Gefährliche Begierde

I have to admit, that the original title is better than the German translation (which I translated back to English). We get a German actor here who is quite convincing in being ... well quite hard to decipher. Then again, we also have a story of others trying to deceive - but to what end and with what purpose? If there is one ... and who can we trust? Things that get layed out here.

And then we have the movie within a movie - which adds another layer to it. Which you'll either appreciate or not while watching this. Just do not expect this to be an erotic highlight or whatever you may read into this ... it is sizzling at times, but it is more teasing than actually pleasing ... that rhymes sort of! Nice. So you got the information, now you can decide if this is for you or not.

I liked it pretty well.

You have to put yourself in mind that what you are watching is a sort of film noir, with a beat score ... jazz from the 50's. In this movie, director Figgis may be working out some of the themes he runs into in his everyday cinematic life. But what seems most to be going on is an exploration of the possibilities in each of us. The movie is rather existential, which perhaps fits with the beat mantra, the era from which, born in 1948, the director himself sprang.

Realize that you are watching an art film, but one that makes a little more sense than David Lynch's Mulholland Drive or some of Terence Malick's self-conscious work. I found the ending a bit silly, and I began to expect a different denouement, one that would have been darker, perhaps with a twist. But the movie doesn't really leave you hanging to work out your own ending quite as much as so many modern movies do, and which the main character, a screenwriter and part-time screen writing teacher, says is okay because "life doesn't have a pat ending," to paraphrase. The ending even had a little of the Casablanca about it ... boy, I'm really mixing homages here. This movie probably won't go down in the pantheon of greats like Casablanca, but it was a nice effort; sort of an indulgent one, as the attitude the screenwriter takes toward the up-and-coming generation seems to be. But the screenwriter hasn't lost his touch, may even be more attuned than those coming up behind. Plus, Sebastian Koch is pretty nice to look at.

It's just totally unbelievable that Mike Figgis, an Oscar nominated and celebrated director made this movie. Everything is wrong. The acting is on an amateur level, the cinematography likewise. A lot of stupid ideas, all done in a most hopeless manner. The music used is of the lowest quality, and never used in a good way. The story is almost non- existent and the characters are shallow and absolutely not believable at all.

It looks like some sort of rejected film school project. An absolute snoozefest, and one of, if not THE worst movie I've ever seen. Shame on the people behind this.

I saw this during a screening in Prince Charles Cinema in Leicester Square. I will confess that I don't normally watch independent movies and have no idea about the director's previous work. I wasn't expecting much. The shots, lighting and environment were pretty good, the editing was good too. Considering the limited budget and that they made this movie in 22 days I think the movie is pretty good. But having said that if I judge this movie neutrally I would say it's an average plus. The plot resolves around a death of a pretty (and lost?) girl. The whole plot resolves around this and sometimes becomes too boring and lagging. The director has tried hard to make this like an art movie but sometimes the artistic expressions don't make any sense. There is some nudity and sex in the movie but they are neither erotic, not do their presence contribute to the movie in any way so I don't see the point of having those. It feels like they just wanted some skin in the movie. Still the movie is enjoyable. The major complain I have about this movie is that it does not give you a satisfactory ending or a proper ending with answers. I really dislike open ended movies that leave the conclusion to the viewers and if you are like me you will not like the ending too.

I will normally sit and watch a picture that may have a director attempting a novel treatment. I can usually interpret what is going on - I do watch silent pictures.

In this picture I vainly tried to work out what was going on, who was what and where was whom. All to no avail.

In the end I gave up after about half an hour - I was becoming bored and restless.

I do wish that some people making pictures would realise that their audiences go to pictures to be entertained and pay good money for this.

After watching this load of cods-wallop, my first thought was to send an invoice to the director to compensate me for my time in having to sit through it.