À l'intérieur

Plenty of people have commented already, both positively and negatively. I'm in the positive camp. I'll try to help you figure out if this could be for you.

Art, life, human experience, ecology, our place in the world and in our minds. That, for me, is what this film is mostly about.

Arthouse, yes, but gorgeously so.

If you are a student of film or cinematography or photography this movie keeps serving up shots you wish you could create.

Dafoe's performance is brilliant - in a subtle and internal way.

If you thought Aranofsky's Mother was worth watching, this is for you (although completely dissimilar). If you have enjoyed Baraka, Samsara and the rest, this is probably for you.

In terms of plot, it is minimal and has no thrills to speak of.

I think it's important to say that there's nothing wrong with not liking the film, feeling bored by it, not wanting to see it. Those who will enjoy it are not above anyone else - those who are disinterested are not below anyone else.

I hope this has helped someone.

"Inside" holds great potential in its opening act, successfully capturing the viewer's attention with its intriguing premise. However, as the narrative progresses, it falls short of expectations, leaving the audience disillusioned. The proficient acting of Willem Dafoe serves as a beacon of hope, pulling the audience back into the story with his unpredictable character choices.

Regrettably, the film takes a sharp turn in the third act, as the plot unravels into complete incoherence. The final act takes place in a "Smart Home," and despite claims of the film being a work of art, the storyline fails to elicit any interest or excitement from the audience, ultimately resulting in a lackluster experience.

The potential displayed in the beginning is ultimately not realized, and the film leaves much to be desired. While the standout performance of Dafoe offers a glimmer of hope, the nonsensical and tedious nature of the latter part of the film leaves a lot to be desired.

It started off intriguing, suspenseful, and interesting, but then it started to become stale, repetitive, bland, with improbable circumstances, absence of logic, and riddled with plot and technical issues.

And after a slowly paced 100 minutes of an incredible performance by DaFoe - the only reason I kept watching, the ending is not worth the ink the convoluted lazy screenplay was written with. It's all filler with very little substance, and merits no rhyme or reason this film was even made. It just all fades away as a waste of DaFoe's talents, and my invested time to watch this nonsense with hopes of some sort of grand finale.

Classified as a psychological artsy-type thriller, there's been many films like this done before and much better. As the second only film directed, produced and (co-)written film by Vasilis Katsoupis, his work was impressive, especially his camera shots, close-ups and angle choices. He captured the very best of DaFoe's talents. But Katsoupis could only do so much with Ben Hopkins' screenplay. Had Hopkins put more structure to the story, better plot development, and given us a more concrete conclusion, this film could've easily been more compelling than contrived. Sadly the results as-is, are a huge disappointment and I can't recommend this at all. It's a very generous 5/10, all going to DaFoe and Katsoupis doing their best with the terrible script they had to work with.

In the pandemic-era film "Inside", Willem Dafoe's impressive range and versatility are on full display as he plays the character of Nemo, an art thief trapped in a luxurious Manhattan penthouse after the security system malfunctions. The film alternates between being a survival thriller and a twisted exercise of the mind, exploring themes of isolation, anxiety, and the need for human connection. While the movie touches on these deeper themes, it also delves into the idea of art and its inseparable bond to the human will. Nemo's inherent urge to create and express is showcased as he sketches on shreds of paper or creates his own mural while trapped in the penthouse. The freedom of the New York City skyline, just beyond the panes of unbreakable glass, is a cruel tease, making art a soothing balm in his confined world. Dafoe's physical and psychological transformation is both harrowing and fascinating to watch. Though Nemo's character may be a tad too opaque, the audience is submerged into his experience, feeling the palpable sense of confinement and being cut off from the outside world.

At its core, "Inside" poses thoughtful questions surrounding the purpose of art, keeping its answers vague enough for the audience to wrestle with. And while there are brief moments of cheerfulness, such as when the "Macarena" song by Los Del Río plays while the refrigerator door is left open for 20 seconds, the overall feeling of the movie is dark and dour. Overall, "Inside" is a pandemic-era film that explores the deeper themes of isolation, anxiety, and the need for human connection through the lens of art and survival. Dafoe's impressive range and talent at display together with the exploration of the human will to create and express make it a must-watch. There is no creation without destruction!

Not too many movies leave me with the "what a waste of time" feeling, but this was one. Although the acting was good, there were just too many ridiculous things going on, and it was just too draggy. And like the usual sucker I am for watching until the end, I kept hoping "well maybe the ending will justify this colossal waste of time"; but no. Run away from this movie! You are better off watching the sequel to "Dumb and Dumber", or even one of the really lousy "Pink Panther" movies with Steve Martin. I don't know why imdb requires so many characters now for reviews, so I'll just say I warned you.