Irreversible

Rating:
Summary: A Shock To The System !
Review: First,hats off to the director for using various camera tricks and techniques in engaging the viewer. It took me a few minutes to realize why the camera lens was in a severe state of vertigo the first 15 minutes into the film. Thank goodness however the entire movie was not filmed using this technique ! Probably would have passed out. The reason for the swirling and sickening motion of the lens and the droning of the high tech synth sound of the soundtrack in the beginning is to capture the madness of the moment of how one man and his friend are seeking vengeance for a heinous crime (rape) committed against his girlfriend. It also transports you into his head.

The entire story is told in a backwards sort of chronological order leading to previous possible events and circumstances that led to Monica Belucci's character becoming a rape victim. The rape scene is one of the most graphic I have seen in any film in my entire life ! You will begin to actually wonder if the scene indeed was real or not. The rape scene alone is one that can haunt the viewer for time to come. Other violent acts are just as equally shocking and extremely believable due to excellent makeup, special effects, and possible cg effects. There is frontal nudity of both male and female actors that may offend some viewers (this is definitely not for children, either)!

The biggest mind trick played on the audience is how the movie progresses in real viewing time, yet, you must keep in mind that the story is unfolding backwards. Hence leading to the beginning and not the end. As we follow Belluci's character and the others one soon almost forgets the first 15 shocking minutes of the film, including the underpass rape scene, and start to think that there is a happy ending. There is NO happy ending (nor beginning for that matter)...I went out on a limb to see this one, particularly since Roeper and Ebert raved about it. Well, in all honesty, it is a very brutal movie to sit through the first time and it is definitely not one I will be seeing again. Due to the filming and stroytelling techniques and all too realistic effects it does merit some attention but only by viewers who can stomach it !...

Rating:
Summary: Genuine But With Pretention
Review: The controversy attached to 'Irreversible' no doubt stemmed from such audacity of the director to include such reastically graphic portrayals of violence and rape. Portrayal of the former involved a scene in which a man's head was crushed repeatedly and brutally with a fire extinguisher in the name of revenge. However, it is the 10 minute rape scene, in which all the nuances of humiliation, degradation and sheer animalism of rape is open for full-view exhibition, that caused the public outcry for the film's ban (unsuccessfully in Australia).
What was the point of such gratuity? Many say it was unnecessary to go to such extremes to prove a point. But it is important to realise that in the real world, these occurrences are commonplace. The film is a study of the dark side human nature. Ultimately it argues that violence is blind, destroying everything in its path, leaving a trail of irreparable damage in its wake. The violence stems from man's evil; the rapist simply wanted to use Belucci's character (Alex) for his own pleasure. This violence then begets more violence, as Alex's partner Marcus rampages through the night-life to find the perpetrator. Yet in the end, the man that suffered his vengeance and rage was not the rapist. And so the chain reaction initiated by one man's self-indulgence and morally reprehensible decision to rape led to the spiralling destruction of many other lives.
The title refers to the structure of the film, as viewers watch the cascade of events in reverse from the opening where Marcus and Pierre storm through a gay BDSM club, leading to the bashing of a man with the fire extinguisher, to the rape then to more happier times before these tragedies. The image of the beautiful untouched Belucci laying peacefully on luscious green grass helps to draw the movie to a conclusion. This reverse chronology detaches us as viewers from any empathy we may have for the Marcus and Pierre, inhibiting us from labelling their acts of retaliation as heroic and justified, such that we are able to witness the extent of their reprehensible behaviour, regardless of the motivation. But it also helps to soften the heavy blow delivered by such a dark and pessimistic ("Time destroys all things") film by concluding with a picturesque, almost niave and innocent view of the world.
While the film does raises genuine thought-provoking issues, it loses points for times of blatant pretention namely, amongst other inane attempts for the avant-garde, the swirling camera angle lasting for the first 20 or so minutes of the film acheiving nothing except to make the audience nauseous. And the attempts to explain the events as some act of fate via visions in dreams destabilises the foundation for the film's arguments as it suddenly and paradoxically argues that the horrors of life do not arise from bad decisions of some but, ludicrously, from some cosmically regulated force. Moreover, the inclusion of the gay club was an attempt to increase shock value. To discriminate against gay people by placing them in a negative context indicates the homophobic contention of the writers/director and only serves to magnify the myopia in the movie's vision.
A movie not for the faint-hearted to the weak-in-stomach. This piece is an insightful human study but alas, succumbed to the desire to appeal the the pretentious art-house crowd.

Rating:
Summary: The subject of the film is gruesome and horrifying...
Review: But, all in all this film is the most realistic film I have ever seen. It is not for the mainstream viewer, of course. This film was shown at one of my student film organizational meetings, and even most of the film students walked out of the room. Mostly men because I was the only woman that dared to see it, which I think is a shame. Many people cannot take sexual violence or violence in general but, it is a reality. This happens to ordinary people everyday. People are killed in equally or unfortunately ( I would hate to imagine) more horrible ways than this. The thing about film is that people naturally disconnect themselves from film because from the beginning, they believe it is a ficticious water-down version of life. But, Irreversible doesn't do that for you. It takes to deep into the dark, grotesque and evil sides of life. And they don't sugar coat it. That is what made me love this film. I probably can only see it once or twice in my lifetime. That's enough. But, I think everyone should see it. Every man and woman. I think it would do wonders in deterring sexual violence because of how intense it is. Anyone who says that this film should have never been made or says that it is too much. All I can say is that they must live in a paradise, completely shut out from the world. Because this film is real. They used a real couple to portray the characters because it could only be believable in that aspect. For a real couple's lives to be ripped apart by such a gruesome act is real. My whole reason for coming into film was to portray real stories that are not being told on the big screen. This film inspired me. And that is what it is for to inspire and to inform. Not to entertain. So if you are looking for entertainment, go to Disney.

Rating:
Summary: LEARN MORE ABOUT GASPAR NOE ...
Review: If you want to know more about Gaspar Noé , this outstanding director , don't miss this french website :
http://www.vialeweb.com/letempsdetruittout

Rating:
Summary: Time destroys all things
Review: However, time will not distroy the excellence of this movie. It takes two viewings to fully grasp the concept, but it's worth it. Every scene provides more information on the one before. At first, I was going to give it only 4 stars, due to the homophobic content (...) But upon a second viewing, I realized that the epithets were justified by previous occurences. ex. the gay-bashing doesn't start until Marcus realizes a gay [prostitite] raped his girlfriend, Alex. And the ending provides a faint glimmer of hope that the viewer knows is futile, as they have had the privalege of seeing the ending first. I especially liked the flashing at the end in which everything seemed to come together. (if you've seen the film, you'll know what I mean.) All in all, this is an excellent movie and is sure to be a classic piece of European cinema.

Rating:
Summary: Irreversible or Back Out While You Still Can
Review: This movie SUCKS. I think that when a movie synopsis says explicit sex, that they should probably specify whether the sex is gay or straight. Watching badly filmed gay sex for an hour or more is really not my cup of tea. But that's not the worst of it. I want to know what the cameraman was on, cause if he didn't walk into a few walls during the filming of this movie (and I use the term loosely) then he must have been doing better than things would have seemed. The entire first half of the movie is like being bounced around in a hamster ball. You can't tell which way is up. I don't know whose bright idea it was to start at the end and work backwards, but the concept fell way short of clever. I was expecting something like "Swordfish". You know, how they show the big explosion and then tell you what leads up to it. NO, this film literally started at the end and progressed backwards. What was the point anyway. It just seemed like someones poor attempt at originality. Using a story line without any artistic redemption what so ever. So if you're thinking of buying it, BACK OUT WHILE YOU STILL CAN!!!!!

Rating:
Summary: film students, you got rooked
Review: I know all you earnest film students out there think that this movie was the greatest flick you've ever seen...of course you do, you're 18 years old. You felt a little dirty and sick watching it and you got all confused, assuming that your gut reaction equated to an artistic revelation. Get a little age on you and you'll understand the difference between titillation and satisfaction. Trust me, no one is having a bigger laugh at your naive appreciation of Irreversible than its creators. They dangled a bit of tempting sleaze in front of you, and because you've sat through a semester or two of film school and think you have the world figured out, you ate it up.
The deepest association most of you come up with is Memento...based solely on similar back to front structure though otherwise, these two movies couldn't be more different in style, art direction, and by far the most important, story.
Irreversible is gross, sure...and that is why you like it. Nothing new there, but also nothing to learn. Worse than gross, though, it's so cynical of its own audience (and read the posted C+ term papers, I mean "reviews" if you don't get me) that I have to respect it, but only in the way I respect the wolf for accepting its nature and consuming the hilarious little lambs.
Long story short: skip this crap and watch anything else.

Rating:
Summary: This is not a film for the faint of heart.
Review: There are aspects to Gaspar Noe's IRREVERSIBLE that I, as a student and as a fan of both films & filmmaking, appreciate on a certain level because of their unbelievable boldness, their remarkable daring. For example, I am in awe of the extremely long, unflinching takes and the incredibly large chunks of dialogue -- improvised, or not -- that the actors deliver in character.

I also realize why Noe chose to structure his film in reverse, ala MEMENTO, and I appreciate his reasoning for showing the beating and the rape first.

In the pornography of violence, the film's structure is dependent upon each act swelling to a violent culmination. As a result, the spectator exits the theater sympathetic to the nominal "hero," who is, in fact, usually the character perpetrating the majority of the violence.

In the pornography of sex, intercourse is likewise the climax to each scene. In truth, we must acknowledge the fact that, in some cases, the climax is violent sex -- oftentimes a rape scene filmed in a highly stylized fashion -- that invites the spectator to empathize with the perpetrator of the deed, i.e., the actor who fulfills the role of the audience's avatar, and dehumanizes the victim, whom the audience is encouraged to forget is likewise an actor fulfilling a role.

Unfortunately, the fantasy satisfaction this form of sexual pornography provides the spectator sanctions the actions of the rapist, decriminalizes the emotional, mental and physical damage rape causes by objectifying the victim and, typically, completely misrepresents the victim's voluntary participation in her own humiliation.

In his film, Noe subverts that process by showing the violence *first*, without context, in order to completely strip away the gradual build up of audience sympathy for Marcus's and Pierre's violent acts (no matter how justified they may have felt in their rage), and to completely strip away from Alex's rape any possible audience titillation.

What I do not care for about IRREVERSIBLE is its extreme inaccessibility, especially at the beginning (the start) of the film. The camera work is nausea inducing at best and, at worst, reveals to the audience a filmmaker at his most self-indulgent.

Moreover, just as the camera work settles down, as we approach the end of the film (which is, in reality, the beginning of the story) the film becomes heavy with patently ridiculous dialogue. The conversation that Alex, Marcus and Pierre have on the subway is ludicrously pointless, because it serves no purpose other than to anchor the earlier (that is to say, "later") violence. The scene does nothing to further our fundamental understanding of the characters, nor does it shed any light on Noe's understanding of the human condition.

Nevertheless, this is a film as unlike anything else you have ever seen, and it is as far removed from the usual drek Hollywood churns out by the gross as Neptune is removed from the sun.

This is not a film for the faint of heart, nor is it for those simply wishing for two hours of mindless entertainment.

This is a film worth seeing for its courage and its audacity, a film that challenges its audience and dares the spectator to continue watching.

Rating:
Summary: i liked it
Review: i think that this is a great film. It is in the same way using imagery to give you a certain feeling of the points of the fillm. I really dont like that people dont like it because they would like a movie like blue velvet or a clockwork orange for beautiful imagery but this is showing it to have more of a feeling of the emotions and the tone of the film. Its a bit hypocritical. I do understand however that a person wouldnt like it because the context and content were too harsh. I felt a bit ill after a scene in it myself. The acting was really good. There was good chemistry between alex and marcus. Even though the ending was nice i still felt a little disturbed by the begining and the feeling is irreversible.

Rating:
Summary: Gratuitous - Disgusting
Review: Exploiting a rape scene for fame is more than disgusting.

What put me most off in this film, was not its violence, but the self serving aim of its financial beneficiaries, namely Noe and Bellucci.

That's the bottom line of the whole film, because there is neither an underlying story nor a glimpse of a message/meaning (!!and for sure nothing philosophical!!) to the whole film. Hence the extremly long focus on violence and nudity is used purely gratuitous.

Moreover, waving the camera around in an attempt at avant garde technique, doesn't make up for a missing plot.