Guy

i just saw Guy on Sundance and I was completely flatten by it. That someone can make a movie of such impact with just one camera is amazing. Guy also succeeds because Vincent D'Onofrio puts out one Awesome performance as the subject of Hope Davis's camera. I cannot recall any actor putting it all out there like he does in this film. He gets striped of any artifact. You know you are not watching a real person, yet it is really fascinating to watch him, because as the camera follows you know that the ante is going to be raised with each passing hour. The movie is quite visionary in what was yet to come (reality TV). But this is more than that, Guy explores the subject of voyeurism from a complete different angle because this is not just an image of a person, you get the full character with all his pathos, and it pulls you right in as you start analyzing the need to be watched and the value of being watched. The movie is very clever in the interaction between the subject and the film maker. You really want to know more of the woman behind the camera, she speaks very few words and yet the few she says are very revealing. The urgency of certain statements reveals that this is not just a camera rolling, but that the cameraman is fulfilling some deep needs within her. This is not a movie for everyone, it will also get very polarizing opinions, you either love it by its rawness and its power to engage you and suck you into it, or you will find it as boring as following a pedestrian, but if your taste is a bit out of the ordinary watch it.

The movie "Guy", from 1996, came to Mexico on September, 1998, probably because The Truman Show is about to be released here, and they are related in a certain way.

The only valuable thing on this movie is the acting of Vincent D'Onofrio, who is excellent playing Guy. The story is plain and boring.

Others here have commented enough on the plot, so rather than be repetitious I will focus on some of the themes. I was fortunate enough to catch 'Guy' the other night on the Sundance Channel. Having been inundated with commentary on reality television for some many years, I was not expecting to glean any new insights into the medium from this film. Much to my surprise and pleasure it seemed to really have something to say about the concept of "the gaze."

It is interesting to examine the film through the psychological lens of Lacan and also consider the gendered "politics of looking" so often spoken of in feminist theory. These concepts, I believe, are heavily present in the film. The reverse of the power dynamic alone (the female subject and the male object) in is truly fascinating and definitely makes it worth a viewing for those of you versed in feminist theory. It makes me wish I was still in college, so I could write a paper about it.

A fantastic comment on voyeurism and the media in modern times. A pioneer to the truman show this film echo's society's vicarious nature exemplified through the real life TV shows such as 'The real world' and big brother, but hints at the dangers of our own obsessions with others lives.

Vincent D'Onfrio is amazing as Guy, an initally reluctant victim of a female filmaker's camera who begins to enjoy her attention.....which provokes consequences on his own sanity.

A brilliant film.

Experimental films are praiseworthy for being just that. In the present instance, however, there is little else to recommend this one.

Since most films are by nature dramatic, going beyond the commonplace by way of revealing truths requiring vivid action or language, one important measure to be kept in mind is that they are also selective of this or that bit of new or unique presentation allowing us to appreciate the art of the author, the director, or the actors themselves. Just aiming the camera and saying "action" and then allowing the thing to develop sans editing defeats any purpose intended.

Guy is an example of home video run amok. Moreover it denigrates women in general by featuring a main character whose sole reason for existing seems to be draping his doughy body over every female in sight before vanishing into the mist. It just begs the question to try to justify this cinematic gambit by claiming how "true to life" or deeply introspective it might, as if by accident, be. Second-guessing the experiment, however novel it may at first seem, is not my idea of fun at the movies.