Moulin Rouge!

Moulin Rouge!-1080P

Moulin Rouge!-720P

Moulin Rouge!-360P

Moulin Rouge!-480P

Absolute trash. No originality. A pure cynical exercise by Hollywood to make as much money as possible with gross manipulations & boring visual effects & a non-existent script & third rate songs which are 80-100 years before their time. I give this one 1/4 out of 10 at best. Baz must be the most overrated director in movie history.

Luhrmann's flamboyant musical 'Moulin Rouge' is a combination of Camille, La Bohème and Showgirls... The film swings easily between present and past, among so many wildly different moods: farce, tragedy, romance, satire, comedy and rock and roll... 'Moulin Rouge' is an assault on the senses, a non stop visual explosion, an exotic trip, and a love story that is sure to touch your heart... It is a gloriously cinematic spectacle with opulent imagery directed with an eye for rich color, especially the color of rouge... It is also a breathtaking and poignant piece of cinema, a disco of dreams, a crazy and daring show, a vibrant screen fantasy, a "Bohemian Revolution," a magical movie for those who love romance, pop music and old musical movies... Nicole Kidman gives the film its soul... She is the "sparkling diamond" of the show, the toast of Paris, the city's top courtesan... She melts her characterization with a sizzling, yet tender, performance... She is undeniably sexy, a beautiful singer, a flashy dancer whose heart sings whenever she sees Christian... In many ways, she is drawn as the ultimate sex goddess, as enigmatic as Greta Garbo, and her glamor masks her pain as well as her happiness... Kidman gives the film its central erotic charge, and its romantic thrills... She sways on a flying trapeze belting out Marilyn Monroe's "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend," and Madonna's "Material Girl." Ewan McGregor achieves a nice mix of optimism and desperation, emphasizing the sincerity of the love-struck poet-hero... Christian is a young idealist who moves to the bohemian section of Paris during the 'summer of love' of 1899... He is hired to write a show about 'truth, beauty, freedom and, most of all, love.' Christian battles for the body and soul of the ravishing Satine... His fundamental believe is 'the greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and to be loved in return John Leguizamo is vulnerable and sweet as Henri de Toulouse Lautrec needing a good writer to come up with story and lyrics for his new show called "Spectacular Spectacular." Jim Broadbent is wonderfully comic as the ringmaster Harold Zidler... He is a jovial impresario who peddles the charms of a successful Satine to a mesmerized public... He is the owner of the infamous nightclub who has promised Satine to the evil Duke of Monroth... He has his eye on her too... Richard Roxburgh is odious as the jealous benefactor obsessed with Satine to the point of murder... He is stunningly arrogant wanting the gorgeous can-can chanteuse in an "exclusive contract." Luhrmann combines 1900 Can Can burlesque with modern musical poetry, exploiting Kidman's grace and beauty and overwhelming the audience with frenetic dance numbers delivered in operatic-style... Like Orson Welles, Luhrmann loves the technical magic of movies... When a red curtain opens, an orchestra conductor emerges to direct the unmistakable '20th Century Fox' theme opening, we immediately realize we're in for something really magical: A spectacular costume revue, an eye-catching fin de siècle exuberance, an inspiring rebirth of the movie musical...

I got this movie on DVD for Christmas from my older brother Paul, who basically doesn't understand me and never will. He more or less told me: 'I saw this with my girlfriend and we both agreed it was kinetic, it was energetic, it was musical and superficial. We immediately thought of you…' After seeing this atrocity, I have to seriously reconsider the image I project to my somewhat conservative family. "Moulin Rouge!" is the kind of film that makes you really consider with a jaundiced eye the sorry state of contemporary mass culture with desperate questions like 'Have we sunk so low?', 'Can we possibly survive?' and 'Don't we all deserve to die from shame for having had anything to do with the kind of society that can produce such a film and call it art?' I know it was produced by Australians and we should all cut them some slack for their relative lack of sophistication. I know Ms. Kidman gives a truly surprising performance as a dancer-singer (I thought she had no other talent than a certain ability to manipulate the media, which she shared with or possibly learned from her husband Tom Cruise) and I know it is probably supposed not to be taken at face value. But I can't forgive its pompousness, its grandiosity, its masquerading as something important while being such a patchwork of second-hand elements. It is supposed to infuse the viewer with the charm and cultural significance of turn-of-the-century Paris while paying homage to every French romantic creation from 'The Lady of the camelias' and 'Scènes de la vie de bohème' onward. Yet, the only spoken French words in the whole show are 'Voulez-vous coucher avec moi?' from the Patti Labelle 'Lady Marmalade' song, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Paris, Romanticism or French culture. The plot is a distillation of every melodrama ever written down to its bare bones: Poor poet loves girl; girl belongs to rich man; girl spits out her lungs. And this is supposed to be funny? It's anachronistic, turgid, necrophiliac and excessive. It's a movie for people who think synchronized swimming is a life-affirming art. It's what Ren said to Stimpy about cartoons: 'They're only puppets and they'll rot your brains!' It's supposed to make you want to get up and dance. It only made me wish I knew someone intellectually-challenged enough to accept this DVD as a worthwhile gift. The truth about this movie is that it's one big monumental camp that was conceived for people who have no grasp of history, of the world they live in, of their own identity, of their own cultural heritage and who like dressing up in mother's mesh stockings and inventing stories in front of the mirror when there's no one around. It's really meant to bring out the secret drag queen in every viewer. Trouble is I never nurtured my inner drag queen. And I can only see this movie for what it really is: a desperate attempt at meaning from feeble minds and, now that Oscar time is approaching, a desperate grasp for Academy members' attention and the supplementary mazzoola that Oscar's prestige can still confer on this undercooked, overripe tripe. "Moulin Rouge!" - the exclamation point is meant to express revulsion - is to movie musicals what "Family Guy" is to TV sitcoms: a cheap gimmick for retards, a cheat and an easy way out.

When will people figure out that you can't compensate for a lack of TALENT with glitz and glamour. Shaking the camera, inserting quick cuts and using over-the-top sets and costumes may distract some people from this atrocity, but some of us are insightful enough to recognize crap when we see it. This is absolutely the worse editing I think I've ever seen. (The fact that it was nominated for an academy award made me rethink every thought I've ever had. I'm afraid to leave the house now, because I think that was a sign of the coming apocolypse.) The cuts are far to quick and it seems to have arbitrary cutaways thrown in that make no sense whatsoever. It was impossible to follow, because there isn't a single shot in this movie that lasts longer than 2.5 seconds. All flashy cuts do is confuse the viewer. They aren't "hip" or "cool" or "innovative", they're just plain ridiculous (believe me, I know what I'm talking about. I'm a professional editor.) The whole idea of editing is to cut the film together into a coherent story so the viewer can enjoy it-and this film failed miserably. All it did was give me a headache. To be fair, the editor is a very skilled editor who probably was just doing her best with what that no-talent hack of a director gave her. I have to believe the A.D.D. style of cutting was his vision, not hers. Check out Road to Perdition or Elizabeth to see her true skills. What was with the gratuitous slow-motion? Every other shot was in slo-mo for apparantly no reason at all. The singing made me want to sharpen a pencil and shove it directly into my ear. Seeing a fat man singing "Like a Virgin" is going to cost me years of therapy and lots of sleepless nights. Kurt Cobain is turning over in his grave, and if I ever hear "Your Song" by Elton John again, I may set myself on fire to distract me from the pain. ...THE MOON SINGS! What the f**K? Not to mention, the story was awful. This was a just a very superficial depiction of love. The story is what holds a film together. No matter how pretty you make it, without a good story, it's just a complete waste of time. I shudder to think of some potentially great movie that didn't get made because this piece of crap did. I was EMBARRASSED to watch this movie, and I was alone when I watched it, so figure that out. If you are planning on watching it, might I suggest taking an entire bottle of Vicodin beforehand- 'cause it's gonna hurt.

In a way, Moulin Rouge typifies everything that's wrong with American cinema by bastardizing everything that's right with its European counterpart. Visually, the movie is a great reference for any commercial or video director. But unlike a music video that lasts only three minutes, Moulin Rouge begins with a visual volume worthy of Spinal Tap and tries to sustain it for 120 minutes. It doesn't work. The rule of dynamics applies as much to a pretentious musical as it does to an ambitious action film. If the volume is too loud, you simply can't hear anything. Everything gets lost in Moulin Rouge's hurricane of desperate art direction and production design. The film's leads, talented actors though they may be, simply aren't charismatic enough to compete. The movie requires posturing, not acting. And, frankly, there are no less charismatic actors than Ewan McGregor and Nicole Kidman. In fact, their appeal is in their pastiness, not in their screen presence. What's more, the music can't compete either. Great songs are dwarfed by the never-ending onslaught of CGI visuals, which, after a while, become tedious. We get it, already. The moral of this story is that you still need one to make a good movie. Nothing can replace pen and paper. Unglamorous though it may be, a good script is everything. The filmmaker's previous effort with Romeo And Juliet worked precisely because he had a great script to begin with. The production design was icing on the cake. With Moulin Rouge, icing is all there is, and a satisfying meal it does not make.

Gag me with a giant MTV spoon! This was like watching MTV for 3 hours without a break. If you like that sort of thing then go see this movie. If however you like movies to have an interesting plot, authentic acting, characters you can care about and a camera that stays still for a few seconds at least, then save your money. Nicole looks good but the sex-appeal is just not there. The music is silly. I felt sorry for the actors. The supporting cast is forced to do the worst acting of their lives. The whole thing is just an expensive failure in film making.