Blur

We know its low budget. We know it was all filmed on one location. But that's what made me wonder about something. With all the money saved on the filming costs, couldn't somebody have kicked in a little for some acting lessons? This was so hard for me to watch ... actually, I turned it off at the 60 minute mark. I challenge you to make it further. What does it say if you make it further? Either you are really bored. Or, you were able to laugh at it. Sadly, I was neither bored enough to watch it nor was I able to laugh at its stupidity. I will say the paintings weren't bad. Especially the one from the film's poster. Sadly that was the best part of the film. Remember, this was me going to watch a movie, not a guy going to an art show.

"We need to get rid of the body!" It is at this exact point in the movie, right after that line is said, that everyone who was watching burst out laughing. It doesn't make any sense. I'll call that the breaking point. I can break this movie down into three parts. What happens before the breaking point, after the breaking point and then the ending. The first part of the movie basically consisted of a bunch of nothing happening. An hour of a guy who supposedly has " a thousand things to do" but really doesn't do much of anything. You meet his neighbor who is somewhat humorous and the only reason I didn't fall asleep. Also some nudity for no apparent reason except to keep the men watching awake. It really seems like you are watching what happens in between the "action". I also need to mention that whoever did the soundtrack to this movie must have been like 12 years old. Very odd music. somewhat porno sounding. and it is Always playing!

After the breaking point, it turned into a bunch of bad movie clichés. They do and say stuff so ridiculous that you just have to laugh!

The third part is the ending which tries to save the movie. The ending is actually good enough for me not to rate this a 1. But besides The Sixth Sense, I'm not a fan of M. Night Shyamalan type movies. (Bore you to tears for over an hour and a half and then try a surprise to save the movie.) But it did explain some things and the very last scenes cleared up some confusion.

I wouldn't recommend this. Completely boring!

I thought that the hideous red face on the main character's canvas looked familiar so I looked it up and, yes, it's almost line for line the famous sketch "Head studies" by Leonardo da Vinci at the Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest. Of course, it could be just a coincidence, but I think it's a subliminal message, something like, "Go to the museum, go to the museum, don't waste your money, don't waste your money..." Anyway, it starts out interesting, with good acting on the part of a group of interesting practically unknowns. Then it ever so slowly gets spookier and cornier in a grossly subtle and confusing fashion. They use lots of contrived false leads to nowhere in particular until the end, when it slaps you in the face and blatantly says to you, "You should have gone to the museum, you wasted your money..." I just wish I could spoil the ending for you, but for the most part, it was so boring that it's a blur.

After reading some of the comments given here I am beginning to think that I have seen another movie. I understand that this is a independent low budget movie. So what. Only for this fact people are praising this movie. At least that is the impression I am getting. A higher budget for this movie wouldn't matter much since "Blur" seems to be depending on the story and not style or special effects. I think thrillers (in particular) have to be judged on plot and creativity. In "Blur" the plot seems to be going in a lot of directions without an actual goal. This is obviously to mislead you. Nothing wrong with this as long there are subtle hints for us to find out what is going on. In here lies the problem. We only get one perspective and that is from the main character. So we automatically assume that what he sees is actually happening. Not once we get a clue from other characters that something is wrong with him. The only thing that is said that he is paranoid. I did had my doubts on Adrien's behavior,but could not make out if it was scripted or bad acting. The surprising twist really comes out of nowhere and only in the epilogue it gets explained. This has got to be one of the worst twists I have ever seen. Come on how could I accept it without a single clue given in advance. This is not being creative. It's laziness. And why is this movie being called a horror movie. There are no supernatural elements involved. Apart from a scare or two and the main character who believes he is a psychic there is nothing going on. This movie has been very disappointing and certainly is not worth watching.

I am glad that I didn't pay to see this movie. This movie seems to be made by the bunch of film student straight out of school. Story is incoherent and totally meaningless. Actors are not beliavable and especially artist(Salvator Xuereb) is just delivering a stereotypical performance. Whole movie was basically just depiction of some painting, paranoia, partying and crying over a dead body.

Music was totally of the mood. There was like action music on suspenseful moments. I was left with an impression that composer probably didn't see the movie when he was making music.

Definitely the highlight of the movie was when charming young Allyssa(Nicole Rayburn) was posing naked - such beauty! And art works in the movie weren't that bad.

This movie could serve well as a example how to not make a movie.