Factory Girl

Factory Girl

Factory Girl

Factory Girl

How on earth did this film get made? Didn't the producers notice that the script was shoddy and the director giddy with lack of skill? The direction is right out of freshman movie class; the screenplay is on the level of a television Problem Film of the Week; the sense of the period and the personalities is laughable. The numerous inaccuracies of fact and tone are the least of it. Guy Pearce gives an excellent performance, and Sienna Miller is charming in a moronically written role, but this film, which should at the very least have been stylish and interesting, is shallow and sentimental in an offensive way. A great disappointment and overall a waste of time.

This amateurish biopic of Andy Warhol's tragic muse, Edie Sedgwick (Sienna Miller, terrible!) shouldn't have been made - at least not with such a poor screenplay/casting. The rich, young and pretty Edie Sedgwick, whose family life hides secrets that could be made into a Todd Solondz flick, goes to NYC in the 1960's and meets pop artist Andy Warhol (Guy Pearce, the only good thing about the movie). They develop a strange friendship and Edie becomes the muse of the Factory, Warhol's bizarre studio, and the star of Warhol's experimental movies. But when Edie meets rock star Billy "I'm not Bob Dylan" Quinn (Hayden Christensen, almost as ridiculous as Sienna), Andy feels rejected and Edie finds herself divided between her "friends" from the Factory and Dylan's, oops, Quinn's love. "Factory Girl" is a bad joke that must be avoided. I think it's laughable to see how much Oscar buzz Sienna Miller caused before the movie came out. The role was quite a bait, but she couldn't pull it off. Sienna gave one of the most ridiculous, cringe-inducing performances of the decade, that it often seems she's laughing at herself. The problem is, the movie isn't supposed to be funny and her laughing is quite annoying. I give it a 3/10 only for Pearce, and I'm being quite generous.

"Im not-i'm not trying to say anything, I sing about what i see." That line alone really explains how this movie is portrayed. The director's eye and camera work are so exceptional that there is no story-telling...only showing. We have to realize the exceptional talent at work here and awesome creativity on how the cast brings the hurt and pain to life; perhaps even hitting close to home to some. Accept the movie for what it is and not for what you think it should be, and you will find an amazing story, perhaps with some flaws (show me one without) and maybe at times even zooming by so fast your left trying to catch up, but it's clear that Sienna and Guy have simply made a tragic story come to life in a way that i believe only they could have; Hayden as well. Even though at first i was compelled to not see him as a fit for Dylan, he made it happen to the best of his ability. Not seeing this movie would be a tragedy. I'll have to admit though, i only wanted to see this movie because of Sienna, because i saw her raw talent previously and was ready to be astonished again as only she could have done. I didn't even know what the movie was about...and in the end...isn't that what it's all about...just seeing a movie and enjoying the work--the art for what it is and how it makes you feel and changes your life.

I am really sad to see the known name actors that chose to be involved in this terrible and quite frankly offencive piece of film-making. I have no side as to what is fact or fiction in this story, nor do I have any favouritism at all regarding any of the real life characters portrayed. However I have never felt so manipulated by a director/writers after watching a film. It is kind of like watching a film about how good drugs are for you, as made by the very people who sell them, and without them even making an attempt to be honest about anything at all. This film is so one sided, and clearly overly tries to make one character an innocent victim, and others the total reason for her entire downfall. Basically every aspect of the film also seems to be filled with corner cutting, nothing in the film is well developed at all. It is a complete joke. The really terrible thing about it all is that the film tries to come across as if it did really happen this way. However anyone who has ever even looked at more than a few years honestly in their entire lives, knows that nothing in real life resembles this total sham. I don't know what the whole truth is in terms of the events in this film. However any intelligent person wouldn't hesitate to wager their entire wealth (big or small), that this is not even nearly truth. This is a hateful film at it's core, and one of pure finger pointing and bitterness rather than any artistic observation or study at all. The director and writers should be sentenced to at least 5 years hard labour for this trash, where they can perhaps drop their ridiculousness and actually learn something about honesty and real life. The only reason I didn't give this film a bottom of the barrel rating is because Guy Pearce is really quite brilliant in it. The lone real bright spot in my view. My personal message to the director/writers who are obviously the most responsible for how this film comes across - We all make mistakes. Quit being part of the problem and be part of the solution towards embracing our reality. Then, and only then can we as a species truly move together in a positive direction. Finger pointing and throwing stones only equals broken bones and eventually the extinction of the entire human race. Grow the **** up!! 2/10

This movie is bad. I read Jean Stein's book. I have seen quite a few of Sedgwick’s movies. Factory Girl was a crude, rough, and inaccurate comic book portrayal of Edie Sedgwick, Andy Warhol and company. Many reviewers have remarked on how closely Sienna Miller resembles Edie. Maybe, if I was looking through an extremely fuzzy lens I might agree. To be frank, Sienna looks older, ruddier and rougher cut than Edie. Even the makeup is off. In Warhol's films, Edie is a flurry of fluttery facial movements, dancer's grace and charm. She is brilliant and mesmerizing. The dark liquid eyes register different moods and vulnerability. The voice is a mix of lips barely moving in Boston Brahmin style, jaw working and changes in pitch. She is ever-changing in a fluid manner. The whole of the sum is what made Edie beautiful and captivating. The self-consciousness is offset by preternatural poise (even the aggressively haranguing Chuck Wein can't seem to thoroughly knock her off balance in Beauty #2). Sienna Miller apes Edie like a tomboy playing femme fatale for the first time. The result is cringe inducing. I won't add to numerous and justified criticisms of the film’s portrayal of Andy Warhol, Chuck Wein, and Bob Dylan (or was it Bob Neuwirth). And I am not sure why the director chose to frame Warhol's attraction to Edie as the result of confused sexuality. I am not sure why the “Bob Dylan” character has to stumble in like a heterosexual hero in clumsy high school style. It never happened. The director seems to have a hard time with the ambiguous yin and yang of the factory in general. The film lacks generosity. The director failed to see the brilliance that Andy Warhol saw in Edie Sedgwick and v.v. The plot morbidly humps toward a clichéd conclusion taking quite a lot of liberties along the way. The notion that Edie wasn't already quite socially sophisticated before leaving Boston is totally laughable. Chuck Wein’s caustic brilliance is reduced to inept school-boyishness. Perhaps worst of all is the hack depictions of the Edie/Warhol films. Beauty #2 degenerates into a kind of rape scene in the film. It’s as if the director began with a premise of disrespect and ended up with a thoroughly loutish film. Read Stein's book. Watch Warhol's movies. Develop your own conclusion.

i saw factory girl and i liked it a lot. i also know a lot about Edie and have read all the books and biographies about her. sienna miller does a good job even though she does not look exactly like Edie (but who really can); she pulls it off. some of the movie is fiction, but overall stays true to the real story. this movie is good and don't believe all that bad press. i think sienna miller and guy Pearce deserve Oscar nods. Hayden is not bad either. in the preview it sounds like he is really bad in his role, but he does a good job. the preview does not show the skill and devotion these actors put in the characters. go see it.

beautiful & drunk & stoned. So what? Is that all there is? You never learn what the big attraction is. Is she an artist? Does she have any talent? Can she act? After seeing this movie I'm not sure. Another comment posted calls this an After School Special with a little of that let's put on a show: Guy you pretend to be Andy Warhol & Hayden you pretend to be Bob Dylan and we'll get Illeana Douglas to pretend to be Diana Vreeland. I know Sienna Miller was not the first choice to be Edie but she does a good job anyway. But after two hours of exposition it still looked like a lot of pretending.FYI Jimmy Fallon does an OK job in a non-comic role & Mia Suari is excellent as usual.