A university professor is fascinated with humankind's history of violent self-destruction.
الإعلان الترويجي
طاقم العمل
Jonathan Weiss
Director
Victor Slezak
Travis Talbert
Anna Juvander
Karen Novotny
Michael Kirby
Dr. Nathan
Mariko Takai
Nurse Nagamatsu
Robert Patrick Brink
Vaughn Koester
Diane Grotke
Catherine
Caroline McGee
Margaret
Robert Morgan
Captain Webster
Tom Constantine
Pilot
Jeremy Graham
Patient
Michael McFadden
Police Photographer
Ed Herlihy
Self
Marilyn Monroe
Self
Ronald Reagan
Self
J.G. Ballard
Writer
Michael Kirby
Writer
Jonathan Weiss
Writer
قد يعجبك أيضًا
The Atrocity Exhibition
Visher
Bloody Mary
The Invoking: Paranormal Dimensions
الموتى السائرون: داريل ديكسون
Sacred Lies
دع الشخص المناسب يدخل
Monument
Let the Right One In
Enigma
Tokyo Vampire Hotel
Runaway
Devil's Diner
The Host
Chalawa
Muthassi
منزل جميل
الجميلة والوحش
Kingdom
Khemjira
لو كانت الأمنيات تقتل
Goddess Bless You from Death
Saints & Sinners
فندق هيل موتيل
التعليقات
10 تعليق
source: The Atrocity Exhibition
While definitely not for everyone, this movie effectively captures J.G. Ballard's difficult novel of the same name. More visual than literal, The Atrocity Exhibition forces the viewer to re-think the art of film and of story telling. It effectively communicates in a new language that caused some who saw it to declare that it 'changed their lives'. It changed mine as well, although I'm not exactly sure in what way. And while I can't say that I completely 'got ' the story, the story that I got was fascinating and one that I can't forget. I've since read the book and that certainly helped, but it wasn't necessary to enjoy the film. This film stands as one of my favorites alongside the best works of Kubrick, the Coen brothers and Hitchcock.
I was simply astonished by this film. I almost think it should not be called a film, as it is so radically different from what we are accustomed to with feature films. This is not a piece of entertainment. Its a piece of incredible art. The book is difficult in itself, but so rewarding, and this film is no different. Its non narrative, and its not supposed to pretend to be like quotidian reality, but actually it feels MORE real than real life. The whole construction, the style of acting, the cinematography, set design and soundtrack are a complete departure from the usual fare. This is one of those films that can change how you look at film, if you are game for that. If not, leave it alone. Its not for everyone, but the best things never are.
I saw this way back at the 2000 Seattle Film Festival and memories of it have stuck with me since then. No idea if this film is available in any form today. Having struggled through but been intrigued by J. G. Ballard's book, this seems to be a fairly faithful reflection of what the book was all about, while being somewhat easier to digest {as if I can claim to have any idea what the book is all about!}. The merging of the themes of sex, celebrity, architecture, and modern consumer society somehow work on screen, even though it's a very confusing and narrative-free picture. There's no real way to make sense of what is happening scene by scene, but there are some fabulous location shots and effects. If you saw Crash then this is worth trying to see.
As a long-time Ballard fan I was looking forward to seeing this on DVD release. The book is the densest but also most oblique setting out of his ideas. How could this be captured on film? The director tries too hard to remain faithful to the structure of the novel(strange that this should be a criticism but film is just so different - I was left wondering what a more straight-forward narrative would have brought, compare with 'The Unforgettable Lightness Of Being' which was a successful adaptation). What really damns the film though is the truly appalling acting throughout the film. Actors read lines that they obviously don't understand and make Ballard's intriguing prose seem quite trite. I recognise that Ballardian characters are often two dimensional - more cipher than flesh-and-blood people - but how did the actors manage to reduce the dimensions further?! The direction was generally dull and plodding, like something I would have seen at the ICA back in the 80s, ponderousness masquerading for insight. Back to the book ...........
I saw this way back at the 2000 Seattle Film Festival and memories of it have stuck with me since then. No idea if this film is available in any form today. Having struggled through but been intrigued by J. G. Ballard's book, this seems to be a fairly faithful reflection of what the book was all about, while being somewhat easier to digest {as if I can claim to have any idea what the book is all about!}. The merging of the themes of sex, celebrity, architecture, and modern consumer society somehow work on screen, even though it's a very confusing and narrative-free picture. There's no real way to make sense of what is happening scene by scene, but there are some fabulous location shots and effects. If you saw Crash then this is worth trying to see.
source: The Atrocity Exhibition
While definitely not for everyone, this movie effectively captures J.G. Ballard's difficult novel of the same name. More visual than literal, The Atrocity Exhibition forces the viewer to re-think the art of film and of story telling. It effectively communicates in a new language that caused some who saw it to declare that it 'changed their lives'. It changed mine as well, although I'm not exactly sure in what way. And while I can't say that I completely 'got ' the story, the story that I got was fascinating and one that I can't forget. I've since read the book and that certainly helped, but it wasn't necessary to enjoy the film. This film stands as one of my favorites alongside the best works of Kubrick, the Coen brothers and Hitchcock.
As a long-time Ballard fan I was looking forward to seeing this on DVD release. The book is the densest but also most oblique setting out of his ideas. How could this be captured on film? The director tries too hard to remain faithful to the structure of the novel(strange that this should be a criticism but film is just so different - I was left wondering what a more straight-forward narrative would have brought, compare with 'The Unforgettable Lightness Of Being' which was a successful adaptation). What really damns the film though is the truly appalling acting throughout the film. Actors read lines that they obviously don't understand and make Ballard's intriguing prose seem quite trite. I recognise that Ballardian characters are often two dimensional - more cipher than flesh-and-blood people - but how did the actors manage to reduce the dimensions further?! The direction was generally dull and plodding, like something I would have seen at the ICA back in the 80s, ponderousness masquerading for insight. Back to the book ...........
