The editing is as masterful as the cinematography. I must say though that the conclusion to the mystery is a bit, uh, unsatisfying to me (also, ridiculous and silly.)
A stunning and misunderstood film. Part of the problem is that Don't Look Now is known (and was terribly marketed) as a horror or thriller which is misleading in the modern sense as there is almost no 'action' or scares to speak of.
The legendary and often-appropriated climactic scene doesn't help this image either. As a psychological drama it is peerless; the acting, locations, atmosphere and the rendering of a city-as-memory are all incredible.
God that poster is awful.
Wow! First class visual storytelling here. Full of cinematic surprises and I loved the editing. Definitely a top cinema work. Story itself was not that interesting but was well told and I found some scenes really scary.
First of all, quickly: the death scene isn't in slow motion. Secondly: it was difficult for John to defend himself when a. he was petrified at the sight of the killer and b. he had absolutely no idea a knife was going to be pulled out until it was too late. And why not a dwarf? They have the capacity for violence too.
I won't bother with the festival remark because your attitude comes across as childish to me - and your refusal to use spoiler tags supports that notion.
I agree. No way is this the best British film. It's a mess. The only good thing about it is the beautiful cinematography (which is often spoilt by horrible editing and bad sound design).
Kind of predicts David Lynch’s career. I’m seeing bits of Twin Peaks and Mulholland Dr. here… I loved it. Just don’t go into it looking for a concise story or memorable dialogue. It’s all about tone and feeling. Past, present and future blur together to form a semi-coherent story of dreading, guilt, grief and the ptsd that comes from surviving an intense tragedy.
Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now is bookended by moments of horror, but it's hard to classify as definitively in any specific genre. For the most part, it's about a couple grieving for their little girl, and suffering PTSD (considering the girl was drowned, and they're spending most of the movie in Venice, the location adds a mood that is not helpful to their process) to the point of making the supernatural vibe that develops somewhat ambiguous. After Julie Christie's character meets a blind psychic who receives communications from the dead child, it may expose Donald Sutherland's as an unbeliever who nevertheless has the gift. He's certainly having visions, if not hallucinations. But the nature of the psychic powers presented in the film are all wrapped up in the film's FORM, and that's where Roeg reall gets me. Because the really great thing about Don't Look Now is the editing - jarring match cuts that are more thematic than logical, that keep you in your toes, or reeling - and the predestination inherent in the bookends is a formalist trick. Similarly, when characters see the past or the future, they are merely aware of achronological editing, of what we, as the audience are frequently privy to (flashbacks, flashforwards, etc.). I almost want to categorize the film as a time travel story where time is fractured and becomes an inescapable maze, just as Venice's network of streets and canals appears to be. And then add the emotional labyrinth the couple is navigating on top of that.
What a pointless movie. A big turd. No cohesive story what so ever, just a bunch of random scenery that lends to no credible narrative. If this is the number 1 British movie, then I will stay clear of THAT list...
This for me is not the best , "the third man" and "lawrence of arabia" are unquestionably much superior but will retain a position in the top 5 along with barry lyndon and it's a matter of life and death.
I was disappointed. Maybe because I was expecting much after reading everywhere some people saying the "editing was masterful" but seriously, it's not. Editing is an art that relies on pace and cohesion, not splicing in random images or cutting things to close for comfort for the sake of a transition. Great editing should be felt but not visible.
Even the performances are numbed from the technical gymnastics. Meh.
I feel like I got trolled, watching this ridiculous crap. An hour and a half of suspense and then...
SURPRISE DWARF ATTACK
!??! You've gotta be kidding me. Burst out laughing. Plus, wasting ten minutes on a sex scene didn't help.
I liked the beginning and anticipated that we were building somewhere and all for a total derailment.
The priest obviously didn't want to be fixing the church, but that was just a red herring. Why not do something with that?
Oh, and the sound is awful. The incidental noises (clinking, bumping around, footsteps) are often as loud or louder than the dialogue.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 22
Timec
The editing is as masterful as the cinematography. I must say though that the conclusion to the mystery is a bit, uh, unsatisfying to me (also, ridiculous and silly.)Big ander
The Baxter marriage is brilliantly rendered, as is the depth of their grief. Entire thing is damn mesmerizing. Evocatively shot with a perfect close.TalkingElvish
A stunning and misunderstood film. Part of the problem is that Don't Look Now is known (and was terribly marketed) as a horror or thriller which is misleading in the modern sense as there is almost no 'action' or scares to speak of.The legendary and often-appropriated climactic scene doesn't help this image either. As a psychological drama it is peerless; the acting, locations, atmosphere and the rendering of a city-as-memory are all incredible.
God that poster is awful.
Sobchak
How can this be the best british film?ozgungenc
Wow! First class visual storytelling here. Full of cinematic surprises and I loved the editing. Definitely a top cinema work. Story itself was not that interesting but was well told and I found some scenes really scary.GregT
In response to Dawizz' mess:I won't bother with the festival remark because your attitude comes across as childish to me - and your refusal to use spoiler tags supports that notion.
Flowneppets
I agree. No way is this the best British film. It's a mess. The only good thing about it is the beautiful cinematography (which is often spoilt by horrible editing and bad sound design).essaywhu
Kind of predicts David Lynch’s career. I’m seeing bits of Twin Peaks and Mulholland Dr. here… I loved it. Just don’t go into it looking for a concise story or memorable dialogue. It’s all about tone and feeling. Past, present and future blur together to form a semi-coherent story of dreading, guilt, grief and the ptsd that comes from surviving an intense tragedy.Siskoid
Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now is bookended by moments of horror, but it's hard to classify as definitively in any specific genre. For the most part, it's about a couple grieving for their little girl, and suffering PTSD (considering the girl was drowned, and they're spending most of the movie in Venice, the location adds a mood that is not helpful to their process) to the point of making the supernatural vibe that develops somewhat ambiguous. After Julie Christie's character meets a blind psychic who receives communications from the dead child, it may expose Donald Sutherland's as an unbeliever who nevertheless has the gift. He's certainly having visions, if not hallucinations. But the nature of the psychic powers presented in the film are all wrapped up in the film's FORM, and that's where Roeg reall gets me. Because the really great thing about Don't Look Now is the editing - jarring match cuts that are more thematic than logical, that keep you in your toes, or reeling - and the predestination inherent in the bookends is a formalist trick. Similarly, when characters see the past or the future, they are merely aware of achronological editing, of what we, as the audience are frequently privy to (flashbacks, flashforwards, etc.). I almost want to categorize the film as a time travel story where time is fractured and becomes an inescapable maze, just as Venice's network of streets and canals appears to be. And then add the emotional labyrinth the couple is navigating on top of that.afan
What a pointless movie. A big turd. No cohesive story what so ever, just a bunch of random scenery that lends to no credible narrative. If this is the number 1 British movie, then I will stay clear of THAT list...nes1983
The first hour is really difficult to watch. Although I suppose it is a good movie, I will not recommend it to anybody.George Bailey
Sheer brilliance!quantumystic
This for me is not the best , "the third man" and "lawrence of arabia" are unquestionably much superior but will retain a position in the top 5 along with barry lyndon and it's a matter of life and death.BadFluffy
I was disappointed. Maybe because I was expecting much after reading everywhere some people saying the "editing was masterful" but seriously, it's not. Editing is an art that relies on pace and cohesion, not splicing in random images or cutting things to close for comfort for the sake of a transition. Great editing should be felt but not visible.Even the performances are numbed from the technical gymnastics. Meh.
KPND
I feel like I got trolled, watching this ridiculous crap. An hour and a half of suspense and then...I liked the beginning and anticipated that we were building somewhere and all for a total derailment.
The priest obviously didn't want to be fixing the church, but that was just a red herring. Why not do something with that?
Oh, and the sound is awful. The incidental noises (clinking, bumping around, footsteps) are often as loud or louder than the dialogue.
Showing items 1 – 15 of 22