Straneo says the release date is 2020. I watched this movie many years ago. The film is not for the faint of heart. A lot of violent scenes that are called beyond the edge. Filmed in a countdown manner, so you do not immediately begin to understand the motives and actions. heroes. The film is creepy, super-realistic, simultaneously repulsive and attractive. As they say, fasten your belts, and stock up on a bag in case of vomiting.
It was arranged in chronological order. So what, like, another movie? Well done! This is how you make money, on the old forgotten ones. Shocking, naturalistic shooting of rape, and the film(s) is about nothing. Demonstration ... savoring ... The animal essence of man. Although it is incomparable with animals! in animals everything is separate: hunting and killing, eating - slut, procreation. And here's something from the devil... Perverts on this stage obviously masturbate with ecstasy, and those inhumans who otherwise (without violence) do not get pleasure.
If Balabanov was a Frenchman, maybe he would shoot something like this. However, "Cargo 200", for all the uncompromising cruelty of the plot, in fact, made a much better impression on me at the time. Although there the camera was not spinning in the air, as if fixed on a quadcopter controlled by a drunk, and the picture in some places did not hit the eyes with a strobescope. I didn’t know “Full Inversion” was a directorial remix, thinking it was such a subtle oxymoron, so I probably wouldn’t understand the charms of the original version. In this film, I saw the director’s strong claim to the greatness of the plan, but neither the eroticism on the border with porn, nor the painfully long scene of the rape and subsequent beating of a beautiful woman, nor the “disclosure of the characters” of her beautiful primate and intellectual nerd, nor other moments seemed convincing enough to get out of the chair and shout “Bravo!” Too bad. By the way, if I were Mr. Noe, I would make a third film, where I would tell the story from the point of view of a man who escaped from the red crossing, who became a casual witness to the massacre of another witness. It might be interesting.
Reversibility of filmed frames beyond the limits of time.
“Damn me, how much I love the early Noah!”
Judge for yourself - Gaspar's latest films are somewhat too artificial, pretentious. All the passions in them are sucked out of a finger! As for: 'One vs. All', 'Irreversibility', the movie ' Entering the Void' - that's where real life is! The butcher with his stream of consciousness will surpass any Stendhal! And in Irreversibility, for example, Alex and Marcus's conversation with Pierre about intimate life clearly deserves a nomination for ' golden dick' cynical! As they say: ' it wouldn't be so funny if it wasn't so sad'.
I see no point in retelling what happened in the picture, because everything that needs to be printed in the comments a long time ago, but I can not help noticing that the chronological order still brought clarity, and re-viewing drew attention to many subtleties missed when viewing the original. One way or another, violence is an integral part of life and this picture can help to feel and understand the state of the victims. Specifically, this tape does not idealize evil, which is now fashionable in the film industry. It is the naked reality that can stop not the most conscious contingent from trying to create something like this in reality. Perhaps the raised generation of moral perverts, after this film realizes that in reality such things are not only far from the cliché & #39; I'm a tough guy, I take whatever I want and fail anyone who gets in the way', but also instantly entail irreversible consequences. The reality of this film is undisguisedly cruel - revenge does not go to the one who was intended, and the real sadistic criminal looks with delight at the mince in his honor.
I will not recommend the film to anyone. For those who are far from what is happening in this life, it will be tolerable. Who would you surprise now? But for those who have seen it on the screen in real life, there are a thousand aspects. It's gonna hurt unbearably. There are no accidents and everything that happens to us is the result of our actions. Noe does not say that such things happened ' with the dirty elite' on merit, he only shows that justice does not exist. Do not seek it in any world, for there are only actions. The choice is yours.
I will immediately explain this choice of name. There are films that have a very strong edifying message and try to teach the viewer something. And it is not always cartoons that help to form the personality of the child. Even adults have something to teach. In the past few months, I have been seeing news on the Internet that a girl was raped with a picture of her in a revealing outfit. And instead of responses of sympathy or modest silence, I see hateful comments in which people simply defend criminals by linking to clothes and saying things like, "It's my fault." So this movie is for people like this, and I wonder how they're going to react to a ten-minute rape scene. Will they change their attitude on this topic?
This film, as the title implies, is an inverted version of the already iconic film of 2002. And, to my great surprise, the new version changed my attitude to this film. I specially prepared for the movie trip and previewed Padal and Odin vs. All, the director’s two previous creations. Thanks to these films, we plunge into Noe’s head, where he, through the mouth of the Butcher, expresses incredibly contradictory and cynical thoughts that boil down to the fact that life is evil, that violence breeds violence and that every person in the soul is an animal. It was not very interesting to look at, well, some Frenchman sees the world this way, great, it was extremely informative. But in Irreversibility everything changed, he somehow managed to bring his thoughts to something more integral and logical than the endless butcher’s tambourine. It is clear that the director is talented, that he has something to say to the world. But apparently, the world is not understood by all of its parts, because the director apparently does not care about the audience and the only thing he wants is fame. I don’t know, maybe without the low-frequency sounds that make you feel nauseous and dizzy, the movie couldn’t be made. Noe is much more important than how many people left the room than whether he has a good movie or not. It is important to be a radical director. Unfortunately, nothing has changed in these 20 years. All also intentional abomination when watching, only over the years he learned to show this abomination a little more inventively.
Okay, I'm going to come back to the movie, because my introduction is already long. Thanks to the correct chronology of events, you are much more empathetic to the characters, you are imbued with their lives and with trepidation and horror wait for the scene in the transition. Because of the appearance of sympathy, you perceive the beginning with completely different thoughts. Along with Vincent Cassel, you feel anger and rage, you directly feel the anger around him. And in a film about revenge, this is quite an important component, you have to feel all the pain that the main character is experiencing and together with him think about the brutal massacre. In this regard, the inverted version works much better than the usual. This, in principle, the differences in the perception of the film, end. The same incredible camera work and nothing like the style. As for me, if there was in the cinema the most terrible hypostasis of hell, it was the club Rectum. There are also attempts to make smart movies. Too late he realized that he was a visionary rather than a thinker. Starting with Irreversibility, he tries to replace reflection with pretentious and ostentatious cruelty, which simultaneously works and does not work. On the one hand, the topic of revenge and the idea of the cycle of violence were fully disclosed. At least you can think about it after watching. But the topic of fate was revealed extremely weakly and even somehow childishly simple.
After watching the movies, it is very easy for Noe to get lost in his own thoughts, it is very difficult for yourself to tell whether you like his films or not. On one side of the scale we see blood and cruelty, on the other we see a unique visual and weak content. Well, on whose side you are, it is up to you, strange as it may seem.
8 out of 10
Watch the re-edited version of the scandalous film 'Irreversibility' 2002, recently released. How much has history changed in the new interpretation?
Intellectually not the hardest thing I've seen in a week. However, in perception one of the most difficult. Those who are looking for light entertainment or something familiar and civilized, probably will not see the film to the end.
'Irreversibility' 2002 is a French drama thriller directed by Gaspar Noe. His second feature film, which became one of the most memorable films of the decade. The original story consists of thirteen episodes of varying length, arranged in reverse chronological order. We start the prosmtor with the final scene and gradually wind off the tangle.
'Irreversibility. Full inversion & #39; 2020 - rewired in chronological order version of the original, the director himself. It has the same strengths (or weaknesses for whom), as in the 2002 film, namely, diving into the depths of the human soul and trying to understand what makes a person do the worst. This is mainly due to the fact that in history nothing but chronology has changed ... or almost nothing.
According to the classics, at the beginning of the review / review of this film, the authors write a warning that the film contains violent scenes of violence and sensitive people should refrain from watching. That's it. No wonder at the first scandalous show in 2002 in Cannes, most of the audience left the hall without watching the film until the middle, and several people fainted. But in my opinion, such warnings, numerous reviews of the shocking experience that followed the premiere, and the content absorbed in the past two decades by modern viewers, served as a kind of anaesthetic. And yet, even when revisiting scenes of violence, they are repugnant. Keep in mind. By the way, the film is included in the list of banned for distribution in some countries.
According to Gaspar Noe, he does not care about the reaction of the audience. He claims he never thinks about the audience when he makes a film. The focus is always on your own pleasure.
The film takes place over a day in Paris. After a young woman is brutally attacked in the transition, her friends - unable to contain anger, decide to take revenge.
The 2002 film was the story of Marcus and Pierre, buddies in love with the same woman. The first half of the film is about two friends randomly rushing around town looking for a rapist, and then we find out who they are avenging. The whole other half is an attempt to justify Marcus' madness with his love for Alex. By the end, we understand that knowing the future would not be a blessing, but a curse.
There is a shift in the new film. This is the story of a woman - Alex, her boyfriends, her irresistibility, her hopes and the story of an abuse. Violence begins almost immediately, it just becomes unbearable at some point.
“Full Inversion” shows that only an unhappy chain of accidents and our own weaknesses separates us from heaven to hell. Things get worse and then get irreparably worse. In this regard, the new version looks even more gloomy.
For the main roles, Noe was looking for a couple in love. She became Vincent Cassel and Monica Bellucci, who were married at the time. Noe only had a three-page draft before filming the film, so all the dialogue was improvisation.
Gaspar Noe was also one of the film's operators. Often, in films, we do not pay attention to camera work, to how we see the characters, but it is simply impossible not to notice the peculiarity of the look in Noe’s films: the camera now and then moves over the characters, showing them from above, then slowly moves along them, studying each part of the body in detail and seems to even participate in the beating. The director said he used cocaine while filming scenes at Rectum because he was so tired of working with the camera. When he finished and the high went away, he couldn't move his arms for the rest of the day.
Noe always admits that the visual component of his films is inseparable from the plot and he works on it as long and painstakingly as on the shooting itself. As a result, in many cases, the characters seem secondary to the way their story is told.
As for the soundtrack. The music for the film was written by Bangalter (French DJ, composer) In addition, Beethoven and Mahler sound in the film.
For me, the 2002 original is more interesting. According to the director, as a result of the editing, irreversibility became worse. Yes, but at the same time, the story became simpler and even more real. We are no longer waiting for the finale, shot in warm colors, admitting that all the horror seen is just a nightmare Alex, a terrible fantasy of her subconscious imposed by instincts and desires. In addition, somewhat smoothed the effect of shock, which struck the viewer from the first minutes in the early version. In Full Inversion, we are warned and gradually prepared for something terrible.
Ready to take a chance?
If you are not familiar with this picture, but decide to look, I recommend starting with the original version of 2002. And then, if you want, maybe a year later, come to the second film. (The director recommends watching both films at once.) But this is clearly too much.
Those who have already seen the original and it did not cause disgust, have the opportunity to see in the movie the history of irreversibility from a different angle.
P.S. From the director's latest interview:
Publication:
Your heroes are often busy finding their way. Many of them are constantly looking for revelations: in drugs, in love, in aggression or in danger. They can't calm down. That’s the correct description, don’t you think?
Noe:
- Yeah. This is also the correct description of all my friends! You just gave a verbal portrait of all my favorite friends, losers in search of meaning.
On February 18, a new version of Gaspar Noe’s cult film Irreversibility was released. But marked "Full inversion." Yes, yes, now everyone who has watched the “Controversy” is thinking about whether the concept of inversion applies in this case. And everyone who's seen Irreversible is wondering if it's possible to tell the original story differently. After all, in the first version of the film, the chronology is in reverse order.
First thought: Noe decided to remake himself? As such, his main and most tinned film, shown to the world backwards, will now appear before us in direct chronological order. What will change from that? Will anything change at all? Lots of questions. Noe always has a lot of questions. And on the other side of the issues, as a rule, is the full acceptance of his ideas and images.
If you don’t know the story, I tell you three friends are going to a party. More precisely, the couple (Cassel and Bellucci) and their friend (Dupontel) go on a home list with all kinds of pleasures. Something happens before that. Something that explains what happens next. Or vice versa? Okay, let's not be confused: the director shows the opposite. First we see the end, then the middle, then the beginning. And at the end (or the beginning?) we realize what a nightmare it really is. Reality. The whole story acquires a special color due to the inverse order. Everything is very bad, the three main characters are experiencing a real tragedy - and we see it right away. What precedes this, we see, moving further along the plot to the beginning of the story. But the full realization of what horror has happened comes at the end, which is the beginning. And it's a particularly eerie feeling when a reality that's already been discovered is complemented by new introductory ones. Introductory, which completely aggravate the incident. And convince in the thesis, which the director prescribes on both sides of the chronology: “Time kills everything.”
Noe takes the story, tells it from the end, as if he were wondering if it was possible to reverse it. But at the very beginning (end), when we see that nothing foreshadowed tragedy, it is quite obvious that events are irreversible. Even when all is well and calm, it is clear that the outcome will be one.
Now there are two versions of the development of events: 1) you did not look at the “Irreversibility” that is happening for you in a novelty, and you get acquainted with it as events unfold, and do not know what awaits you and the characters; 2) you have seen everything – and want to see it again, in a different order: to feel whether there is a difference – and what it will be.
This is the difference we are talking about.
If you haven’t seen Irreversible, or even the rest of Noe’s movies, the inverted version is a good way to get to know each other. That is, in this case, you have the opportunity to get acquainted with a completely new plot, while the rest of the world will watch the old story retold. It turns out that this is a chance to see something different in the cult Cannes hero. This is a new movie.
If "Irreversibility" is well known to you - and even at a one-time meeting, the details are so ingrained in memory that it is impossible to be unfamiliar with them - then you are waiting for almost the same emotions as when viewing the original. But with a little caveat. Because when the story is told from the end, we know what happened right away. And then we are caught up in the realization of how good everything was in the beginning and what irreversible destruction awaits the lives of each of the three main characters. But if we look at it first, we're just watching an evening in the life of an ordinary couple. And even though we know what will happen next, let us hope that the outcome may be a little different. A little more merciful. Just hope, nothing has happened yet.
And in the original version, after the shock experienced at the beginning, many details are barely paying attention. But if you go in order, then the eye catches, for example, such details as the obscurity of Marcus, Alex's boyfriend. If he hadn’t behaved that way, Alex wouldn’t have had to leave the party in a hurry and in a bad mood, wouldn’t have had to experience this split of life into “before” and “after” presented to her by the red crossing. We just watch him sniff coke, suck on one girl or another, defecate over the kitchen sink among a bunch of other people, shove Pierre into the arms of every first ... Of course, he doesn't know Alex's secret. I have no idea what will happen next. But that doesn't excuse him. All right. That’s pretty clear: she’s leaving the party for a reason, a certain event happens to her. But in direct chronology, the color and taste of what is happening are somewhat different. There are a few things you look at differently.
But the question is, will you want to see this horror again, in one version or another?
The director of the film Gaspar Noe uses all possible technical means to create at the right moment in the viewer a feeling of maximum discomfort: the camera’s rotation, an alarming low-frequency hum, an aggressive red color, the gloomyness of the frame, inverted red and white letters in the credits, and the titles themselves slide sideways. In addition to the form, the content of the video series contributes to the intensification of tension and disgust: perversion, sodomy, transvestites, masturbation, cruelty, extreme passion. The shocking “irreversibility” shakes the psyche to its very foundations.
It is impossible not to give credit to the courage and uncompromising director - if it is worth showing such terrible events, then it can only be done so that it causes genuine horror. The viewer must not only understand with reason that the event shown is abnormal, but also feel its pathology. In the episode, Alex (Monica Bellucci) breaks the fourth wall and gives the impression of a request for help directed to someone who is now on the other side of the screen and can not affect the irreversibility. This technique creates maximum involvement and at the same time conveys the conceptual idea that we are unable to change predetermined events.
Content
What did the director have to say to the viewer through such a film? Gaspar Noe postulates several theses:
The insufficiency of one rational. Pierre (Albert Dupontel) ex-boyfriend Alex. Pierre is strictly rational and lacks spontaneous vitality. Naked rationality, unbalanced by the impulsivity of desire, is incapable of living life fully. As Alex tells him, “It’s impossible to explain everything.”
The irresistibility of the animal in man. Marcus (Vincen Cassel) is Alex's current husband. His Latin roots go back to the Roman god of war Mars. Openness to spontaneous impulses of desire makes him charming, sincere and attractive. But on the other hand, his impulsivity turns into uncontrollability and destructiveness. Blindly following instinct leads to destruction and war. Marcus represents the irrational principle in man.
Inevitability of meeting the repressed. The viewer will have a meeting with a character who personifies everything that is most destructive and perverted that is in the human psyche being pushed into the unconscious. But since it is impossible to completely get rid of the undesirable content of psychic life, so every person expects such a meeting somewhere in the subterranean corners of the unconscious.
The immutability of the events of the future to the same extent as the events of the past. The film showcases and quotes John Dunn’s book, The Experiment with Time. According to Dunn, the past, present, and future are already present in a universal reality. This concept was the inspiration for Noe in the creation of Irreversibility. All that was, is and will be is already in eternity, and man only runs through the already written book of life with his consciousness. The past is available in memories, the present in the here-and-now moment, and the future manifests itself in prophetic dreams.
Time destroys everything. In Hinduism, there is the terrifying goddess Kali who personifies the destructive and creative aspects of the fullness of time. But in order to enter eternity, one must first renounce human form and nature. Everything that is changeable and impermanent is subject to physical destruction. The process of parting with the body and ego is cruel and terrible. But such a sacrifice is necessary for eternity. If we look at the events of the film in this way, it completely changes the meaning – it becomes a symbolic sacrifice of the physical for the sake of ascension of the spiritual into eternity.
Compared to the first version of the film, although the latter is easier to perceive due to the linear chronology, the original version is better. The irreversibility of 2002 brings more discomfort and tension, as it immediately throws the viewer into the hell of the “Red Intestine” and uses the reverse order of chronology, which is more consistent with the concept of the film. It is also important that the 2002 film begins in hell and ends with the ascension to the bright sky, thus representing an upward movement.
Irreversibility is undoubtedly influenced by the determinism and serialism (the philosophy of time) of John Dunn, psychoanalysis and Eastern philosophy. The film provokes the viewer to experience a traumatic experience of meeting with the repressed into the unconscious. You can understand it at different levels of symbolism, but in any case, this experience will be shocking.
Why watch?
This movie is worth watching for the sake of ending. Or to survive a safe traumatic experience. Or to meet the repressed – visualization and verbalization of which contribute to the release of mental energy and emotional discharge, which in turn has a positive therapeutic effect. The viewing will necessarily be accompanied by strong experiences and emotions, and as a result, the goal of any truly dramatic work is achieved - catharsis. It is in order to survive the catharsis and it is worth watching such a film.
“Irreversibility” Gaspar Noe is unlikely to want to review a second time, but the only viewing of this outrageous movie will leave any viewer unforgettable impressions.