Benutzerrezensionen

Where to even start with this? What starts as a fun drug-fueled comedy slowly turns into a claustrophobic nightmare of grotesque imagery and sensory overload. I've never done any hallucinogetic drugs, but I imagine that after a while, the rush Would become a nightmare. This is an ugly movie. It's hard to watch. It's extremely uncfomfortable. And that's the point.

Terry Gilliam said in his own words: "I want it to be seen as one of the great movies of all time, and one of the most hated movies of all time." Judging by the critics' reactions, he succeded. The film has an almost perfectly split 50 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, and many critics, including Roger Ebert, were completely appalled by it, and honestly, it's not hard to see why.

But the movie survived. It has stood the test of time. It has risen from the ashes to become stronger than ever before. It is a paradox. A joyful nightmare. A horrifying treat. This film was too weird to live, yet too rare too die.

This is far from your everyday movie, and only for those with a deep appreciation for the diversity of film-making, or fans of Hunter S. Thompson. This does not mean those mentioned will enjoy it, although definitely respect the attempt. I personally found it fascinating. To portray a permanently drug induced state to the big screen was done with creativity and subtle humour. You could expect nothing less from director Terry Gilliam who has played such a massive role in the brilliant and original Monty Python works.

Having never read any of Hunter S. Thompson's work, I get the impression that justice is done for the adaptation to the big screen. An absolutely quality cast must be credited for this, ensuring a natural performance is achieved. Las Vegas which features strongly throughout the movie seems to be so appropriate when dealing with this subject matter, they just seem to go hand in hand.

An oddball journalist and his psychopathic lawyer travel to Las Vegas, with a car full of drugs, alcohol and the pursuit of the American Dream.

A psychedelic trip into the macabre, a chaotic spiral into madness. These terms perfectly describe Hunter S. Thompson's novel describing his drug fueled trip of the west. Depp does a perfect rendition of Thompson and truly is a marvel to watch in this film. In his rendition it is easy to see how Depp has become one of this generations finest actors. This film for the casual viewer may be difficult to follow and or watch, but to me personally is a fantastic film one in which does what it was intended to do, and that is to entertain and to darkly and at times humorously take the viewer on a chaotic ride. With a huge cult following and an eventual prequel that came out; Rum Diaries, this is a wonderful peek into the world of the not so normal and the drug fueled ride that is Hunter S. Thompson's life. The soundtrack is perfect for this film as it follows suit with the chaos that is viewed on the screen. I highly recommend this film to film buffs and lovers of dark comedies.

For all those of you who decry this movie for being pointless and lacking soul, that was the point! This is an excellent movie, a true adaptation of the book, nothing more and nothing less. It is an unflinching look at the sickening excesses of a consumption based culture of America during the early 1970's, who's vacuous heart resides in Las Vegas, a symbol of greed and debauchery. The pointlessness of the movie is a metaphor for the pointless pursuit of personal gratification and greed, the true heart of the "American Dream".

If you put aside the usual assumptions about a movie, i.e. that you are supposed to care about the characters, that their needs to conflict and resolution etc, then you will enjoy it much better. This movie is a magical ride and actually works on many levels, not only as testimony to the horrors of excessive drug use, and the tacky, ugly view of the worst parts of America, but also to the failed 60's generation, a generation that thought that "somebody somewhere is guarding the light at the end of the tunnel". Drug use is simply a way of escaping your present reality, and all the drugged out zeroes of the sixties were truly lost if they thought that enlightenment and peace could come from a hit of acid. This movie takes Timothy Leary's supposition of "freeing your mind" to it's ultimate conclusion and the conclusion is that you are not actually freeing your mind, but destroying it.

Of course this movie is also fun to watch the incredible performances by Johnny Depp and Benitio Del Torro, both of whom I barely even recognized in their roles (Depp with a shaven head and the bloated Del Torro who gained 40 pounds for his portrayal of "Dr. Gonzo"). Del Torro has one scene in particular (the bathtub scene) which is both disgusting and very disturbing. Apparently his performance was so convincing that he had a hard time getting work after this film because everyone was convinced that he was wasted on the set. The truth is that he's just a damn fine actor who didn't hold back for one second, which is exactly what the film called for. Also the scene of Johnny Depp squealing like a banshee after imbibing some adrenocrome and Del Torro freaking out behind him is unforgettable.

The directing itself is fast paced with offseting angles a lot of wide angle lenses. Gilliam has a style which is unmistakable, it's like walking around inside of a Dali painting, everything is distorted and stretched to create a strong sense of surrealism. Yet his approach is much less offensive than Oliver Stone, who desperately throws every single filming trick at you repeatedly until you are pummeled into submission. Wow, look he switch to 8 mm, then black and white, now it's slow mo all in 3 seconds!

Anyway, I digress. This is a fine movie, don't watch it stoned, you'll get more out of it, repeated viewings are recommended. I also recommend getting the criterion DVD version, which has commentary by Gilliam, Depp, del Torro and Hunter S. Thompson himself!

I think the people who reviewed this film are a bit warped for thinking of it as anything less than a masterpiece. This film comes from the glorious days of Johnny Depp taking obscure roles in films and totally immersing himself in the character. Benecio Del Toro's performance was second to none, and I cannot for the life of me comprehend why someone would think this to be the "worst movie ever". God save us that we actually have to think a little when we sit in those awful theatre seats. Heaven forbid we're required to use our imagination a little bit and not have it handed to us in the form of Hollywood mindless pap. The film, del toro, Depp, and of course, Gilliam are all brilliant. I pity the fools who gave this movie a negative review and fail miserably in articulating their reasoning.

In a sense, this is kind of like the movie Terry Gilliam was born to do.

Terry Gilliam is an awesome visual director in the same way that Tim Burton is an awesome visual director: every single frame bleeds its own distinct style of beauty, but sometimes the story just doesn't hold it up, or the stylistic elements get in the way. However, what could possibly be better to found Gilliam's surreal psychedelic imagery on than Hunter S. Thompson's story of his exploration into the American Dream? Still, it's a hard thing to pull off, translating Thompson to film, and while Gilliam does succeed, it's largely from the support of the incredible cast working under him to work out. Johnny Depp and Benecio Del Toro especially have to really work on exaggerating when needed, slowing down when necessary through what feels like hundreds of hallucinogenic scenes with just barely enough narrative structure to pull them together.

Of course, the outcome is pretty fantastic, but it sets this movie squarely in the "love it or hate it" section of the world's video library, which is pretty much Gilliam's career simplified anyways.

--PolarisDiB

I have read countless reviews of this movie that have derided it for everything from glorifying drugs to being unchristian to being boring. Maybe my mind works very much like director Terry Gilliam's (I loved 'Brazil' and '12 Monkeys'), but the last thing I would do to this movie is deride it. It is a brilliant adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson's generation-defining book of the same name - it stays very faithful to the events in the book.

First of all, this movie literally glows with Gilliam's eye for detail that he has consistently displayed throughout his career. The sets are so elaborate, one could never take in all the scenery from any number of viewings without slowing it down and watching very closely. The bombardment of the bright, flashing lights of Las Vegas and the bizarre camera angles, as well as surreal sets make for an interesting and entertaining presentation regardless of a lack of coherency and taste. What we have here is a movie riddled with black humor and a horrifying satire of the American dream. I'll admit it takes a very `unchristian' viewpoint to laugh at the `straight economics' of allowing policemen to gang-f**k a girl for $30 a head. Therefore, people bound by a constricting sense of morality should never have watched this movie in the first place. It is for people like me who enjoy living a very un-stoic life (at least vicariously through movies) by having radical ideas and perspectives forced upon them. Fear and Loathing is the embodiment of such a perspective - it is a gruesomely accurate depiction of the bi-product of the often-glorified 60's drug culture. And one thing that countless critics seem to carelessly omit in their analyses is the constant references to the `American Dream.' Johnny Depp (Raoul Duke/Hunter Thompson), in his verbose verbal narrations, makes quite a few references to a desparate hunt for reason behind the madness of not only this `American Dream', but the drug culture as well - "He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." - Dr. Johnson (displayed before the opening scene). The problem with the waning popularity of this movie is simply that its design was not meant to appeal to the buttoned-down mainstream. People that want to laugh and cry in a movie theater and then get the hell on aren't the type of people that would enjoy seeing an unjustified drug-induced frenzy on Las Vegas. This movie has everything a critic should be looking for in a masterpiece - magnificent cinematography, lovely acting, shock value, provocation of thought, and a meaning behind it all. To freaks like me it also has immense entertainment value as well. This work will be one of my favorite movies of all time.

It's 1971. Raoul Duke (Johnny Depp) and his 'attorney' Dr. Gonzo (Benicio del Toro) are on a drug-fueled road trip in the American west. They pick up a hitchhiker (Tobey Maguire) but he runs away screaming. They're on their way to cover the Mint 400 motorcycle race in Las Vegas. They are joined by photographer Lacerda (Craig Bierko). Later, they attend a District Attorney's convention on narcotics.

The surreal imagery is both ugly and tiring. I hoped the reptile vision is the start of some good visual attempts. I don't think Terry Gilliam is wild enough in this movie. Also the scenes are too long which stretches out the hazy feel of the movie. It feels repetitive. Johnny Depp is exploding with craziness but the early fascination fades. I'm not sure if Gilliam achieved anything other than tedium. It's not until the end that Gilliam comes up with something compelling. Gonzo pulling the knife on the waitress is the only truly compelling scene leading an interesting idea to conclude on. If only the rest of the movie had something to say too.

After I watched this movie for the first time, I thought it was dumbest piece of ... whatnot I had ever seen! But as time passed (merely a few hours) and while I couldn't get that movie out of my head, I realised that Terry G. again made a movie, that nobody else could've done ... at least not like this! Everyone was saying that you couldn't possibly make a movie out of that book ... and nay-sayers will still be convinced that it can't be done. But I've come to terms and really accepted this movie for what it is! A crazy hell of a ride movie, that is just ludicrous! And I love it! Every f**ing minute of it! And how could you write a review without even mentioning the F-word. Try to listen to the commentary by the real Hunter S. Thompson! That's the guy who wrote the book, for those who don't know.

So as this movie is just plain crazy, I don't know how to wrap this up ... maybe I just leave it open ... ;o)

"Fear and Loathing in Las-Vegas" is a narcotic story- autobiography of the lost generation of the seventieth based on the Hunter Thompson's novel. This is the most controversial but not the best work by Terry Gilliam, the author of such staggering films as "Monthy Python and the Holy Grail", "Brazil", Fisher King", "12 Monkeys".

I am very impressed by Gilliam's awesome power to get inside a "man under too many influences's" mind and show the distorted and grotesque hallucinating visions of that mind from inside. Johnny Depp was amazing - he is one of the greatest and fearless actors of our time. Depp and Gilliam's craft are the main reasons to see this film because there is not much else to see. Gilliam's films are usually very interesting because there is always a story behind the delirious shell. Often, it is an absurd story but it is always a strong one. The problem of Fear and Loathing... is - there is no story at all. For the first thirty minutes or so I was truly charmed: it was funny, crazy, and visually nothing like I've seen before but for how long can I be fascinated by the monsters that were generated by the constantly and shockingly abused brain?

It's hard to describe how good this movie is without sounding sycophantic but it really is that good. This film is based on the "true" story of when the notorious reporter Hunter S. Thompson and his then attorney Oscar Zeta Acosta went to Las Vegas to cover a bike race for rolling stone magazine but instead spent the entire trip going out of their minds on various illegal and legal chemicals. This may sound like a one trick pony for stoners and 60's throwbacks but I am neither and I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Very few films based on books manage to tell the story or capture the spirit of the original but F&L certainly manages both. The story sticks closely enough to the book without alienating the books fan base but also trims out the right areas so that the film doesn't become overly long and uninteresting.

The film is still fairly long, compared with most popcorn fare, at around 2hrs and does sag a little in places but the pace quickly picks up again. The performances are absolutely spot on with Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro virtually becoming their characters. Both are heavily disguised under make-up but their acting ability shines through. On first viewing I wasn't that impressed, it was a good film but not a great film, but after a second viewing I fell in love with it. You notice things and pick up on gags the second time around that you missed the first time. You immerse yourself in their world so much that you feel like you were there with them on the "trip" in both senses of the word. I have shown this film to most of my friends and they also have become hooked after viewing the film twice, it's such a shame that this great film works like this as I'm sure there are many people who are unwilling to give it the second chance it deserves. If you haven't seen this film I suggest you do and if you don't like it see it again. If you have seen this film and didn't like it, see it again.

An impressively faithful adaptation of what most would consider an unadaptable piece of literature by the prolific Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is a depiction of drug use that starts out at full speed, and as it progresses, closes in on you and won't let you go. It goes nowhere, which is why it was a commercial and critical failure. I'm one of the greatest advocates for character development, something this film almost completely lacks, and yet, I was captivated by this film until it's end, and I was satisfied. It perfectly captures drug use and American decadence, as intended.

"The cinematography, the color, and Depp performance is the only thing i can appreciate in this movie, besides that, some of it was alright and some of it was just so boring and empty, Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas is actually a unique movie, following a drugs addicts and his friend, fills with random stuff which is make sense for a drugs addicts but the thing that they forgot is even though this movie is about drugs addicts they still have to make a point or a purpose, and they don't do that, the movie just fills with random stuff without a purpose, so it makes the story less interesting and boring, overall Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas is kinda waste of time"

'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' was originally an Article published in two parts in Rolling Stone Magazine. It was written by Hunter S. Thompson. It tells the story of a journalist reporting on the Mint 500 in Las Vegas.

Terry Gilliam (the Director) is an accomplished film maker who began his career as one of the members of Monty Python. He did all of their animations.

These two men on their own are incredibly clever and gifted artists in their chosen medium. What we get from this combination is one of the best films ever made. It is a more or less true story. It is a wonderful view on the warped nature of American 'Culture' from a completely askew angle. Drugs, drugs and more drugs, but instead of preaching their evils or telling you how fabulous life is when you're on acid, you get a very unbiased experienced approach to their use and abuse.

Visually the film is amazing and both Johnny Depp and Benizio Del Toro are true to the book. I couldn't possibly recommend this film more highly.

This movie polarizes the audience like few before: while of course, there's people who like it and people who don't like it for any movie, 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' either excites or almost repulses it's critics, and I dare to say that most of the negative responses are based on ignorance, or even fear, of introducing psychedelic experiences into mainstream culture.

Personally, i regard 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' as one of my absolute favorites, definitely in my top 10, and possibly even top 3. One of the many outstanding characteristics, besides a flawless performance from its main actors, excellent direction, and maybe the greatest achievement, one of the few literary adaptations that don't have you leave the cinema with disappointment, is the visual interpretation of the influence of LSD and other psychedelica. Though it has been tried many times, in 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' it has been done in a way that in my opinion deserves an Academy Award like 'Best Visual Interpretation', were there one like that (btw, number 2 in my psychedelic charts is, interestingly, a scene from 'The Simpsons', episode 809, 'El Viaje de Nuestro Jomer (The Mysterious Voyage of Homer)', where Homer eats super-spicy chili made from Guatemalan chili peppers grown by mental patients- that causing him an incredibly accuratel realized 'trip').

Well, I guess up until now you, the reader, can guess that I am one of those that loved the movie, and think it to be a mile stone in cinematographic history, along with 'Apocalypse Now', 'Pulp Fiction' or 'The Matrix'.

When you start watching this movie, you'll decide if you like it or not. But if you don't want to wait, I'll tell you. This movie is so trippy, so gross, so insane, so bizarre, and so friggin' crazy! Now with that said, it's also brilliant, funny, surreal, dark, entertaining etc. The story goes like this; a Dr. Journalism, Raoul Duke (Johnny Depp), and his wolf man attorney, Dr. Gonzo (Benicio Del Toro), are sent to Las Vegas to cover a Mint 400 motorcycle race but end up abandoning that in search of the American Dream. The two characters are out of their minds on drugs the entire time which is where the surreal factor comes into play. The film is based the famous novel by Hunter S. Thompson, which was based on real life events he experienced. I'm not kidding when I say that five minutes into this movie and you'll feel that someone drugged your drink or something. This is more than just a movie, it's an experience, and an experience like no other. If you haven't read the book or don't know what your getting yourself into, then you're gonna have one hell of a ride. Johnny Depp (of course) nails the performance of the character that the book created. What director, Terry Gilliam, did is take the book and match the images that we thought of while reading it, perfectly. Throughout the film, watching the two characters wander witlessly around Las Vegas tripping on acid, I felt like I was part of the experience. Also, Depp's performance is so good, that I started to forget that he wasn't really Hunter S. Thompson. The characters are both psychotic but in different ways. Raoul Duke has one foot in reality and another foot in a pit of madness, Gonzo, however, is off his rocker. He's just a ticking atom bomb ready to go off, I'd be scared to stay in the same room as him. But what keeps this movie going strong is the narration by Depp. Some of it's recited from the book but other times it's whatever's on his mind. Without the narration, the movie would be just one wacky thing after another. Overall, watching this movie is like being hit by a car, sucked into a tornado, spat out into a trampoline factory, raped by a wild tiger, eaten by Godzilla, thrown off the face of the Earth, and plummeting right down on the TV. Any negative reviews you may have heard about this movie make no sense. They love the book while hate the film for being so crazy and shapeless (oh, you mean exactly like the book). This is a perfect adaptation of the book. So great performances, surreal scenery, flowing narration, and a clever cameo by Thompson himself. When I first saw this movie, I liked it just fine. I've seen a few more times and every time I see it, it gets better. Now it's gotten to the point where I think it's one of the best films ever made. So if you're a Johnny Depp fan, or a Terry Gilliam fan, or a Hunter S. Thompson fan, or just in the mood for something different and I mean REALLY different, definitely check it out.

Love it so much it hurts. There are so many great lines, and moments. To many to count. Johnny Depp should have received an Oscar for it. His performance is nothing short of genius. I know there never will be, but a sequel would rock. Benicio Del Toro takes a great turn as the disturbed side-kick. I wonder if his character could even tell the difference between sobriety and being high. All of the cameos are a nice treat, especially the Flea one in the bathroom, " I s-p-i-l-l-e-d L-S-D o-n m-y s-h-i-r-t..." Tobey Maguire has a great scene as well, he actually looks quite believable as the sickly albino guy. I'd say it's nothing short of incredible.

We were smart enough to trust Terry Gilliam. About thirty minutes in, we had almost bailed. Was the whole movie going to be a drug odyssey, colorful but monotonous, like a kaleidoscope. Drugs. We get it. In fact, we got it ten minutes ago. It was technically impressive, but not engaging.

Then narration started, giving the movie purpose and depth: we hear Hunter S. Thompson's observations on American culture during the Vietnam war, and I'm prepared to call him the angry voice (as well as one of the great comic voices) of my generation.

Johnny Depp does a brinkmanship job as Thompson (called Raoul Duke), who took the counterculture as seriously as it could possibly be taken. Depp is convincing whether he's fearlessly altering his consciousness, or writing with heroic honesty, or stopping the molestation of a young girl (Christina Ricci), because his moral compass is true. Yes, he has criminal tendencies, but thievery and vandalism are his nonverbal weapons against capitalism, and only bottom lines get hurt.

As Dr. Gonzo, Benicio del Toro is a force of nature. My only regret is that he couldn't have been shown, as he should have been, stark naked during his hallucinatory episode in the bathtub, so we could freak out with him.

BTW, as for my review title: I'm not coming down from the druggy stuff. The really heady stuff is Thompson's sensibility as a writer-- it's ruthlessly brilliant, original, and biting, and that is what Gilliam is celebrating. I only wish Thompson, the self-described "self-stigmatized patriot," was here for POTUS 47.

Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is a psychedelic comedy, but also an astute piece of literature-cum-political science on a period in American history that was just really strange, thus reflected by its creator. It was the pioneer in 'Gonzo journalism' and sent Thompson's star even higher than it had with Hell's Angels. Although it's one of my personal favorite books, it could have been tricky to adapt it- Alex Cox tried and failed- but somehow Terry Gilliam digs into the Thompson psychology, dementia, and off-the-wall humor, while also putting his unmistakable mark on the material. Two sensibilities thus merge, alongside the tremendous performances (underrated, despite the praise from fans) from Depp and Del-Toro. It asks an essential question- how does society end up crossing paths with the outlaws? But there's more than that- much more in fact- but it takes more than one viewing. I remember writing the first time I saw it: "This film is so bizarre you might just want to put down the bong and get high from this movie (after all, the movie contains every single known drug known to man since 1544)."

Granted, it's immediate appeal is that of a midnight movie, the ultimate midnight movie, as a work where the visual style is cranked up to a queue that goes even further than past Gilliam ventures. Distorted, sometimes tilted, widescreen angles, very bright, strange colors via Nicola Pecorini, and a beating soundtrack loaded with everything from Jefferson Airplane to Tom Jones to Bob Dylan to Debbie Reynolds (what kind of rat bastard psychotic would put that on right now, at this moment)! And aside from Depp and Del-Toro, who immerse themselves to the hilt (Depp especially is in a form here comparable to his Pirates movies- you can't see anyone else play the character, and at the same time you almost can't recognize him, a credit to Depp's 'method' style), there's hilarious supporting work from Craig Bierko, Tobey Maguire, Gary Busey, Harry Dean Stanton (Castration!), and Christina Ricci, and even an extremely moving and dangerous scene with Ellen Barkin.

It's not an easy film, to be certain, and it will likely appeal to those who may think 'ah, drugs, I like drugs, must be my kind of movie'. But it's not that simple; it's actually fairly critical of drug use, in an overblown, Fellini-esquire satirical manner (eg Adrenochrome, which is a tiny landmark of gonzo film-making to complement the author), and there really is no point where Gilliam, Thompson or the characters say 'take drugs'. On the other hand, there is also a critical attitude, a refreshing and brilliant one, on authority, like at the DEA convention at the hotel- again, strange times in society. At the same time the film is superb as escapist fun, in the darkest and craziest ways that only a maverick like Gilliam and his people can pull off, it's also got some layers in the substance, of Duke and Gonzo almost as relics from a former era already in 1971. With consistently quotable dialog, excruciating moments of depravity, and some of the most outrageous production design in any film, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is an unlikely cult classic, and in its own delirious fashion a possible definitive work from the director alongside Brazil.

I watched this after "Naked Lunch". This one was also a very strange film. It is based on real events experienced under the influence of substances I do not even want to mention and then turned into a book. Hunter S. Thompson was a very unusual person. The film was a bit boring, but also entertaining at the same time. Seeing what they went through was funny but also disturbing. It feels like a dark comedy. The cast did a great job. Johnny Depp was really good and so was Benicio Del Toro. The director of the film is Terry Gilliam. I think the movie had the potential to be a better film, but the hallucinatory scenes were given too much focus. Toward the end I got sleepy and it felt like I was watching it under some kind of influence myself. But later when I was awake I watched the ending again. It is not a very good film and definitely not for everyone. It is average but interesting.

FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS

What they don't tell you when you when you front the counter to buy your tickets for this film is that the price includes a two hour hit of movie mescaline.

So you never did drugs in the 60s? The 70s? Not even the 80s? Worry not. Now in the 90s this movie is as good as, or better than, the real thing. And you won't get busted.

This however is not a film about drugs. It is a film about the excesses and freaks of society, with or without your head being blown away with substances. It does not glorify drugs - quite the opposite.

This is a time warp film, designed to light up the remaining brain cells of baby boomers with memories of all that social anarchy and chaos that characterised the late 60s and early 70s. Gen Xers seeing this movie however will probably continue to be quite mystified about what exactly the olden days were like.

This film is not a story. It is an experience. There is no plot. A few circumstances form a flimsy backbone for a few drug crazed days, mostly in Las Vegas. The film is utterly faithful to the book by Hunter S Thompson. Johnny Depp is utterly faithful to the spirit of the lead character, Raoul Duke. Benicio Del Toro taking the off lead as Duke's equally drug riddled attorney Dr Gonzo is also true to his part. Terry Gilliam as director brings in the best excesses from his days involved with the hallucinogenic Monthy Python team.

But this film is something more than a drug riddled orgy of carnage and destruction. It is also a pithy social documentary, focussed on the late 60s but equally relevant to the late 90s. It is a sick view of a sick society. In both a literal and metaphorical sense Fear and Loathing is an acid commentary on the worst excesses, not only of drug taking, but of social existence.

The two lead characters are quite obviously sick, depraved, drug crazed animals, by any reasonable construction. They are never seen in anything other than a totally wasted condition, and invariably behaving in the most outrageous anti-social manner imaginable. They have a briefcase loaded with every conceivable drug, all of which are swilled down with copious amounts of alcohol. The entire film is shot through their eyes and hallucinations abound as the special Fx team morphs the carnage that is their external reality into the bizarre visions that reflect their drug induced internal reality.

However – and here is where this film is so really outstanding – every other character, every other scene, every other circumstance in the movie is also a circus side-show or a freak attraction. The essential difference is that all these other bizarre cameos all reflect an ordinary reality, uncoloured by the Hunter S Thompson orgy of drugs. As such they are, by and large, taken as unremarkable. It is only when this other kaleidoscope of human freaks and weird events is juxtaposed against the lush technicolour hallucinations of the two lead characters that the blurring between drug induced fantasy and everyday reality becomes so obvious. The distinction becomes impossible to detect.

Without exception every secondary character in this movie is a freak of one kind or another. They are social misfits, they are physically abnormal, they are distorted personalities or, as in the case of the DA Convention Against Hard Drugs where every participant is seen with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth, they are living contradictions of any notion of sense and normality. Even Hunter S Thompson plays a cameo role – fortunately for cult followers as yet another social freak masquerading as Mr Ordinary.

The setting for most of the movie is Las Vegas – a classic freak show environment of its own. Utterly segregated by both physical location and its inherent raison d'etre from any ordinary reality, this isolated city in the desert offers the perfect surreal platform from where the two lead characters can wreak most of their own hallucinogenic carnage.

This movie is rich in many ways. It is rich in its filming and its execution. It is rich in its pace and – short of walking out - the viewer has no option but to go along for his own two hours of drug induced madness. It is rich in characterisation and totally over the top. It is rich in special Fx and it is rich in its ironic view of straight society. It is as enthusiastically politically incorrect as one would expect from all of its other excesses.

As every bit as much as this is a film of its time, Fear And Loathing is also a film of this time. Little has changed about the freak show that constitutes much of the fringes of our society, and which we somehow have come to accept quite uncritically. It is only when the acerbic lens of this movie is trained upon the absurdities and paradoxes with which we all more or less peacefully co-exist that we realise how fine the line between madness and sanity really is. Importantly, as well, how impossible it is to actually know where that line is drawn. Not to mention on what side of it we each stand.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas was not a particularly well-done movie. Johnny Depp saved it, but every other actor was not up-to-par. Terry Gilliam is a great director, but his flair for excess eventually swamped what might have been a very tight, very funny movie. On the other hand, there are only about five movies which I vividly remember, and this is one of them. It's (dare I say this?) like Kung Pow - Enter the Fist. While you're watching it, you're giggling, and thinking, "what the hell." Five days later, you start laughing hysterically ("REMEMBER THE BATS?!" "OH YEAH! HA HA HA!!!") (trust me). I hate trying to rank movies like this. "It's a seven, but wait a week and it'll be a nine!"

This is the worst film I have ever watched in my entire life. There was absolutely no point to any of the storyline, none of the characters were worth following (infact they were more annoying than anything else). I couldn't even say what genre the film fell under after watching it, was it supposed to be funny? I'm unsure. This is my first film review on IMDB, I just had to do it in the hope that it prevents anyone from watching this film again. I feel that it's my calling in life to save someone the precious time it would take them to watch it. So if you're reading this review and it prevents you from watching this film, you're welcome and you owe me a beer.