The Forbidden Room

source: The Forbidden Room

Of time. Life is too short. Vomit emoji. For some reason I have to say more because my review was too short. And this movie continues to waste my time

It is impossible to talk about the movie without mentioning the ongoing project Seances dot nfb dot ca. What can you say... It's Guy Madding, Evan Johnson and Galen Johnson, so expect to be in a trance for two hours. The amazing soundtrack will put anyone to sleep (which is not a bad thing!). I tend to disagree with some viewers when they comment that the movie is "non-linear". I find it to be absolutely linear, with it's nested stories driving you towards a path that is much like a dream, if you could actually recall one. A story within a story, within a story... But its absolutely perfectly structured, with a beginning middle and end for each story. I recommend watching multiple times, preferably in bed just before going to sleep. You'll realize that all the judder from your mind is silenced, and the movie will carry you to your own forbidden room.

About as far removed from a conventional narrative as possible, this highly experimental movie from Guy Maddin juggles a raft of plots with subjects as diverse as bathing habits, doppelganger theory, deep sea mysteries and a doctor whose obsession with bones interferes with his work. Even more bizarre than Maddin's rather random jumping between plots, however, is the visual style he brings to the project with black and white and tinted sequences, silent movie style title cards, deteriorating stock footage and the list goes on. The film has a found footage feel to it -- think Craig Baldwin's pseudo-documentaries and you will know what to expect -- however by providing no logic to the flipping in and out of stories, Maddin does not manage to spin an experimental movie half as enticing as Baldwin's seminal works. To call the film 'uneven' would be a massive understatement. At its best, 'The Forbidden Room' is laugh-out-loud funny - with Louis Negin offering a very funny take on 1950s basic hygiene movies - and memorable - with a catchy song about derrieres. These high points are very few and far between though and the majority of the movie is too convoluted to generate laughs with characters so paper thin that they are simply not interesting to follow around. With its uncanny visuals, daringness to be different and hilarious odd bits, 'The Forbidden Room' is not a film that should be dismissed altogether. It takes a lot of patience though to get through. There is reason why experiment movies usually are not as long as this effort is.

I see what Madden was going for--a kind of tribute to the old-school adventure films of the early 1900s, but whatever he had in mind is ultimately lost in interwoven excess of choppy editing that would make David Fincher blush. Every inch of the films is sliced to bits and stitched through various quotes and distorted images that bleed together from scene to scene. The production design is low budget though accurate for what the director is going for and the cinematography contains some lovely shots that feel like they belong in a movie 80 years ago, but the camera is shaky on a Greengrass level that--coupled with the fragmented editing--makes it hard to even look at the screen. It is as though the director set up everything to be vintage and then decided to film it like a 21st century spy thriller. The final straw is the music--a blaring array of organs and orchestras that teeter in and out of tone and are as choppy and unpleasant as the rest of the film. I don't understand how this could have been shown to people in it's current form nonetheless how it was shown to critics and met with applause--it has a certified fresh rating on RT and is in the top 100 of 2015. "The Forbidden Room" is like a big practical joke perpetrated by all of critical media to get interested film buffs to sit through the movie equivalent of pouring battery acid in your eyes while listening to a group of Chimpanzees screw.

It's the kind of film that art house film students dream of. In fact visually it looks very much like an art house film students dream! There's text all over the screen, bits of narration and a truly bizarre story. It's pretty original, it's funny (I think intentionally) and it's nuts. Totally nuts!! Sadly a bit too nuts, good but not great. It sometimes feels like a silent film, with words appearing to help the narrative... but with sound. Some of it struggles and needs some patience, but by enlarge it's fantastic, in every sense of the word. The screen pulses and throbs with energy, it's beautifully crafted. Stories intermingle, twist, plots within plots, within dreams. My one criticism is it's too long, not by a lot, but it would benefit from losing a good 20 minutes. A minor quibble.

This film is not entertainment. It is so strange, I find it psychotic. Nothing in it, or the multitude of sub-stories strung together from beginning to end, have meaning. No characters are likable, comprehensive or sane. I purchased this film based upon reviews as a "masterpiece". They lied.

In fairness, this sounds like quite a good idea on paper. A bunch of lost movies from the silent era have been put on film by using old reviews as building blocks. What's more, the idea of visually representing this material by way reproducing the look of old film stock and silent movie techniques seems like a pretty good one. But what it ultimately comes down to is that old adage that some ideas sound far better on paper than they are in practise. At the outset I was pretty much on board with this one and appreciating the visual ideas and general oddness of the content but after half an hour or so I was basically struggling. The visual style, while well done, is basically so relentless that it becomes increasingly difficult keeping your mind on any of the content. So much so that for the most part of this I was staring at it as you would wallpaper. Pretty wallpaper admittedly but staring at a wall for extended periods is hard going and ultimately a somewhat mind-numbing endeavour. I don't think there is any point summarising the plot. I cannot see what good that could possibly achieve. But suffice to say that that the material is dealt with in a part surrealist, part absurdist manner. There is even a few interesting actors involved in this as well but they are pretty much lost is the mix also. As I said earlier there is an interesting visual aesthetic at play here and the concept has potential as an idea but, despite all this, I found this to be a thoroughly unengaging experience. It felt way too long clocking in at two hours as well and, in the final analysis, I more or less hated watching this interminable film.

Despite having seen him mentioned a number of times,I've never found a good "entry point" to start with looking at the work of film maker Guy Maddin.Getting the wonderful chance to host an event on IMDb's Film Festival board,I was intrigued to find that a Maddin title had been nominated for viewing,which led to me stepping into the forbidden room. The outline of the movie: The film is based around short unrelated sketches that merge into each other with barely any connection. One of the stories involves a submarine crew eating flapjacks in order to get extra air from the air holes,who are left breathless,when a mysterious woodsmen is found in a dock,who has no idea how he got there. View on the film: Based on "lost" films which Maddin believed would only be seen if he made re-made them himself,Maddin and editor John Gurdebeke work closely together to unleash a rupturing nightmare atmosphere. Washing the screen in volcanic reds,Maddin & Gurdebeke blend the titles in a rugged manner,where the acid reds screech between each changing "dream/nightmare." Inspired by reviews of films which are believed lost,the screenplay by Maddin/Evan Johnson/ Robert Kotyk/John Ashbery and Kim Morgan aim for a dream-logic anthology,spanning disconnected stories which fade in/out at regular intervals. Despite this approach keeping the films focus constantly changing,it also causes the flick to get stuck in a surprisingly sluggish dead-end,due to there being no attempt to give any character the vaguest impression,and the writers giving the recurring stories no feeling of purpose over there return,in a forbidden room that should remain locked.

I admire the film making and the art direction for The Forbidden Room, but while it initially dazzles, it quickly becomes rather tedious. There is no real payoff for the effort it takes to sit through it, and it does take some effort. The most entertaining part for me is the opening titles. The only movie I can compare it to is Stalker, and it isn't a fair comparison. While both share the washed-out, sepia tone Lynch-like visual style, Stalker has a discernible plot beyond just its style. I'd love to intellectualize the film and say it has deeper meaning, but outside of the art direction and distressed film look, after sitting through it I've decided there is just no "there" there.