Exhibition

2013
5.8| 1h44m| en| More Info
Released: 09 August 2013 Released
Producted By: BBC Film
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

An intimate examination of a contemporary artist couple, whose living and working patterns are threatened by the imminent sale of their home.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

BBC Film

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Kidskycom It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.
Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.
Wyatt There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.
Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.
paul2001sw-1 Joanna Hogg makes sparse, almost stilted films about uncommunicative, and to my mind, unappealing middle class people. 'Exhibition' is not quite as painful to watch as her earlier film 'Archipelago', but it does feel a little pointless: an architect loves his artistic wife, even though they don't really talk to each other. Her explicit refusal to discuss her work is made exasperating for the viewer because the film doesn't show us it either, at least not in any terms that one could imagine as saleable product: the vision of the artist here is of someone spending time alone, periodically donning weird outfits and standing or sitting in strange positions. Instead of the art-theme predominating, we're just left with the irritating ticks of the overly-fortunate. It feels like an improvisation that was never turned into a finished script.
Paul Creeden I have just finished watching Hogg's three films on Netflix. "Exhibition" is the most recent. I see a progression in her work from "Unrelated" through "Archipelago", but not in this film. Her strong points are setting and character. She obviously has no interest in plot. She uses superficial circumstance as her plot line. Summer in Italy, holiday on the Isles of Scilly, posh house in the city being sold.The production values are good. The films are all interesting visually. The casts are also good. The scenes form a collage, not a painting or sculpture. The overwhelming mood of all three films is boredom. Boredom of people with too much privilege and not enough personal insight or maturity. This is perhaps the most annoying aspect of "Exhibition". Two wealthy narcissists bump into each other in a designer manse. D's so-called performance art is simply a channeling of her sexual and emotional dysfunction. H is a classic enabler and codependent. Even the sadomasochistic element of their relationship is boring.I got something from both "Unrelated" and "Archipelago". I got nothing from "Exhibition" other than a cramp from sitting though it.
J Hearn I'm not sure why the first reviewer felt the need to attack Hogg personally and trash her aesthetic. Her removed, mesmeric method of filming people in relationships isn't for everyone, but she will appeal to viewers interested in unconventional approaches and who appreciate not having characters' emotions spelled out at every step.As with her earlier film Archipelago, the characters reveal themselves solely through their actions and speech in a context of mundane everyday life, but Exhibition ventures into fantasy/dream-state in a way that helps expose the inner reality of D, the wife who seems almost trapped in a house that is as much a character as its human inhabitants. Something happened at one point that we are not privy to, but it has deeply affected D. One could say that she and the house are haunted, and it acts as a defining structure for her relationship with her husband H. Its spaces are strictly defined as to who lives where, as both artists work next to, but separate from, each other.We are given glimpses of each through short interactions, attempts at lovemaking, and H's sense of control contrasted with D's retreat. She seems passive and self-protective, and their decision about the house will change everything.The movie may be considered "boring" by people addicted to action, or who can't stand having negative space where an explanation "should" be. The film isn't slowly paced, but as with her other films, the spaces between are as important as what the characters say. Get acquainted with Hogg's work and be surprised at how affecting it is.
johnnymurphy15 The term 'Art Film' can sometimes mean an interesting, unique experience full of symbolic possibility, or it can be a code word for pretentious bore-fest! Exhibition easily falls in the latter.D (Viv Albertine) and H (Liam Gillick) are a married couple who live in what Al Pacino from 'Heat' would describe as a 'Bullshit postmodern apartment!' They are both artists and have their own studio in separate rooms. They communicate to each other by using the speaker phone, and there is a spiral staircase which unites the house. We see D sitting around in her room moving a stool around and sitting on it, putting together some kind of conceptual art performance which symbolises something. There is a shot of her lying on a rock or opening cupboard doors and other random, pedestrian activities which I don't care about. There seems to be tension between the couple. D does not like to talk to H about her art because he might be honest to the point of insensitive. H tries to occasionally assert his manhood by trying to have sex with her but she resists. More scenes of them sitting around talking about stuff and waffle about the house being a living and breathing entity which harbours good vibrations within the walls. They have to sell the house for some reason, but D wants to stay and blah blah blah! I found it so tedious and so monotonous, I started looking away from the screen as I did not care what was going on at all. Both characters were unlikable, un-relatable and a couple of hollow, ostentatious snobs making the kind of art which is disposable and meaningless. With all these glowing reviews stating how enigmatic and sensual it was, I had no feelings of any kind of enigma or sensuality whatsoever. Was I missing something? Clearly I am the wrong target audience here who has no care for understanding whatever the point of this film was. I am sure it's not that important…. to non pretentious people anyway!