Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA psychological thriller based on the concept of anamorphosis, a painting technique that manipulates the laws of perspective to create two competing images on a single canvas.A psychological thriller based on the concept of anamorphosis, a painting technique that manipulates the laws of perspective to create two competing images on a single canvas.A psychological thriller based on the concept of anamorphosis, a painting technique that manipulates the laws of perspective to create two competing images on a single canvas.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire au total
- Teenage Checkout Girl
- (as Desiree F. Casado)
Avis à la une
There are too many co-incidences which spoil the mystery. The story is certainly dragged at places. And at places it makes you sleepy. The music is nothing great. Willen Dafoe tries his best to impress. So I think it is not the one to watch in a theater but its a good watch at home. Nothing Brainy about it. It won't keep you guessing.
What this genre needs is I think: 1) a psychological thread; a detective with psych issues, love, faith e.g. and these issues tend towards some sort of solution or elaboration 2) an intellectual thread; a complex, mind-stimulating, yet not too far- fetching murder case. 3) good realization; atmosphere that presents us the above two as (at least spiritually) real.
This film accomplishes these tasks: 1) An obsessive+compulsive detective with affection problems, buried past etc. And there is "character development", I like the atypical disintegrating end which is barely relieved by the end title music. 2)An artist-killer is not a never-heard-of idea, but anamorphosis is good idea. I liked the way the murder cases interconnect. I liked the way this all leads to the past. I liked, that some characters say 'forget about the past' some say 'go back! its the same'. 3)atmosphere is good, music good, murder scenes especially good.
Why did I gave it a 6? It is not original. Especially as for atmosphere creating, directing and filming. It is absolutely filled with clichés. There are original things are the character of the detective and the final...but maybe thats all... I still would say it is worth watching it, but it is just an other serial killer movie.
The end is a terrible let down for an otherwise superb production. Its like they ran out of ideas and money at the same time. Or maybe there is a producer to blame.
I would definitely recommend watching this movie even with the poor ending. I was reminded several times of the movie S7ven. Willem Dafoe's character is extremely meticulous as was Morgan Freedman's character. Other common elements: Both movies have young detectives partnering with soon to retire detectives. Both movies have a seemingly omnipotent serial killer always three steps ahead of the detectives, baiting them along and watching from the background. Both movies rely upon arcane literature and art to understand the villain's human "paintings."
I could continue to list common elements in both movies however I don't want to give anyone the impression that this is a knock-off of S7ven--its not. Rather its like reading a detective story written by the same author with different characters. If you liked S7ven I think you will like this movie. Just don't expect any great surprises.
The biggest difference between S7ven and this film is the ending. S7ven had an incredible, mind-boggling ending while Ananmorph ended like a candle blown out leaving the viewer in the dark and unsatisfied.
Anamorph had some real potential, considering how seriously the director and actors approached it, but there were just too many problems. For one, it was mind-numbingly boring. By the end of the movie, I was nearly asleep. Watching this movie before you go to bed is definitely not recommended. The pacing is just way too slow. If you watch it, watch it while you're wide awake and alert.
Second, there are just way too many unanswered questions that were constantly nagging me. Why is the serial killer called "Uncle Eddie"? It's such an idiosyncratic name that it begs explanation. None is forthcoming. Why was that woman giving a blood transfusion? What was the nature of her relationship with the detective? After every scene, I was left with more and more unanswered questions, which the director seemed to think were too inconsequential to answer. I beg to differ.
Third, and this sort of ties in with the second point, things were constantly thrown into the movie because they seemed artistic, interesting, or enigmatic. While Anamorph has an explicitly stated premise ("truth is dependent on one's POV"), much of the movie seems like shallow, pretentious nonsense, instead of supporting the premise. I'm beginning to think that the killer is named "Uncle Eddie" simply because it's enigmatic and mysterious. That's a terrible reason.
It's always possible that much of the movie simply went over my head (I was half asleep while watching it), but I think it's more likely that this is just a mediocre movie. I think that the director shows promise, and I'd be interested in seeing his later films, but this one just didn't grab me. It's too slow, boring, and pretentious. Normally, I criticize directors for being too overt and not subtle enough, but this movie is so subtle that nothing ever happens and nothing is ever explained! Obviously, we need a bit of balance.
Now, there are new serial killings that are similar, yet different. The artsy posing is there, but is much more gruesome and elaborate, involving Renaissance techniques such as camera obscura and anamorphosis. Many in the police and press are calling these new killings "copycats." Stan isn't so sure.
While watching the plot develop, one inevitably makes comparisons with the Hannibal Lecter movies. While this film aspires to that level, it falls short, mainly because although the basic premise is not without interest, the writing fails to deliver on the promise. Stan's character is unfortunately made a lone wolf, with minimal dialog and interaction with other characters, even keeping his partner in the dark. Willem Dafoe, he of the high forehead, hollow cheeks, and strong chin, does a great job with what he's given, but can't quite carry this film on his own. The supporting cast was, somewhat understandably, very uninterested in their roles, with the exception of Peter Stormare as the character of the low-level art dealer. Finally, the lighting effects of the flashback scenes and final scene can only be described as bizarre, and not in a good way.
The writers made the mistake of trying to make up for the film's deficiencies by upping the gore scale, and in doing so, probably cut the film's box-office receipts considerably. Parents: the film's R rating is *very* well-deserved. Even adults should ask themselves if they're strong of stomach before going to see this movie.
In conclusion, I would recommend this film only if you're a big fan of Willem Dafoe and/or this genre.
Le saviez-vous
- GaffesWhen Stan meets his former partner, he rolls down the window of his car on the passenger's's side. During this scene the height of he window is changes in every shot.
- Citations
Stan: [lecturing to class] Don't be seduced. Avoid psychological speculation related to the killer's intent. We may never know why he did what he did. He may never know. Treat the boundaries of the crime scene like a frame, and limit your analysis to what is presented within it. Sit with it, don't rush things, and above all, in your initial encounter with the crime scene, trust your own eye. Remember, all you really have is what the killer left behind - his work, his aesthetic, if you will.
Meilleurs choix
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Anamorf
- Lieux de tournage
- 81 Hudson Street, Ville de New York, New York, États-Unis(Puffy's Tavern bar scenes with Peter Stromare)
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 6 950 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 3 120 $US
- 20 avr. 2008
- Montant brut mondial
- 674 839 $US
- Durée
- 1h 43min(103 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1