Irreversible Review
by Richard A. Zwelling (razwee AT yahoo DOT com)March 27th, 2003
IRREVERSIBLE
* (out of ****)
a film review by
Richard A. Zwelling
Note: The content of this film is extremely graphic, both in terms of violence and sex. The camera does not avert its gaze in several brutal sequences, and therefore, there is no way for the audience to get comfortably out of the line of fire. An NC-17 rating might be, dare I say, too tame for this film.
Due to its method of reverse storytelling, the first film with which Irreversible will no doubt be compared is Memento. I say this with a tone of disdain and regret. One of the many characteristics that made Memento such a wonderful experience is that it had an interesting story, compelling characters, and an ending (or beginning) that adeptly tied all elements of the film (plot, theme, character) together. The reverse storytelling was novel, and indeed captivating, but it did not make the movie in and of itself. It was a springboard that the film put to wonderful use in fleshing out its other elements.
Irreversible has the reverse storytelling. In terms of all the other aforementioned characteristics, it has nothing. The basic storyline (told chronologically, for your ease of understanding) revolves around the brutal rape and beating of a woman named Alex (Monica Belucci). She had been dating Marcus (Vincent Cassel), a drugged-out loser who has a volatile temper that would put The Hulk to shame. Previously, she had been dating Pierre (Albert Dupontel), a friend of Marcus's who is much more clean-cut and sensible.
After learning of the horrible rape, Marcus and Pierre decide to take matters into their own hands. They begin a search for the assailant that leads them from their comfortable yuppie lives into the worst dregs imaginable. Their search finally concludes at the "Rectum", a gay club of uncompromising debauchery and squalor. They locate who they think is the attacker and bash his head to a bloody pulp with a fire extinguisher. Sound interesting? I didn't think so either.
As a stylistic feat, Irreversible is impressive. Each scene is (without exaggeration) one long extended take with some improvised dialogue. The opening twenty minutes of the film are a tour de force of sound editing, lighting, and cinematography. Several shots in the film can be described as avant-garde and the music is carefully chosen to evoke a specific feel in each context.
In light of all that the film lacks, however, these strengths seem almost pretentious. The masterful technical aspects of the film can fool the audience into believing that what they have just seen is meaningful cinema. I can't consider meaningful a film that devotes ten minutes to Marcus trying to get Pierre laid, and yet another ten to Pierre and Marcus asking Alex about her orgasms.
Another area of the film that will engender constant controversy is its uncompromising combination of sex and violence. Admittedly, I am intrigued by disturbing films, and I am impressed when a film can effectively communicate a meaningful message through disturbing material. However, I have my disagreements when I feel that the material is disturbing with no apparent purpose or goal. So taking your own brutal form of revenge is bad. OK, fine. Seeing a guy's skull crushed by a fire extinguisher doesn't add any depth or meaning to that. So violent rape is a horrible thing. OK, fine. I don't need to see a ten-minute still shot of a woman getting anally raped in a tunnel to understand that.
Overall, this comes off as a badly conceived cross between a sadistic porn and a snuff film. And as one other critic aptly put it, "You need this film like you need a fire extinguisher shaped hole in your head."
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
