Rating: 
Summary: No acting, no clothes
Review: In a nutshell, I found the story boring and the acting was 2nd class. I think the only thing that makes this movie sell is the fact that most of the women end up naked several times throughout the film.I think the only reason this movie was made is the promotion of full frontal nudity. You can read other reviews and the summary for the details, but here are the facts as I see them: If you have no desire for good entertainment and want to see Elle McPherson and others fully nude, buy it and you'll enjoy it.
Rating: 
Summary: Enjoyable and thought provoking
Review: In the guise of a genial British-made comedy, Sirens spiritedly examines the collision course negotiated by the art world and censorial social codes. In the 1920's, a smug young minister seeks to climb the church's political ladder by succeeding on a mission to Australia to dissuade an artist from exhibiting work considered lascivious. Transportation plans go awry and the minister and his proper young wife are marooned in the exquisite Outback with the artist and his often nude models. By the time they leave, the minister has lost the battle with the artist and his wife has sampled the Bohemian life and learned a few things. The artist's ethics are honest, independent and life-affirming in contrast with the minister's agenda which compares more with the ignorant ogling and shunning by the local folk. The acting is fine, the cinematography stunning. This is one of the few films where nudity is a) actually called for, b) unselfconscious, c)handled gracefully.
Rating: 
Summary: I have this feeling of Deja Vu.
Review: Is it just me, or does this film remind you of something else? Anybody know the movie, BELLE EPOQUE. Okay. Take that film, replace the sisters with models, give the lead a wife, change a few settings, and you have a watered down American version called SIRENS. It's just far enough removed to keep them from calling it a remake of a better foreign film, but the two are frighteningly similar. Even the video covers look alike. Oh. I'm not saying it doesn't have its merits. That's why I gave it three stars. It is enjoyable, funny, entertaining, and erotic. If you want a decent movie for Friday night, SIRENS will do nicely. If you want to experience the real thing, watch BELLE EPOQUE.
Rating: 
Summary: Comment on John Griffiths review
Review: John's review has it pretty right. This is a great film but it's even better when you know well the landscape in which it is placed. That landscape is at least as good as shown in the film, if anything even better. It's one of the very beautiful places of this earth and so accessible - see below. John's conclusion that it is "a wonderful colourful look at the Australian Outback and its early pioneers as a bonus" is a little wide of the mark. The Blue Mountains in which "Sirens" is set are less than two hours drive from Sydney and Norman Lindsay's house and land where it was all filmed is just over an hours drive from Sydney - hardly "the Outback" !! The house is now a Norman Lindsay museum - his paitings alone are well worth the visit - and the grounds are pretty much as seen in "Sirens". As for "early pioneers" it is based on events that took place in the 1920s - hardly pioneers, other than in social attitudes ! But all of this just makes the Blue Mountains and Norman and the "set" for "Sirens" all that much more accessible for anyone visiting Sydney.
Rating:
Summary: Comment on John Griffiths review
Review: John's review has it pretty right. This is a great film but it's even better when you know well the landscape in which it is placed. That landscape is at least as good as shown in the film, if anything even better. It's one of the very beautiful places of this earth and so accessible - see below. John's conclusion that it is "a wonderful colourful look at the Australian Outback and its early pioneers as a bonus" is a little wide of the mark. The Blue Mountains in which "Sirens" is set are less than two hours drive from Sydney and Norman Lindsay's house and land where it was all filmed is just over an hours drive from Sydney - hardly "the Outback" !! The house is now a Norman Lindsay museum - his paitings alone are well worth the visit - and the grounds are pretty much as seen in "Sirens". As for "early pioneers" it is based on events that took place in the 1920s - hardly pioneers, other than in social attitudes ! But all of this just makes the Blue Mountains and Norman and the "set" for "Sirens" all that much more accessible for anyone visiting Sydney.
Rating:
Summary: Not a bad story, actually
Review: Let's face facts: pretty much everyone rents this movie for the same reason (involves the words "Elle" and "naked"). But the movie itself is really not that bad. Hugh Grant pulls his usual bumbling/stammering schtick, but it fits in this role. And I really like anything with Tara Fitzgerald. She's a bit dour here, but if you like what you see, try "Brassed Off" after this one. She's fabulous there, especially playing off of Ewan MacGregor.
Rating:
Summary: Cute and sensual at the same time
Review: Most reviews like this movie for good reason, but there are many details that nobody mentions which are an important reason why this movie works so well. It should be required viewing for every subsequent generation of film-makers. There are too many wonderful things to explore in this movie than can be covered in an Amazon review, but here are a few. Why is the opening boat sequence shot in black and white, when the rest of the movie is in lush color? Do you understand the snake metaphor? (It shows up once in reference to Stella and once in reference to Stella and twice more.) Stella loans Giddy her wedding ring to fool Devlin, but what more than that does it represent? Sam Neill and Hugh Grant are perfect as opponents together; but the story isn't about them. Stella makes the journey in this story, and if the result is a bit predictable it is so well done that it doesn't matter. Also it is interesting to see a then-versus-now comparison of Portia de Rossi (Giddy) who grew up to play Nell on Ally McBeal. There's a lot of talent there that seems to have not been used enough.
Rating:
Summary: An intelligent exploration of Pagan versus Christian mores.
Review: Okay, I admit it -- I was lured into seeing this film because of all the hype surrounding the acting debut of Elle (in her birthday suit, no less). Thank the Goddess, this turned out to be far more than just a naughty nudie flick. It's truly an intelligent exploration of the relationship between faith and art, the politics of morality, and the delicate relationship between decadence and repression. It's lighthearted enough to keep from taking itself too seriously, and artist Norman Lindsey (brilliantly portrayed by Sam Neill) emerges as a bona fide hero for modern Pagans. It's a film about artistic and sexual freedom, yes -- but it's also about lies and secrets (just how many of the models had fathers who were eaten by sharks?), and it refuses to make the bohemians into "the good guys" at the expense of the poor uptight Reverend Tony Campion (Hugh Grant). My favorite scene in the film is when, on the first night of the Campions' visit to the Lindsays', the models dress up as fairies to entertain the little Lindsay girls. It's an haunting, otherworldly moment, in a hauntingly otherworldly film. Incidentally, there actually was a controversial artist named Norman Lindsay, and some of his art (as well as his estate) were used in the making of this film. I don't know if he ever had a run in with an Anglican minister named Campion (I rather doubt it, but it sure makes for a fun story).
Rating:
Summary: Worth Watching
Review: Sirens is a great movie. It has a cast which I think anyone would love to see. It stars Hugh Grant, Elle McPherson, ...
Rating: 
Summary: Political Correctness 101
Review: Sirens is an excellent PC movie (this is scorn, incidentally). The up-front story concerns sexual repression, but consider how the repression is escaped from: The wife cheats on her clergyman husband (ironically played by the unfaithful Grant) and it is made clear that not only is this not wrong, but that she is also a better person for having put a knife in her husband's back.
It should be popular with American women....
| 
