Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

rageinblack I heard a lot of good things about it but I was procrastinating the watch for some reason, my subconscious already knew why apparently. Jokes aside, this movie was annoyingly ridiculous to me. She was beautiful, he is an awesome actor, the atmosphere screamed Polanski all over it and I thought what could go wrong, right? Well, first of all, her acting was terrible and annoying when she played the role of Anna. I could literally picture in my mind in most scenes how the director behind the scenes screaming to her "now roll over, be more insane, do this do that", such a feeling I had when I watched the annoying Babadook kid acting out too. They both did a bad acting job IMO and or maybe it was the director's fault. I can see the director as some kind of visionary megalomaniac, clearly inspired by Polanski. That being said, the movie didn't make much sense nor it explained anything. It was long and boring, but if it was made better, even with the same elements but placed more logically, could have been good. I also like the Lovecraftian overtone that it has. I'm actually surprised that I disliked the movie. I mean I didn't actually dislike it, I was intrigued to a degree but at the same time I was put off, because I was constantly seeing a missed potential. I don't know, I may be wrong, perhaps I'm doing injustice to the movie, but I was ultimately disappointed. I felt like the director was improvising badly, a lot. As I said, this movie could be better. It was too vague and artsy to be considered an actually enjoyable and entertaining horror movie, but it is not that far from it either, so I have very mixed feelings about it and that's why I rated it 5 out of 10 stars.

esotericbonanza One of those brilliant films where one has to act as an active viewer, engaged and thoughtful and willing to make an effort, in order to get the best out of the film. Comedic, experimental, horrific and political, this is both baleful and vicious and always brilliant.With committed and brave performances from all of the cast, and particularly Adjani, this film begins at a high and intense pitch and gets stranger and stronger from thereon. Determindely non-naturalistic, this film is really a most unusual work.

dragoshilbert I agree, Sam Neil and Isabelle Adjani gave performances of a lifetime but it is not enough to make a movie good. As Oct 2017, this is rated 7.4, so for sure over-rated. Isabelle Adjani looks amazing in this movie but I think this is as far as it goes related to good points. Constant screaming made my ears bleed, I understand that the Director had some bad events in his life but what is my fault to suffer? It is a long movie, 3 in one, with a lot of irrelevant scenes and dialogue that makes no sense. It is visible that the people involved had some good ideas and talent but the final result is faulty. Don't waste your time in watching this, except you want to see Isabelle Adjani with some amazing green eyes. At the end you will very bored and disappointed because it should had been shorter and better. A very good plot for a "Twilight Zone" episode but ruin by the desire to make it a movie.

Stephen Abell Back in the days, directors like Andrzej Zulawski (who also wrote the story and screenplay) were still able to experiment and this movie is one of those experiments. Unfortunately today it no longer holds it's power. It just seems to be strange, awkward, annoying, and presumptuous.Both of the main actors are strong in their characters and roles. Sam Neill is Mark, who comes back to his wife after being away for months on work. He returns to find things have changed. His wife has been having an affair and now wants a divorce while seeming to be in the grip of a mental breakdown. This sets Mark on his own course of mental illness and Neill does a good job of portraying anxiety and depression.Isabelle Adjani as Marks wife Anna is, for the most part, brilliant at portraying her character's breakdown. She rushes about agitated, unable to complete even one simple task.Though the actors do exemplary jobs it's Zulawski that makes their illnesses a weakness to the film by overplaying them. There is just too much of them "spazzing" (Sorry for not being PC but when you watch the film you may forgive me) out to create a relatable atmosphere.Then with the unveiling of Anna's lover, the truly unbelievable self- righteous and pompous Heinrich, superbly over-acted by Heinz Bennent, that the film falls further into implausibility. The only realistic anchors in the film are the secondary characters, such as Heinrich's mother played with feeling by Johanna Hofer and Anna's friend Margit Carstensen portrayed by Margit Gluckmeister.Having said that, Zulawski does an impressive job of creating an unease through all the insanity. You get the feeling that there's something more, something darker, which is bothering Anna and Mark. When this is finally revealed the revelation is startling and is the reason why this was originally banned. It also shows why Carlo Rambaldi was one of the great special FX artists.This is a long two hours and four minutes. There are sequences that didn't need to be so long, and others that didn't even need to be in at all. Had this been at least fifteen to thirty minutes shorter with tighter direction, it may have lasted the time and be relevant today as it was then.I enjoyed parts of this film and loathed others. Because I didn't love any part of the film I cannot recommend for people to view. There are better wastes of time out there.