/disliking it as ignorant.
It is ignorant for those who disliked it to tell everyone else they must be ignorant for liking it.
I side more with those who are bashing the ones who disliked it, though. Mostly because every single person couldn't really make me see their reasoning for disliking it, no matter how eloquently they put it. And that's because it seemed to be that they just didn't understand what the movie was supposed to be about. And if you did, then perhaps you'd see it differently. Some people just take things too seriously, though. Rather they like something or no.
It seems the ones who disliked it the most, the ones who are speaking of it on here, are the type who have to find a meaning in every little fart. They should understand that it's just entertainment. Maybe they'd be entertained more if they weren't so busy dissecting every little piece of cinematic interest. How can anything be liked when you treat a movie that way? Or anything else that way, for that matter. You sound too picky. Like most movie critics.
As for the people telling others they're ignorant for disliking it. It seems to me the lot of you are loyal book followers, and that translates to loyal movie follower, as well, since I thought the movie was very similiar to the book, missed a few parts and meanings, but overall, was the same. If you're that way, you must understand, not everyone likes this sort of genre. And most people can't fathom why someone dislikes something that they love so much.
All kinds of people disliked it, and all kinds of people liked it.
Okay so the movie was alright (even though extremely disgusting) but my appreciation disappeared when they showed him in the suit getting out of the carriage and two men bowed before him... i mean come on! no perfume can have that effect on people. They suddenly forget that he killed so many women and declare him an angel?! Unless the movie was supposed to be sci-fi I don't buy it. I was so waiting forward to seeing him on the cross slowly dying so the ending was a complete waste for me.
That's my personal opinion on the movie.
[deleted]
It is just revolting. I care very little for the opinions of the fans who want to use the words 'art', 'genuine' and 'masterpiece' to sugar coat their case, so please don't waste your replies.
In all honesty, how could anyone stomach this pathetic script. A young perverted boy so obsessed with beautiful smell he took the lives of innocent women for it. Did anyone else throw up in their mouth?
Did anyone really like Jean-Baptiste- he just had a terrible aura about him, I wanted him dead from the beginning.
It goes against the very grain of every true moral I have been raised to believe. But then again, you F-artists have a habit of 'validating' what is truely wrong.
You call child pornography the art of innocence, and now violence against women is otherwise know as the pursuit of essence.
I mean if I admire female breasts does art give me the right to cut them right out of living bodies and hang them on my masterpiece?
Oh gee he kills himself at the end because he had realised his pursuit of smell had peaked and he longed for it no more... not because he realised what a total phsycho he was and felt guilty for killing over a dozen innocent young women.
And why do I get the feeling that most people have missed that point?
Geez get me a bottle of scotch and a gun I'm outta here.
You artists can keep your piece of crap movie.
Before I say anything, I have not read the book. What I say is purely from having watched the movie. Second, let's remember this is a movie, not real life. It is also not based on a true story. It is called Fiction. And don't take any of what I say offensively, that is not my purpose.
It isn't a pathetic script. He wasn't "obsessed" with smell in general. And he was not perverted in the sexual behavior kind of way, IF that the meaning you are trying to use.
In the beginning, he became infatuated with the smell of a woman who happened to be extremely beautiful, a woman who was pure in every way. That was the most amazing, beautiful, mesmerizing smell to have ever entered his nose. When he followed her, all he wanted was to be able to smell her, be consumed with her scent; not to kill her. Accidentally, he put both his hands over her nose and mouth and made her unable to breathe. Her scent goes away along with her life. The purpose of his miserable life, he now thinks, is to find a way to preserve such a smell. Any smell.
The movie shows that all women had different scents, and some were "better" than others, the pure ones. The prostitute was just a test. A test to see if he would be able to capture scent with animal fat, just as the girl of the field was a test to see if the tank full of water would work. He wasn't able to do it in the tank. So he tried the animal fat. His intent was not to kill the prostitute, or any of the girls, all he wanted was to put the fat on her and take it off after a certain amount of time. She became frightened, didn't want to keep going. And what girl would? I'd be pretty frightened myself. So, in his mind, he had no other choice but to kill her, in order for her to keep calm. Yes, it's disturbing. But his mind is a completely different level than anyone else's. I personally don't know anyone with such acute sense of smell; he could smell glass! However, don't get me wrong, I am not trying to justify his actions... but like I said before, it's a movie. It's entertainment. I understand it to the best of my ability.
The movie is supposed to go against some morals that most people are raised with. Thou shall not kill, being one of them. Those morals were not taught to him (as far as I understood). He didn't have a mother or a father. He was bought and sold like any object is. So, if I am validating his actions, it's because (other than the fact that... this is a movie... not real life) he knew no better, he knew nothing but his sense of smell and his "purpose in life" (that being to preserve the best smell in the whole world). Also, he was not capable of loving, and no one was capable of loving him. Morals are irrelevant, if he did know them. Also, this is the story of a murderer... what would you expect? Just because he does not use guns and his justification is much more than financial or simple-minded his character and the entire movie becomes "pathetic." Pathetic are movies like I Know What You Did Last Summer, or Scary Movie, etc.
And no, at the end he didn't "kill himself" because he "had realised his pursuit of smell had peaked and he longed for it no more," he gave his life away because he realized he could never be truly loved nor would he ever love. Therefore, there really was NO purpose to his living. He could've slaved the entire world, but it had no purpose. He could've have taken credit for the greatest things to have ever happened, he could've called himself the Messiah, but that was not his purpose. In the end, all he wanted was love and he knew he'd never reach it.
And that it's not the kind of film for you does not make it bad.
I'd like to see all the people that call movies "bad" make a "good" movie themselves.
So basically, your only real argument was to retell the entire narrative of the script in synopsis form, as if to say no one had watched the movie.
Please don't waste time trying to justify his reasons to kill and come back with the 'this is not real life' argument. And don't bring religion into this. The idea of 'killing being immoral' is a civilised belief before anything else. But excuses like the ones I hear give 'real life' psychos reason to be more creative.
But that's ok I get it now, let's just make the clarification, if it happened in a movie its excusable. Kill Bill must be the greatest piece of at ever written.
No point arguing here ladies and gentlemen, the artists seem to know more than me.
Haha, no reason to get upset here. I explained the situations in the movie and consequently I had to retell certain parts in order to prove my points. That you didn't catch that is not my fault. I did justify his reason to kill... in a movie, because it's fiction... he was not a plain human, like most of us are. It's not real. Like I said more times than enough.
Real life "psychos" don't usually get their ideas from movies like Perfume. One in every one-hundred men are psychopaths. That does not make them assassins, they just don't respond to their emotions like other people. It's a physical problem, in the brain. The killers with mental problems use their own imagination, they have their own justifications, they don't need anyone else's. People who get "their" ideas from movies do not have mental problems.
Don't feel offended because I say, "Thou shall not kill." It's commonly used. I didn't mean to bring in "religion."
I'm not a so-called artist. I never claimed to know more than you, if anyone else has, that is -for lack of a better word- dumb.
That something happens in a movie does not mean the whole world has to go out and do it. It's not excusable.
Never seen Kill Bill, I wouldn't know.
Assumptions are often wrong.
[deleted]
[deleted]
It was good acting by the guy playing grenouille. The movie started of really well and as some guy above said it would have got an 8.5 or something. But its stretched too much in between and the end and also becomes a little depressing. According to me this movie is a 6/10 and 7.5 is way too overrated. Yeah maybe for the concept i would have given it, but then again its copied from the BOOK.
shareWell, you are perfectly able to have your opinion about the movie. Just know that you sound incredibly pathetic when you attack the filmmakers like that. And thinking that your opinion ranks higher that other people's opinions (ex. "..people who say that this movie is brilliant, don't know much about film..") is just childish and stupid.
I think this is one of the best movies that has ever been made, and I can't follow one single thing you say.
Why on earth do you think this movie is cheap - because of it's lack of explosions and CGI effects? I think this movie is so rich on the characters, costumes, scene of locations, music effects and artistic camera shooting.
Why do you think this movie tries to be a Hollywood movie? I think this movie is the most opposite of a hollywood movie as it gets.
yea.. there were too long pointless scenes. For example when the people on the square started making love for like 20-30 minutes. I mean, what is up with that? :S You could do that scene with 4-5 minutes and i GARANTEE that everyone gets the point!!
shareAbout mysogyny: Yes, this is a rather well-crafted film that seems to be fairly close to the book. Well-done, artful story, etc. What irks me are previous posted phrases like "a woman who was pure in every way"... because of COURSE we all know that a Woman Who Has Sex (ie, a normal human being) is no longer "pure". (eye rolling) Once again we have to accept that rather common mysogynistic assumption in order to appreciate the movie... but daaaaamn do I get tired of films/stories/etc that, though good, are all too often based on male obsession with femininity. Anyone ever hear of the Bechdel Test for movies? 1. It has to have at least two women in it, 2. Who talk to each other, 3. About something besides a man. Or, I would add, clothes or shoes or children. Another test: How many movies can you name where a main female character ends up unmarried/uncoupled, happy and not dead? (Yes, they exist -- Sunshine Cleaning is only one example -- but there simply are much much fewer of 'em.)
Please note I'm not saying movies that DON'T answer these criteria are bad -- not at all! I just wish we could have a more even balance, ie a 50/50 ratio that includes movies truly about WOMEN (and not *just* about What Women Mean To Men). Just sayin'. Peace.
ok to everyone replying & complaining about the rating.
its just the WEBSITES rating
just because their rating is different then yours doesn't mean their wrong. it doesn't mean they're right either. its all in opinion. i understand you disagree with it, but you don't have to express it so horribly, or put down others because of it.
Life takes at least a little maturity to pull through.
What a pretentious piece of wannabe writer. The film is brilliant .
shareI concur....What the Hell did I just watch??!!! To be fair, I did not read the book. However, after sitting through that awful thing I can't believe anyone would want to. I know...I know books aren't film, but seriously I can't imagine any medium this story could translate well to. I rented this movie because the girl at the video store raved about it. (I won't be listening to that cinematic idiot again) I was hopeful because it has a decent cast. Alan Rickman, John Hurt, Dustin Hoffman....it couldn't be that bad!? OH BUT IT WAS! I'm a big movie nerd and I try to keep an open mind and I still couldn't believe what an awful waste of time and money this thing was. If anyone reading this is thinking of watching this movie...put it back, change the channel or watch something else. IT"S AWFUL!
Sweet Lime?
an answer with no sense
You know if i said poop you would laugh
People, do not give in to this garbage. Do not waste 2 more hours of your life to watch the same movie again. It will not get better. Stop doubting yourselves and realize that your first impression was the right one.
This movie is only good for wannabe reviewers so they can sit and point out the obvious "art" in it - you know the "art" that is so obvious that you need to clinch your fist in your pocket because its snobby and false.
Perfume disguieses itself as a movie made for intellectual people with a sense of taste.
Without the disguise, it is a movie made for, and by, pretentious self-absorbed douchebags who are filled with complex over their appearance and would go to war just to be recognized for their "genius". You can see them at expensive cafés wearing fat black-framed glasses, without the glass.
In short - The Perfume = The Godfather for people with 85 IQ, and zero sense of taste. The book might be good though, not gonna bash that. Yet.
For every animal you don't eat I'm going to eat three.
you're an idiot. you brag so much about your iq and taste yet you can understand a movie that is not based on dialogue but on the visual representation. spend less time on writing huge essays about nothing on the internet and spend more time not being an as$hole.
share[deleted]
Just watched it again and it's a great film. Technically superb and with a fabulous story that can be interpreted on many levels. Compared to such a film most other films are superficial and dull.
shareYeah, this movie ranks pretty low for me.
And you know what, I'm getting plenty tired of you people coming on here talking about how Americans don't read and such and such. I read (and not just Twilight), I'm American and no, I'm not rare. And do you want to know why this movie did so poorly in America (aside from the fact that its bad)? It's because it for limited release (like 100 theatres or so).
IMO, this movie was bad, you are entitled to your opinions, just as I am mine, however, this has to be one of the worst movies I've subjected myself to all year (and I've seen some pretty bad movies this 2009.)
"Adultery makes a party go such a swing!" Naomi——Skins.
[deleted]
Independence Day? Really? You would actually compare an art-movie like Perfume to that? Well this speaks volumes.. And by the way this movie is based on a best-selling book, so I guess that it couldn't possibly be worthless..
share