Blindness 2008 R CC

Amazon Instant Video

(117) IMDb 6.6/10
Available in HD

Victims of a mysterious epidemic of blindness sweeping through a city soon face an even greater affliction: the chaotic breakdown of social order. With Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo.

Starring:
Julianne Moore, Alice Braga
Runtime:
2 hours 2 minutes

Available in HD on supported devices.

Blindness

By placing your order, you agree to our Terms of Use. Sold by Amazon Digital Services, Inc. Additional taxes may apply.

Product Details

Genres Science Fiction, Drama, Thriller, Mystery
Director Fernando Meirelles
Starring Julianne Moore, Alice Braga
Supporting actors Eduardo Semerjian, Don McKellar, Ciça Meirelles, Antônio Fragoso, Lilian Blanc, Douglas Silva, Daniel Zettel, Yoshino Kimura, Joe Pingue, Susan Coyne, Fabiana Gugli, Mitchell Nye, Danny Glover, Alice Braga, Mark Ruffalo, Joe Cobden, Julianne Moore, Mpho Koaho
Studio Lionsgate
MPAA rating R (Restricted)
Captions and subtitles English Details
Rental rights 24 hour viewing period. Details
Purchase rights Stream instantly and download to 2 locations Details
Format Amazon Instant Video (streaming online video and digital download)

Other Formats

Customer Reviews

One of the most frustratingly stupid films I have seen in a long time... I won't even go into all the plot holes here.
Max
This story is supposed to enlighten us into the deeper nature of human beings once civility and society are jeopardized but it fails to pull it off.
singer
If you're looking for a movie about what would really happen if everyone in the world suddenly went blind, this isn't it.
kacunnin

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

63 of 73 people found the following review helpful By C. Duchesne on October 31, 2009
Format: DVD
Wow, why does this have such a low rating on IMDB and why does so many people hate it? The only answer that I can come up with is that most of the people that hate it are teens that don't know the meaning of "plot hole". There's no plot hole in this movie. The fact that there's no explanation why people become blind is not a plot hole, it's just not an important detail. Saying that it's plot hole is just like saying that the fact there's no explanation why people become zombies in Dawn Of The Dead is a plot hole. It's not a plot hole, it's just not what the movie is about. It was intentionally not explained. Anyway, it's an awesome movie! It's not only entertaining, it's also sad, disturbing, powerful and I could go on and on and on! I'm pretty sure that it's the only movie that made me go from sad to disturbed to happy and to sad again!

Short review, I know, but I'm just not good at writting reviews. I just hope that it's atleast slightly helpful.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
24 of 29 people found the following review helpful By Vaun I. on July 29, 2009
Format: DVD
It is easy to understand why this film received such terrible reviews. "Blindness" is a very difficult film to swallow; it's largely unpleasant, cynical and even disgusting. But is this portrayal of humanity farfetched, a sloppy exaggeration of human beings' capacity for baseness? One need only look back in history to find the answer. In short, this is not a film which you emerge from feeling "warm and squishy", although if one makes it through the end that -may- be possible.

Many of the criticisms are aimed at the lack of plot development. But this would be like calling "The Ring" a terrible movie on the basis of its inadequacy in explaining how a girl can walk out of a television set. Or claiming that "Mrs. Doubtfire" was awful because Robin Williams' accent was actually Scottish and not English. There are films that are intended to petrify and others which amuse; the purpose of "Blindness" is neither. It is not a well-defined plot which drives this movie, but rather thematic elements and experimental imagery. With that in mind the cause of and solution to this epidemic blindness, the explanation behind the Doctor's Wife's immunity and answers to similar questions become irrelevant.

The realism of this film also comes into question, when it pertains to mass hysteria. The likelihood of these particular events seems as questionable as if nearly everyone adopted a code of altruism with the knowledge that blindness is now a highly contagious epidemic with no foreseeable cure. The sudden removal of sight does not promote calm. Which doctors and scientists would offer to conduct tests on the quarantined knowing that they could very well lose their sight as well and end up joining them?
Read more ›
2 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful By Jeremy Storly VINE VOICE on January 30, 2012
Format: DVD
The film begins with close-ups of red and green stoplights that evoke the human retina interspersed with unfocused and above-shots of traffic, forcing us to consider the theme of vision immediately, in the first few frames. Likewise, the shorts of the intersection remind us of the retina. Soon, we realize, the image has been somehow filtered, and seems to allow only shades of red and green, making the viewer effectively blind. Soon after, as in the award-winning novel by Jose Saramago, the first mysterious case of blindness occurs.

Fernando Meirelles, a brilliant director whose other films include the tremendous _City of God_, is not without a vision for this film. By establishing a mood that alternates between the claustrophobic and agoraphobic, he attempts to capture the sense of blindness which Saramago pulls off on the page so expertly, but which is difficult to pull off on screen. Meirelles is sensitive to the challenge that faces him, and he approaches the task admirably and smartly. His film is an adaptation, not an appropriation, and he pays due homage to his source material. What works in-text sometimes does not work on-screen, as any great director knows, but any attempt to improve on Saramago would seem egotistical. Meirelles knows this, and he makes every noble attempt to faithfully adapt Saramago's work to the screen.

The trouble is, everything happens so fast that we have little time to absorb it all. Characters speak, act, and move on, and we have little time to dwell on their emotions. When the woman suffers and dies after giving herself over to the enemy, we are provided with a sense of injustice, but are left with little sorrow.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
13 of 17 people found the following review helpful By One-Line Film Reviews on July 31, 2009
Format: DVD
The Bottom Line:

Director Fernando Meirelles and his screenwriter Don McKellar actually improve on the source novel with this excellent and intelligent film that expertly portrays what Saramagos' "white blindness" might do to society and enlarges upon the allegorical themes of the book; inexplicably reviled by most critics and a film that some seem to find sordid, Blindness was one of the best and most thought-provoking movies of 2008.

3.5/4
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful By SkunkDave on July 26, 2009
Format: DVD
The main problem with making a movie from this book is that the entire all-enveloping theme is that you remove yourself from the world of sight and find out how people and life are at their core, especially in an unexpected and horrific situation. This can be a little distracting when you're simply sitting and staring at it with your own presumably intact sight. Alot of impact of the metaphor and "symbolism" (if you can call it that without images?) delivered by Saramago's book relies on the fact that the characters can't see each other. For example, they introduce themselves by their jobs because their names are meaningless without faces to represent them. You can forget nuances like this while looking at the faces of the actors and assigning them identity as soon as they enter a scene.

Alot of the criticism obviously sprouts from a misunderstanding of the story. Why did the movie end this way? Because the book did. Why didn't they explain the blindness? Because it was written specifically to get you to focus on themes underscoring the surface plot and events. Why this, why that? The book, the book, the book. If anything, the director should be applauded for developing such a worthy shooting style and choosing scenes which were worthy efforts towards reimagining emotions and notions from the book. The colors were bland and washed out, the scenes were bare with very little musical score to speak of... all, if you were really paying attention, purposely brought about the same sense of desolation in the viewer that the characters must have been feeling. I'm sorry this wasn't a Sci-Fi Hollywood thrill ride, but it really shouldn't be and wasn't meant to be. Shame on you for suggesting such.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Customer Images

Most Recent Customer Reviews

Search