Customer Reviews

Fear X

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(8)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Danish director Nicholas Winding Refn, third film "Fear X" may baffle or frustrate his viewers with his non-linear plot line and it's leisurely pacing. Indeed Refn falls short on adhering to the protocols of commercial filmaking, but he is aiming, almost entirely, for effect, rather than aiming for commerce, in "Fear X."

In this case, "Fear X" was written by renowned novelist Hurbert Selby Jr. Selby's script has minimal dialogue and it's left to John Turturro's considerable acting skills to convey the obsessive quest of a mall security guard to find out the truth behind the seemingly random shooting of his wife.

You are never completely certain, if the action on the screen is actually unfolding, or whether it's all happening in the mind of Harry Cain, Turturro's character. He frequently sees the mute ghost of his murdered wife, leading him to a sinister looking vacant house directly across the street from his own house. He eventually breaks into the house and finds a strip of photo negatives, which he believes to be the smoking gun left by his wife's murderer.

It's clear that Harry Cain is obsessed, but we wonder if he's being good detective, or if he's a delusional madman whose paranoia leads him on a groundless quixotic investigation. Cain's co-workers are concerned about his erratic behavior in the wake of his wife's death.

Perhaps the entire film is a surreal parable about moving from the first "denial stage" to fifth and final "acceptance stage" in the 5 Stages of Grief upon losing a loved one. Harry Cain exhibits all the five ritualized stages of grief and by the end of the film it's clear that he has accepted his wife's death and is ready to move on with his life.

Rafn's filmmaking style may appear to be slow moving, but for those who appreciate camera and soundstage techniques the leisurely, unhurried pace of the film allows the viewer to take in Larry Smith's magnificent wide angle camera shoots and the use of a blood red tinted camera lens on some of the interior shots.

The drama is enhanced by Brian Eno's ominous ambient soundtrack score. Indeed the entire film is an excellent workshop on how to use lighting, music, camera angles, and set design to ratchet up tension in a film. Those interested in filmmaking will find "Fear X" to be ambient cinema, while those with shorter attention spans will find it boring.

Like,David Lynch, Refn's filmmaking is allegorical, atmospheric and explores the murky regions of the subconscious mind.

Rafn has shown enough talent in "Fear X" to be regarded as part of the future generation of innovative and artistic directors. It's not everyday that a filmmaker with the devious & subversive imagination of a Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch, or Terry Gilliam comes along. Each of whom evolved into brilliant filmakers as their career progressed. I struggled between giving 4 stars or 5 stars to "Fear X" in the end it was 5 stars, simply on the potential Refn exhibits in this powerful psychological suspense movie. Like Lynch's "Eraserhead" and the Polish brothers' "Northfork", "Fear X" is destined to become a cult classic among cineastes.

It is not a film for those who cannot tolerate ambiguity, but for those who have a taste for the unusual or quirky, "Fear X" is fascinating.

This is not a film for everyone. It is quietly and methodically paced and is actually an interior (psychological) drama. It is absolutely beautiful to look at, shot by cinematographer Larry Smith who was also one of the cinematographers (secondary I believe) on Eyes Wide Shut by Kubrick and it shows. I don't understand why I haven't heard of this film before. Cinephiles should definitely find it fascinating. I bought this used on a whim as a fan of Turturro and watched it with bated breath, wasn't sure at first but came out intrigued. Upon second viewing I think it is a fascinating and exceptional film, feeling more like a Scandinavian film than American. Obvious visual overtures are made to Kubrick's The Shining and the pacing and camerawork are reminiscent of Eyes Wide Shut. If you like contemplative, (dare I say) existential filmmaking and are patient and allow for introspection and participation in watching film, check it out. It's well worth it. This should get more attention by folks who love fine film-making. If you want a traditional thriller/drama look elsewhere, you're not going to find that here. But, if you want exceptional introspective performances, beautiful editing and cinematography and a quietly paced (almost sculpted) drama on death, murder and moral culpability and understanding you'll find this a fascinating piece. Couldn't decide on 4 or 5 stars and gave it only 4 because of the standards the film sets for itself, which are incredibly high. It may, upon a third viewing, be changed to 5 stars.

The whirl of uncertainty surrounding Fear X reminded me of Eraserhead, a David Lynch twister. Eraserhead, however, maintained a sense of 'what the heck's going on' while still inserting interesting symbols in a completely odd storyline - absolutely nothing normal. Fear X mixed reality, normalcy and artistic wierdness - a combo that doesn't work as well. I did follow the direction of the film, not the plot, but the unusual unfolding of the mindset of a man desperate for answers. Since there was a plot, leaving the audience unsatisfied was more of a cruel tease than an artistic twist. John Turturro did an excellent job in his role. The external features of the film reflected well the desperation within the main character. I think the film would have actually done much better if not for the moment during which there was an obvious attempt to explain what was happening. If your film is wierd, leave it that way. Explanations simply make the film like half-cooked meat, it's almost there, but not quite what it should be. Fear X was a mix between Eraserhead and The Machinist. It failed to slide into a proper category.

At first viewing, this film seems, to be blunt, somewhat lame. Then you think about it. And then you realize it's absolutely not lame at all. It requires some serious mental input, but the rewards are there, definitely.

This is not a trickathon flick like Memento. It's a much more subtle work that digs into you once you get what's really going on. The core of the film is, Is what we experience "real" or is it what we THINK is real?

While it may appear initially that this question only applies to the protagonist, Harry Caine (John Turturro in an excellent performance), that's definitely not the case. The "bad guy", played by James Remar, a cop, is--if you think about it hard enough and pick up the clues--definitely experiencing the same mindset as Turturro's character. You have to put the pieces together. When you do, it's fascinating.

Harry Caine has been experiencing tremendous grief after his wife's murder. Understandably. Part--a big part--of that grief is hallucinating her presence standing next to him in the bathroom, standing just outside his house, comforting him in the bedroom. He is absolutely obsessed with finding her killer.

There is something--we don't exactly see what initially--about his next door neighbor--another cop (i.e., not James Remar's character) that leads him to break into the man's house when the owner is not there, where he finds what he thinks is a clue to his wife's death. He pursues that clue and ultimately runs into the James Remar character who may or may not have been responsible.

The viewer has to pay very careful attention to the details here; details is what this film's all about. The ending scene itself is, when you think about it, a fitting piece of the puzzle (no, I'm not giving away the ending here). So this is really, one thinks, a story about retribution...or is it? In fact, it's really a story about attempting to bridge the gap between what we experience and what we mentally create as experience.

That bridging of the gap does not always happen. Or sometimes it does happen and we can't handle it. Or sometimes it does happen and we handle it in a way that we think is the right way and then find out later--guess what? It was not the right way at all, after all. Not at all.

A fascinating film, this bears more than one viewing to see what is really going on here. The screenplay was written by noted "underground" American writer Hubert Selby Jr. who has done a masterful job of piling on the layers and the subtlety. The director is Nicolas Refn, a Dane whose first film, Pusher (Danish) won kudos for both the director and the star, Kim Bodnia.

Much better than you might expect--but you definitely have to make the effort to see what this is really about.

Definitely recommended.

It started out good, and stayed good all the way to nearly the end. Oh wait, I'm sorry, I forgot, there WASN'T an end. I could got into detail about it why it was such a waste of time, but it's really very simple. When it was over I was left feeling ripped off. Not in a monetary sense since I saw it on cable. Rather, my time and my emotional and psychological investments were abused.

I came across Fear X while browsing in our local video rental place. Why haven't I heard of this movie? This is one of my favorites, an instant classic. Chilling and mesmerizing, it is the story of a mall security guard whose wife was shot in the parking garage. He uses surveillance tapes snuck to him by his co-worker to look for clues to find her killer. Caine is obsessed, but a gentle guy - he just wants to find out why his wife was killed.

He sees her ghost or vision beckoning him on, leading him to check new places, which gets him into trouble. Some people have said the film leads to nothing. This is true and not true. I got a powerful message from the movie. Without spoiling anything, I will say part of it: maybe some answers are better left buried.

This film was expertly made and filmed. Great tension and very dramatic acting. What ruined it for me was there was not an explanation at the end. We know they wife was killed by accident, but why? Who? What was the cover up? No questions were answered, and that made me feel like my time was wasted on a good looking movie, poorly written end. Not satisfying at all.

To me, if you make the best looking film out there, and it doesn't make sence, you're not a good film maker.

This reminded me of an Ingmar Bergman film...the characters speak and act in ultra-slow motion and always maintain somber, downcast expressions. There is no joy...there is no humor...just relentless sadness and grief. It takes minutes for them to complete a single sentence, and then the sentence is generally not worth the time or effort.

I know that the director is trying to create a cinematic masterpiece of pathos and psychological turmoil, but the characters and their behavior are so alien to reality that no empathy can be achieved.

The acting is generally excellent, but at such an incredibly slow and distracting pace that you become numb to the situation. The cinematography is excellent, but relies on deep blood red colors in a trite and all-too-obvious manuever to establish an aura of imminent danger. There are some very suspenseful moments, but they rely heavily on background music for emphasis...which is "cheating"...real suspense can stand on its own merits, and the main source of suspense in this movie is whether the characters will actually complete a sentence before the camera runs out of film.

The ending, however, is the ultimate insult. After investing 85 minutes of your valuable time, fighting the urge to take a nap while the actors complete their dialog and hoping that there will be a satisfactory resolution to reward you for your time and patience, suddenly the screen turns into about 60 seconds of red scribbles and loud noise. I naturally assumed that my television had malfunctioned, but no...it was the director who had malfunctioned. This was apparently his artsy, abstract way of conveying madness, rage, angst, or.....who the heck knows???

Your misery is not quite over, though, because there is one final scene of draggy, humorless dialog, somber expressions, and....absolutely no payoff. The credits begin and you look around the room at your fellow viewers with the "what just happened?" look and everyone curses you for selecting this movie.

Unless terms like "Ambient-Noir" frequently appear in your thoughts and daily conversations, do yourself and family a big favor....leave this sad and disappointing mess on the shelf.

The influence of Stanley Kubrick and David Lynch is manifest in Nicolas Winding Refn's third film. One might say that FEAR X is a bizarre film well photographed. I liked the first part of the film focusing on John Turturro's obsessional minimum life. The last part can be forgotten. It's clearly the film of a young director who still didn't know where to go exactly. A DVD zone completists. Only.

"Fear X" is a surprisingly boring movie based on a novel by Hubert Selby Jr (Requiem for a Dream (Director's Cut),Last Exit to Brooklyn [VHS]) While Selby's usual themes have been drug addicts, junkies, prostitutes, and people struggling with their addictions... this one is a mystery in the vein of Memento) John Turturro is a mall security guard whose wife died under mysterious circumstances. He is hooked to watching security cameras, and rerunning the footage endlessly.

In the beginning, there is a sense of dread and suspense. Turturro's character seems to be obsessed and slowly going mad. Things become more menacing as he goes on a quest to investigate his wife's death. Slowly, the movie goes from being a meditation on loss, and has the horror movie atmosphere right... to being boring. In the end, this thriller did not thrill. It cured my insomnia. It's a tranquilizer. The movie goes from being compelling to a true sleeper. Thankfully there are bad movies that are fascinating, such as Peanut Butter Solution [VHS] and The Oxford Murders ( Crimes à Oxford ) [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.2 Import - Spain ].