Irreversible

Well, that might be, but it would hardly be the first time that reviews or discussion ruined part of a film before people saw it.

Of course, but these two scenes basically sum up the entire movie. Sure, there's more to it than that but it's not like most of the remaining scenes do that much to add weight or significance to the film as a whole.

I understand. I don't want to put myself in the position of championing this film. I wanted to do no more or less than dispute the idea that the scenes being in reverse order doesn't have any point or purpose behind shocking people at the end.

What's it like being better than all of humanity?

Does it, though? Really? If it did, would the need be there to have a 10-minute-long rape scene and a very graphic murder? I still feel you could get the same message within the film no matter what story-telling device you use to get there.

Either way, I still don't like the film!

EDIT: I Saw the Devil!

For me, the scenes being backwards, illuminates the lives destroyed by the revenge. So the character's are at their most sympathetic when we already know the doom waiting for them, which makes the entire thing that much more tragic. Plot wise and emotional, this was a much better and more fascination use of backwards storytelling than Memento, though I love Memento, it simply is not in this film's league.

__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below

http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201

well I'm not cheering for anything regardless of my morality like you said you did, so I'm doing better than you.



It's not about getting the same message, it's about the impact. A kid's sock puppet show could give you the same message as this film, but no kid would ever feel like it's "that bad". This film shows things not for your entertainment, but still in a cinematic way to express the distress and unfathomable atrocity that such acts provide. That doesn't make it bad.

Then why are you still arguing about it?

It's a fantastic film, but not the "Good" version of this. It shares a lot of the same qualities actually, the very raw depiction of violence. However, in that film you are also not cheering for the vengeance seeker as you feel he has gone too far fairly early in, so in your taste it should be a terrible movie because you don't cheer anything on. Both films are learning experiences.

There's still "good" people in Irreverisble. You seem to be ignoring that. What I should root for is A) Vincent Cassel to overcome his grief and drop his hunt or B) Vincent and Monica to overcome the tragedy. If morality is a concern. After all, this isn't a "fun" revenge romp!

And, yes, before you say it, this would make it a completely different movie. Maybe that's why i don't like it. Maybe I wanted to see a film that lets me judge things for myself instead of shoving it's moral in my face. By reversing the chronology I have no "debate" about the concept of revenge/vengeance. It's simply shoved in my face. There's no subtlety or ambiguity to the film.



True, the message could be told many ways. The problem with Irreversible (as I've already said) is that the impact gets lost because the film descends into an endurance test. Not wether or not I can sit through an over long rape scene, but can I sit through an hour of near pointless, tedious character building scenes that should have existed before the ten minute rape scene.

Because i'm lonely. Duh.

I'm rooting for the "protagonist" to get revenge. For a little bit. Then I'm just rooting for his humanity. You didn't get that? You really think there are films where you shouldn't be rooting for something? Maybe you're not as advanced as you thought you were...

This contradicts this:
You don't seem to understand the purpose of it existing backwards.

That's twisting the concept of "rooting" to something dumb. There are many films where you don't root for something, Korean vengeance films for one and Lolita for another. It's not a tough concept.

Maybe I don't. Isn't the purpose to make me realize the Vincent Cassel winds up the bad guy? Yoda already explained it. I was just pointing out that you can make that exact same message in the end while still building the characters into something that I'd give a flaming crap about. Can we just agree to disagree on Irreversible? I hated it for reasons other than the fact that it plays backwards.

I, unfortunately, haven't seen Lolita (despite owning the Kubrick box set for years...) but I've seen some Korean vengeance films. I'd love to hear specific films that give me no emotional investment on purpose.

Well, any Kubrick film (which is why people hate him), Vengeance Is Mine, The Ruling Class, Naked, Rashomon, Divorce Italian Style, Visitor Q, but sticking to Korea, Real Fiction may be the most obvious, I could make an argument for Oldboy and Lady Vengeance but that's a lot more emotionally complicated, The Coast Guard too.

Kubrick made films that had a certain amount of cold detachment, I agree with that. But there's undeniably an amount of humanity present in all of his works, IMO. I never had trouble with any of his films identifying with at least one character.

I've seen Visitor Q, Oldboy and Lady Vengeance. I see what you're saying, but I still feel some sort of emotional attachment to those films, even when it's akward or repulsive.

The only thing Irreversible left me with was a slight amount of revulsion, which, most likely, is what Noe wanted. So, good job!

I have read on this threat,someone sad,i think Yoda,that movie is all about ending,and just that ending is interesting...i agree with that,but i still think that film is great,first half and ending....

This movie is fantastic. It really is. It's so bleak,nihilistic, yet true. I mean it's not a film you want to rewatch, or one that gives you "warm" feelings. But it's thought-provoking and powerful. The idea that no matter what we can't change the outcome of our lives is horrifying.

Hmm, I don't believe this film to be very thought provoking. I think the word being thrown around is gimmicky and thats also what i think in regards of how it's filmed.

It boils down to another rape movie, shock cinema some kind of exploitation you name it. Is it more than your straight forward vulgar brutal movie? yes, should you put much thought into it? no.

I don't mean to offend anyone that enjoys the film, ive seen quite a few brutal movies, this being no where near the worst but at the end of the day he's going for shocks and to me thats one big gimmick albeit not always bad.

Provoking yes. But not thought provoking.

^ Agreed

I don't think this was intended to be thought provoking, but I also don't put it in 'shock for shock' category. Personally I adore this movie. It's incredibly effective, that droning techno in Club Rectum or whatever it was called is so perfectly mind numbing for the scene it's used in. I think it's time for a rewatch.

Irreversible wins the prize for the most unorthodox use of a fire extinguisher in a film.