(jp) wrote: Is uber stupid but lots of fun. If you are stupid enough to like parodies, you will like this one, Of course, the real idiots watch parodies and give them bad reviews as if the people are trying to make THE ARTIST. LOL
(it) wrote: Pleasant, entertaining flick that reminds me of a happier version of Flashdance, to some degree.
(us) wrote: Donald Cammell is one of the more criminally underrated directors of our time. Perhaps this neglect is a result of his short filmography (which consists of only four feature length films), perhaps it's because his films are an odd combination of conventionalism and pretentious artistry that seem to conflict with one another, or perhaps it's because he has been overshadowed by his more "successful" film partner Nicolas Roeg, who together made the classic psychedelic gangster thriller "Performance". Whatever the case may be, Cammell's work needs to be re-evaluated as one will find him to be a true film auteur - a master of dark, nihilistic, and existentialistic thrillers.In terms of plot, "White of the Eye" is probably the most conventional of Cammell's films - the narrative is a straightforward rendition of the "slasher" genre (if one wishes to call it as such), offering up no surprising developments or unexpected turns - but everything else about the film is far from conventional.The editing is by far the most mesmerizing aspect of the film. The cuts are elliptical, with time and space overlapping with one another until they ultimately merge, creating a surreal and hallucinatory ambiance. Adding to this mood is the fact that the cuts are often not cuts at all but rather dissolves - shots melt into one another instead of being severed by splicing as they normally are, not only amplifying the dream-like nature of the film but also seeming to suggest that the characters are linked to one another on a more metaphysical level rather than their social relationships. Yet there is another significant detail about the editing that needs to be addressed - the rapid succession of of cuts made during several key sequences. For example, the first murder sequence is not simply shot in a long take - nor is it filmed in a gritty, kinetic style as they often are - but rather it is carefully constructed with a multitude of symbolic edits that both compliment and contrast the scene with a series of juxtapositions (a goldfish flounders in a bowl of meat, the heads of roses become detached as they fall, red sauce is splattered across a white table and a painting, etc.). These sequences are so rich and detail that it would take several viewings to fully comprehend each shot's significance.In addition to the spectacular editing, the direction is just as superb, with the camera tracking in forcefully and spinning around characters rapidly to create greater intensity and "presence" (we feel... we experience more). The cinematography is also striking with such wonderful compositional decisions as extreme closeup of the eye, sudden inversion of colors (that is, shot in the negative), etc.Interestingly, the musical score is composed by members of "Pink Floyd" and is truly haunting - it's strange, not rhythmic, and unbalanced, amplifying the uneasy, surreal, and dream-like atmosphere the other aspects of the film have already established.The film is an experience. It is a visceral and psychedelic assault on the senses. It has to be felt and not rigorously deconstructed. It is a film about the surface, about symbolisms, about metaphors, about a mood, about a feeling, all told with a framework of a conventional genre piece. Conflicting elements to be sure, but a mesmerizing film none the less.