Enter the Void

Gaspar Noé's big beast of a Cannes entrant showed for the first time in the UK this week in October. Gaspar Noé was there to introduce the film, which was a great kick for me, even though he didn't do a Q&A. His intro was quite funny, because he's not a grand intellectual, he's more of a sensualist. It's clear that he had a pretty dissipated youth and he talked about his experimentation with hallucinogenics and he always wondered as a kid why nobody was making movies with the images like he was seeing whilst high in them. So this is a movie I think he's wanted to make for a very long time, perhaps a couple of decades, but only now has he been able to get the freedom and funding to do it.

He said he had seen the film Lady in the Lake after taking a magic mushroom; this is a 1947 Raymond Chandler adaptation which is shot in POV (that is, the camera is like the eyes of the lead). Gaspar had also been reading about life after death experiences, or near death experiences. So he wanted to combine the hallucinations, POV shooting, and out-of-body experience material. The result is 2 hour and 43 minutes of masterpiece. It will leave the ciné-gourmand gorged and bewildered. For me it's a clear step-up, even an evolution, from his last feature film in 2002, Irréversible. The idea of having out-of-body experiences really frees up the concept of POV, Noé's not limited by the body (which can't just glide forty feet into the air, or halfway across the city). He's really freed up to shoot the fluorescent sexual labyrinth of Tokyo, which is shot only at night-time and in POV.

The story in the movie concerns a brother and sister (Oscar and Linda) who have a childhood trauma and end up moving to Tokyo in their late teens where they become involved in a heaving underworld. I think though that Tokyo is more of a metaphor in this film, I don't think he's trying to tell you anything about Tokyo the city per se, I think it's just the perfect pre-fabricated set for Noé. In the film it's a nerve centre, it's that place in life where we meet lovers, copulate, produce new life, and die. It's the mayfly (order Ephemeroptera, from the Greek for short-lived) part of the human lifecycle, which we experience in a heightened fashion through the eyes of Oscar.

There's a lot of stuff in here for you to take offence to if you want, If you have ever taken offence to a film on content grounds as opposed to intellectual grounds, you're likely to take offence here. Pornographic linkages between adult sexuality and the Oedipus complex, for me are brilliant, but will upset many filmgoers.

Those people who have decided that Noé is homophobic or misogynistic after seeing Irréversible are not going to have their minds changed by this movie at all. There seems to be a very strong link in his mind between sex and procreation. You don't have to consume the movie in a homophobic way in my opinion, but there may be a lot of upset gays after seeing this movie. Particularly as the gay character in this movie is portrayed as being on the same level as the rapist in Irréversible. There's no direct comment, but if you read between the lines, you may not like what you read.

I think the androphiles are going to love Nathaniel Brown who plays the lead teen, Oscar, in this movie, which is his first credited role on IMDb, straight as I am, even I can tell he's a heartthrob. Paz de la Huerta as Linda, his sister, is very eye candyish too. If you like to see beautiful things writhing (we're talking eye popping next level FX hallucinations here, as well as copious sex), then this is the movie for you.

I walked out of the cinema still tripping, the POV is so spectacularly well delivered that you feel almost like you're still in the movie when you come out, because the mode of perception hasn't changed.

The lasting images I am left with are from the Love hotel, a very strange pastel and fluorescent building that has holo-reflectors design on the outside and which Noé dedicates a lot of the later part of the movie to, the FX emanations are spectacular.

One thing's for sure, you won't leave Gaspar Noé's "Enter the Void" with comparisons ready. More than likely, you won't want to think about it at all. Over two and a quarter hours, the film hijacks your consciousness like a potent hallucinogen, and leaves you feeling burnt out and brain-fried on the other end.

Is it worth the trip? Yes, with an asterisk. After all, the opportunity to see something this flagrantly original comes but once in a blue moon, yet it isn't the sort of experience many will enjoy having. "Enter the Void" begins with a strobing title sequence that explodes into a first person account of drugs and death in Tokyo; it ought to come with a seizure warning. Compounding matters, almost every scene is designed to look like one continuous shot, with the camera being placed either behind our protagonist Oscar's head, or behind his eyelids. As if the pulsating neon lights weren't enough, we're also subjected to the split-second blackouts of Oscar blinking.

Visually, "Enter the Void" is unlike anything I've ever seen, but it sure ain't perfect. The problem, bluntly, is its amorphous, front-heavy structure. The first half plays out conventionally enough, beginning with what we assume is the end, and playing flashback catch up to contextualize the subsequent events. We arrive back in the present to neatly tie the knot, only to discover that Noé isn't remotely close to finished telling his story.

Where he takes "Enter the Void" in its ethereal second half is actually pretty fascinating, conceptually. However, it feels like an entirely different film. Noé floats aimlessly back and forth across Neo-Tokyo (to support the 'one shot' aesthetic, he rarely cuts directly from one location to another, often necessitating that the camera move through walls and entire buildings). The film really wears its premise thin during this overlong stint, though the last twenty minutes mostly redeem it.

The conclusion is a little predictable given that the characters seem to be arbitrarily engrossed by the Tibetan Book of the Dead, but it works because it boils "Enter the Void" down to its visual core. Somewhere along the way, the lines of the narrative are obliterated and Noé takes a hypnotically beautiful and bizarre psychosexual detour that bridges the gap to his ending nicely.

In retrospect, it's easy to remember the curious power of its final moments and marginalize the boredom that divides it from the first, much stronger hour. The film would almost certainly benefit from a second viewing, but I'm still not entirely sure that I would ever grant it one. I seriously question how Noé and his editor could stand to watch and assemble this film all day every day, because even their 137-minute finished product is a workout for the eyes. God help us if it were released in 3D.

But for better or worse, eyestrain is part of the experience, and "Enter the Void" is more an incomparable experience than a great film. It's a shame that the vast majority of its potential audience will never even have the opportunity to see it projected, as I can only imagine home video will diminish its psychedelic impact.

The best recommendation I can make is that if, like me, you go out of your way to see distinctly different films, you'll get your money's worth with "Enter the Void." Objectively, it's hard to deny the incredible creative scope and visual audacity on display, but it's also hard not to wish the whole thing were just a wee bit more succinct.

It ain't perfect, but "Enter the Void" is original, and there's no undervaluing that. Hell, I'll try anything once.

So what could I add to what has been stated in the other reviews? Yes, 'Enter the Void' is definitely a trippy mindbuster, and as such anyone who requires story or frames to enjoy a film should give it a miss. Yes, the visuals are eye-popping and the ubiquitous stroboscope effects may cause severe nausea - I watched it on BR and couldn't help but thinking what an advantage home entertainment can be over cinema exposure. This is a film which may be best enjoyed alone, somewhat stoned or drunk, and very late at night. And the pause button is definitely a life-saver.

I can sympathize with those who felt tormented by the epic runtime and disparity between the first and second half of the film: the former is sort of a 'last film' of the protagonist Victor retelling his life, and therefore makes sense plot-wise, the latter is a meandering flow representing his attachment to his sister. It is a bit unfair to discard the film for this reason, though, because the dialogue between Victor and his best friend Alex in the beginning hints at what the nature and culmination of this attachment will be. The interspersed aerial shots of an increasingly CG-rendered Tokyo may actually put this transition into question - this could all very well be part of Victor's 'death trip'.

What I really liked about 'Enter the Void' is the setting, for I have lived in Tokyo myself for three years. The area where the story takes place (judging from where the CG puts the Tokyo Tower) should be Roppongi, which is an expat and night club haven; while the CG makes the place appear a bit gaudy, it is indeed populated by a disproportionate number of drop-outs and sleazy bees, and I've always wondered why there's no film about Roppongi yet - contemporary Tokyo is mostly condensed to the Yakuza backdrop of Kabukichô or the juvenile epicenter of Shibuya. So on that note, I appreciate a film about the expat world, as weird and dysfunctional as it may be.

'Enter the Void' pushes the gates of what film can visually do visually wide open, and therefore shouldn't be dismissed by any cinephile. But your viewing conditions will be crucial to whether you will love this film or hate it.

Gaspar Noe gets a free pass from film festival directors and apparently (judging from the IMDb sample reaction) ignorant film fans with his intentionally provocative works. I've seen this dreck before.

With ENTER THE VOID we have a typical case of a film (or video)-maker infatuated with some technique and then running it into the ground. The floating "omniscient" camera p-o-v is unleashed early in the film after the first-person hand-held camera gimmick wears thin, and the viewer must suffer through it for over two hours, when Noe is not cribbing from "the ultimate trip", Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for his tedious light shows.

As a film buff old enough to have sat through 2001 several times in all its Cinerama glory, I can vouch for its trippy theatrical impact back in 1968; current fans do not have this opportunity so we don't have a fair appreciation of this masterpiece based on mere video screenings. Even given this advantage, Noe conjures here an ordinary rendering of the "cult of ugliness", making each shot pastel-pretty but with determined ugly = beautiful inversions. I would prefer an Abel Ferrara visit to the drug-infested gutter with his intrinsically gritty approach to Noe's SFX hokum any day of the week.

The bland anti-hero Nathaniel Brown was poorly cast, a dull presence in those few shots when we actually see him, and his sidekick Cyril Roy is embarrassingly there just to deliver exposition. Even in the most rudimentary, improvised XXX porn, I can't recall having the film's premise "explained" to me the way Roy lays out in detail the reincarnation theme from the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and then, sure enough Brown goes through the out-of-body post-death claptrap as described. Paz de la Huerta is the recent indie flavor of the month girl (see: Jarmusch), but her lack of acting ability is evident, especially in her freakout scene here. In castng this eye candy role, anybody (read: any body) will do.

For porno content, Noe delivers considerable footage, none of which has the impact of real porn. Especially when compared to the work of Phil Prince, Joe Davian and other New York City pornographers of the '70s and early '80s, when s&m/b&d dominated (pun intended) porn features for a while, all fully documented on DVD reissues. Glamorizing then debunking the ecstasies/perils of the druggie life style is such an old hat concept in filmmaking that I'm surprised anyone gave Noe any credit for this rehash.

Parting shot: the infamous "penis entering vagina" shot in ENTER THE VOID is a corny ripoff of pornographer Luca Damiano, who has used this effect in numerous '90s porn videos, any one of which is more entertaining than VOID. Check out his EROTIC ADVENTURES OF RED RIDING HOOD for a prime example.

Saw this at the Melbourne International Film Festival. Whilst I didn't enjoy Noe's first film I Stand Alone, I loved Irreversible.

There is lots to like about ETV and much to dislike as well. An hour into the film and I would have given it perhaps an eight or nine but by the end of the film I was frustrated. Why? Noe just can't help himself and you get the feeling he either didn't know how to end the film or simply just wanted to be shocking for the sake of it.

Visually, I couldn't help but be impressed. Some amazing shots, lighting (strobe) and editing techniques. Noe also mixes up the story well as he did in Irreversible. You are not spoon fed the story and I love the way he told the back story of the two leads.

Plenty of people walked out at the screening after the hour and forty minute mark and I couldn't blame them. Probably not because they were shocked but just bored and frustrated. Noe pads this out and it is such a shame as overall it ruined the film as a whole.

The acting is quite wooden and doesn't ring true but that is only a minor quibble when compared to the film's bloated running time.

Hard to fault Noe for his creativity, energy and style and refusal to follow norms in terms of narrative structure etc. Still, I wish a friend or colleague had tapped him on the shoulder or given him some constructive criticism about the last half of the film.

I can only imagine how much footage Noe might add into a Directors Cut - Lord help us. Perhaps he could learn some lessons from this and streamline his storytelling and not feel the need to bludgeon the audience just for the sake of it.