IMDb रेटिंग
5.7/10
68 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA thriller about the contemporary art scene of Los Angeles, where big money artists and mega-collectors pay a high price when art collides with commerce.A thriller about the contemporary art scene of Los Angeles, where big money artists and mega-collectors pay a high price when art collides with commerce.A thriller about the contemporary art scene of Los Angeles, where big money artists and mega-collectors pay a high price when art collides with commerce.
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 3 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
The styling of this film is interesting, offering a perspective on the shallow but at the same time ruthless and cut throat world of high end art. This is blended with what could be described as a horror morality tale, where greed is repaid with bloody interest.
Regrettably, this film is ultimately a buzz kill. Its story feels incomplete, like a half finished work of art. You can see the sketched outline of what its trying to achieve but its never completes the picture.
This is most notable in the story which seems to me at least to be truncated. Perhaps, the original idea would have taken too long? Its a shame the extra time was not taken, as this actually did look like it was going somewhere intriguing. As a result characters inexplicably go from one state of mind and action to another, without any real segue.
The result is a film I 'sort of" liked but at the same time felt dissatisfied with. It has its clever moments but another twenty or so minutes I feel would have made all the difference. 5/10 from me.
Regrettably, this film is ultimately a buzz kill. Its story feels incomplete, like a half finished work of art. You can see the sketched outline of what its trying to achieve but its never completes the picture.
This is most notable in the story which seems to me at least to be truncated. Perhaps, the original idea would have taken too long? Its a shame the extra time was not taken, as this actually did look like it was going somewhere intriguing. As a result characters inexplicably go from one state of mind and action to another, without any real segue.
The result is a film I 'sort of" liked but at the same time felt dissatisfied with. It has its clever moments but another twenty or so minutes I feel would have made all the difference. 5/10 from me.
I'm all for weird and obscure films. David Lynch has put together some epically strange films and television seasons, so a horror/thriller based around an art heist? Sure, why not. The result? A visually fascinating, sometimes horrifically obscure (especially if viewing at night) but ultimately a hollow narrative that thinks it is much better and more clever than it actually is. I won't pretend I'm smart enough to say the movie is really some sort of metaphor or satire, but I do typically know when a movie is well put together. Velvet Buzzsaw is certainly not one of those.
5.0/10
5.0/10
The idea in the film is fantastic but didn't seem to dive deep enough into the story and lacks impact. With most of the characters being pretenious, I was overwhelmed with the use of metaphores and foreshadowing, it became expected throughout the film but doesn't hold enough significance. An origin film on Dease would seem more interesting to me after watching this film.
It's a bit ironic, this film that wants to explore the vapid shallowness of the fine art world in a stylish horror movie setting... ends up inviting the very same criticisms that the finely dressed tastemakers in the film fling about.
Ok. Buzzwords aside. I did enjoy this film more than I disliked it. But in all earnestnest, it was by a hair. Knowing this came from the same guy who made the excellent psochological thriller Nightcrawler. This is like asketchbook of ideas for a giallo-inspired slasher. Each individually awesome. But there's no real throughline to keep us going. People pop up until they die gruesome deaths. It feels kind of slapped together haphazardly.
I expected more from Gilroy
Ok. Buzzwords aside. I did enjoy this film more than I disliked it. But in all earnestnest, it was by a hair. Knowing this came from the same guy who made the excellent psochological thriller Nightcrawler. This is like asketchbook of ideas for a giallo-inspired slasher. Each individually awesome. But there's no real throughline to keep us going. People pop up until they die gruesome deaths. It feels kind of slapped together haphazardly.
I expected more from Gilroy
Dan Gilroys newest picture, and most importantly second collaboration with the fantastic Jake Gyllenhaal, "Velvet Buzzsaw" is every much as unsatisfying and confused as it appears to be shiny and unique.
The satirical pieces, which take extremely long to set up, never work with the upcoming horror events - and the scenes of terror never seem to fully work under the context of the satirical bits. We're left with a movie that pretends to be clever, intellectual and satirical on art, but displays nothing but a lack of every aspect mentioned above. There are quite some parallels between this and Inarritus "Birdman" (2014), in which the movie is neither convincing nor impressing to justify the flashy and dazzling tone and sense of narrative. It misses substance, thought and precision to back up its ambition.
For the most part though, Gyllenhaal is great, as one would easily expect. And I can not fully degrade the supporting cast who don't seem to be doing anything terribly wrong. It's just as if all the characters have no real purpose besides their bizarre looks and the way they speak. No character has a serious arc, which is sad in this type of movie where it could have easily be portrayed throughout a leitmotif and theme of art. Everything just flows and flows into nearly two hours of badly paced dialogue, horror scenes and stylish art.
I must admit that some of the paintings and visual art looked really nice. The cinematography, and the editing (which was also done by director Gilroy) is not bad too. There is actually one shot that I remembered liking quite a bit. We are thrown into a family watching TV, until the camera moves top to reveal they are actually mannequins in a studio. The problem ultimately is that it's half style, no substance. The style does not tell its own story, neither do the characters. The plot is never explained and essentially only exists by coincidence and chance. "Velvet Buzzsaw" never feels forced, because it simply hasn't got any constitution for the premise. That's in a certain way even worse than feeling forced.
Netflix hit out another pretentious, unconvincing, flashy and "empty" movie, whose only saving graces are Jake Gyllenhaal and the editing.
4/10
The satirical pieces, which take extremely long to set up, never work with the upcoming horror events - and the scenes of terror never seem to fully work under the context of the satirical bits. We're left with a movie that pretends to be clever, intellectual and satirical on art, but displays nothing but a lack of every aspect mentioned above. There are quite some parallels between this and Inarritus "Birdman" (2014), in which the movie is neither convincing nor impressing to justify the flashy and dazzling tone and sense of narrative. It misses substance, thought and precision to back up its ambition.
For the most part though, Gyllenhaal is great, as one would easily expect. And I can not fully degrade the supporting cast who don't seem to be doing anything terribly wrong. It's just as if all the characters have no real purpose besides their bizarre looks and the way they speak. No character has a serious arc, which is sad in this type of movie where it could have easily be portrayed throughout a leitmotif and theme of art. Everything just flows and flows into nearly two hours of badly paced dialogue, horror scenes and stylish art.
I must admit that some of the paintings and visual art looked really nice. The cinematography, and the editing (which was also done by director Gilroy) is not bad too. There is actually one shot that I remembered liking quite a bit. We are thrown into a family watching TV, until the camera moves top to reveal they are actually mannequins in a studio. The problem ultimately is that it's half style, no substance. The style does not tell its own story, neither do the characters. The plot is never explained and essentially only exists by coincidence and chance. "Velvet Buzzsaw" never feels forced, because it simply hasn't got any constitution for the premise. That's in a certain way even worse than feeling forced.
Netflix hit out another pretentious, unconvincing, flashy and "empty" movie, whose only saving graces are Jake Gyllenhaal and the editing.
4/10
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाLoosely resembles the life of Henry Darger, who too was a recluse that created a prodigious volume of artistic work which was celebrated posthumously, and who also spent some time in an asylum. Darger is largely known as an outsider artist, much as Dease is in the film.
- गूफ़When Morf just finishes hearing voices in the soundproof room the other gallery director informs him that the sound wasn't working, that it's not voices but whale sounds from 20,000 feet under the sea. The deepest known whale dive is less than half that depth.
- भाव
Morf Vandewalt: Critique is so limiting and emotionally draining.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटDuring the first part of the credits, Piers is creating art in the sand.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in FoundFlix: Velvet Buzzshaw (2019) Ending Explained (2019)
- साउंडट्रैकFloating Ships
Written by Marc Mifune and Alexandra Stewart
Performed by Les Gordon feat. Aces
Courtesy of Sony Music Entertainment France SAS
By arrangement with Sony Music Entertainment
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Velvet Buzzsaw?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 53 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें