Set in London, England, good Samaritan Dan Woolf, a struggling writer, takes Alice Ayres, a shady young woman and part-time stripper, to the hospital when shes hit by a car, and they fall in love. One year later, Dan meets photographer Anna Cameron and tries to pick her up, but she rebuffs him. In revenge, Dan sets Anna up for an embarrassing encounter with sex-addicted dermatologist Larry Gray, but the two end up seeing each other. Then another year later, Dan and Anna begin an affair of their own, and relationships between the four collapse. Over the next year, all of them become obsessed with hurting each other and wreak some heavy emotional damage. Will any of them be strong enough to put this destructive sequence of events to a stop?
|Closer Movie(DVD)||Resolution: 720x400 px||Total Size: 990 Mb|
|Closer Movie(HD 720)||Resolution: 1280x688 px||Total Size: 4477 Mb|
|Closer Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x256 px||Total Size: 269 Mb||
|Closer Movie(HD)||Resolution: 852x464 px||Total Size: 571 Mb||
Watching these morally bankrupt characters go about their lives issimilar to, but less interesting than, watching ants in an ant farm.That's how detached from them I felt. But the worst problem is that there is almost no motivation foranything that happens. People say, frequently, "I love YOU now", or "Idon't love you any more. I'm leaving", or "I've been having an affair"and there is almost nothing prior on screen to indicate why. Apparentlythese schizo people just wake up one morning and decide to make majorchanges in their lives for no apparent reason. The only sympathetic, flesh-and-blood, character is played by NataliePortman. There is not a camera angle or pink wig that can make her lookanything less than stunning. There is one scene, not sexual, where sheis in bed with a lover she has just been reunited with, bouncing aroundlike a puppy for joy. In this short scene she goes way beyond thewords, to communicate utter contentment, hope for the future,vulnerability. Her acting was terrific and made the film worthwhile.
Closer is a very emotional film that will move your heart. I really like how the story folds and how the 4 main characters are linked together. And the 4 starts all have amazing performances in the film. It is definately worth watching if you have missed it in the theaters. Then why only 3 stars and not 5?That is because upon reviewing the specs on this DVD release, I am a bit disappointed. Got to say I am a little spoiled by the standards nowadays, that I am expecting some extra behind the scenes stuff, or cast and crew interviews. But this disc provides literally nothing. No bonus features at all! Therefore, if you are looking for a good drama, Close is the one movie you should watch. However, is this DVD worth the bucks? That will depend on what you are expecting on a DVD nowadays. To me, I am going to wait and see if they would come up with another edition before purchasing.
** HERE BE SPOILERS **Recap: Alice (Portman), a stripper and waitress and Dan, a failedwriter, (Law) meet at a crossing, where Alice get hit by a cab. Withjust minor injuries Dan takes her to the hospital and so theirrelationship starts. Later Dan meets Anna (Roberts), while she istaking his photo for his book (based on Alice) and falls for her, whilestill living with Alice. Anna is interested but does not fall for Dan,but for Larry, a dermatologist. But at an art exhibition of Anna'sphotos, including one beautiful of Alice, Dan and Anna meet again andthings start to happen...Comments: A film about love, betrayal, illusions and disillusions, ofhurt and pain and life in general. This movie is beautifully shot andnarrated, using pictures and events as much as words. There are somejumps in the timeline, but not at all confusing. The performance of theactors, which is great all over, in addition to the work of writer anddirector, makes this a movie just as much felt as seen. There arelaughs (much thanks to a witty dialog) and there are sorrows. I guessmost can relate to some scene or another (I sure could) and thereforewe can feel, actually feel what the characters do. Actually a bettertrick than any special effect could do. This was worth every pennyspent, and well worth the time. Recommended.9/10
No its not, this is not close to life at all. At least not to mine. Inever had Natalie Portman bending over my face naked. But thats not whyI didn't like the movie.What kind of characters are these? Jude Law walks around being the'clever' and 'smart' misunderstood author, Julia Roberts is thesensitive artist, King Arthur is the perverted misogynist doctor andNatalie Portman is the stripper. It begins OK, but falls totally flatwhen Julia meets her King in the aquarium. From then on its just onedimensioned nag nag nag shag this orgasm that. For those who think'Million Dollar Baby' has a lot to say about life.
I went to see this movie at my local theater which has only one exitand the tiniest rows imaginable. As luck would have it, I've got thelast seat and therefore was blocked in, lest I make 20 people get up inthe middle of a movie. The experience I was subjected to was takenstraight out of Clockwork Orange - made to watch something atrociousand not being able to leave. I literally hit my head against the wall,it was so bad! Now, the thing about it is that everything exceptcamera-work and the score was bad, really bad - the meaningless plot,the dialogue which vacillated between pretentious (Character X leavingY: What do you mean you love me? Where is your love, can you point toit? What can I do with your sweet words? I don't love you anymore, goodbye) and really dirty sextalk, regurgitated straight out of a badporno. I really think that everyone involved in this project shouldtake out an ad in Variety and apologize to all who had to watch it.This movie makes a bold step in modern art, leaving off where thatgod-awful exhibit at Saatchi gallery left off (Tracy Emin's My Bed),the one where a modern British "artist" put up her dirty, stained bedand called it art. It's a small step for bad art...yeah, just that - asmall step toward crappy and pretentious.
When I went to see Closer last night I wasn't exactly sure what I wasin for. I had read a few reviews and knew it was mostly dialogue andthat the movie could span months and even years in a few scenes. Butthe plot looked unique and I love the actors so I drove the extrathirty miles to Salem, the closest theater that had it playing, with afriend of mine to watch it.I was very impressed. The acting was amazing. I especially lovedNatalie Portman's performance. The scene with her and Clive Owen'scharacter in the strip club was really fun to watch; definitely newterritory for the actress. She is so gorgeous, too! I have known that,of course, but saw it more in this movie. I love the flawless-ness ofher face. (I'm envious!) She did a really good job with her character,and was by far the most intriguing character of the movie. She wasmysterious, had lots of moods, and lied much more than you realize atfirst, even though she really is the only "victim" of the movie.I liked the job Julia Roberts did just because it was so new for her. Ithought that her and Jude had great chemistry and it was nice to seeher break out of her romantic comedy roles. Jude did wonderfully, asalways, although you inevitably hate his character. Clive Owen, whomactually acted in the original play, did a likewise good job at beingvery unlikeable. The plot itself was very unique, and although weird at first, I endedup liking it. Especially on the drive home discussing the movie with myfriend. I really think its a movie you appreciate more as time goes on.It starts out with the meeting of Jude and Natalie's character and thenjumps a year to the next scene where he's written a book using her life(or at least what he thinks his her life) as his inspiration. Here yousee him getting his picture taken by Julia's character and theyinstantly hit it off and start kissing. It's reeling at first, veryhard to believe after just watching him fall for Natalie, but once youget into the pace of the movie you stop thinking about stuff like that.The scenes between the characters are so absorbing and theirconversations so emotionally charged and shocking that you just livefor the moment and the scene in the movie and forget about the factthat you didn't see the relationship lead up to this point.I highly recommend this movie to anyone who is out to see somethingdifferent-as long as they can handle some very sexually explicitlanguage-and anyone who wants to see well-known actors try somethingincredibly new for them...and do a very good job at it.
The movie starts good but later the story sucks."Closer" isn't the kind of film just any audience would enjoy. The filmfeatures complex sexual and relationship themes that might leave someviewers cold. A hollow and disappointing offering from Director.Dialogue is mediocre and contrived. Not grounded in reality.This filmexplores the sexual politics of a metro-sexual elite, it is not agenuine universal exploration of love and the damage it does.The movie shows that the world has life with only betrayal andselfishness and not the true love...In short The movie is 'Awful" I give 1/10 for the movie...........
I am not maybe writing a useful comment for those who didn't see themovie. Its August 2008, the film has been released 4 years ago. I sawit in 2005- and enjoyed it, and I switched on the TV last night and washappy to sit and watch it, again, for the 3rd time actually. And not somany movies that you see again and again and even like them more, themore you watch and older you get.A great film about relationships (love, sex, betrayal, etc). I thinkCloser, together with Eyes Wide Shut are among the very important andgreat movies that deal with relationships, in our time. One is set inNY, the other in London- well, last scene again in NY.The acting is So strong and they all fit together. Little things thatyou appreciate more as you watch again and again. The scene where Aliceand Dan are breaking up, after confessing his affair with Anna. Thisscene is just great. the lines here- and through out the whole movieare just great. Portman delivers a great performance. when she asks himif he brought her to their house, then she says "you are a piece ofsh!t" she is amazing. then when she asks him if he still fancies her.Again the scene where Anna is telling her husband about her affair,where he is asking her how the sex was. so realistic, and so well done.when he asks her if they had sex at their place and where.. then shepauses, swallows, and say "there.." (and I am not a big fan ofRoberts). Clive is great as well. Portman in the room at the stripclub.. her lines and her performance. when she keeps saying Thank You.(and she is adorable as well) the whole cast just fit together and havegreat chemistry that you can't believe that they all actually didn'tfall in love or had crushes on each other. The editing is great, therhythm and pace of the film. Everything just makes you sit and enjoy,and feel respected by the makers of this film. In some weak(e r)movies, the lines are misleading or not making much sense that youdon't buy it at the end of the movie. Here, you finish watching andstart wondering about the characters real emotions, motives, if theyreally did this and that, if they meant so and so.. so much to analyzeand think about. The characters are 3 dimensional. and complex.The film starts with the Line "Hello Stranger" It closes with "Welcomeback Ms Jones"The last scene with Portman- such a beauty- crossing 47th street inManhattan, the lights are-again- red... it all might start overagain..!? Perfection.Thank you. Thank you for your honesty. Now f k off and die, you f k dup slag.
This movie makes the assumption that when beautiful people, who arecomplete strangers, get together, they immediately kiss and fall inlove. It amazes me that so many people comment of the realism of thisfilm. It could not be farther from reality (unless you expand thedefinition to include "Reality" dating shows.) Where do we see thatthese people would ever fall in love with each other? They meet andthen they are all in love. Not one frame of this movie is devoted tothe how or why they fall in love. "You're pretty, I'm pretty" leads tosex not love. We are not even shown when the couples get back together.We have to hear it from the characters mouths. Is that suppose to beexposition? Making up is the low hanging fruit of any love story. Theycouldn't even write this in? A myriad of factors go into falling inlove. Not the least of which is the test of time. This makes writinglove into a movie very difficult, but there are several examples of itbeing done successfully. To call this a "reality based" love storydiscredits films like "Eternal Sunshine" and "When a Man Loves aWoman". Yes, even the sci-fi movie "Eternal Sunshine of the SpotlessMind" does a better job of showing us a true picture of two people inlove than this movie does.The final collection of scenes (especially the hotel scene with Portmanand Law) were pretty good and provided some redemption for the film.However, the final scene with her walking down the street and all theguys' heads turning was really bad. What are we supposed to believethat she is "beautiful" and empowered now? She's Natalie Portman! Whenin this film was she not beautiful? If you want to see thetransformation of a female character from self conscious and meek tostrong and empowered (and therefore beautiful on that merit alone) thenlook to Whoopie Goldberg's character in the Color Purple.
Mike Nichols is one of my favorite directors, a multi-talented geniuswho has never been afraid to work on the edge (quite possibly he cannotwork any other way), and when he delves into the intense Scorpionicwaters of the savagery involved in the vast majority of one-on-onerelationships, you know a profound experience is in store.With Closer, he returns to the Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf format of4 people brutally ravaging one another's psyches. Closer is differentthough, of course, because it takes place over a period of time ratherthan a consecutive amount of days, as Woolf did, and it's a much betterfilm, I believe: over the years, Nichols has managed to hone his innateScorpio talent of restraint, and Closer benefits from thismagnificently. Like Virginia Woolf, it's based on a play, and it doesfeel stagy, but this works FOR the film - the framework of one scenarioafter the other in which time has passed (or regressed, as the case maybe; the film is not entirely linear, which is another brilliant choice)creates the discipline - the illusion of civility - necessary toexhibit the brutal mind games and lethal, obsessive ego-drivenpowerplays that endlessly occur between the 4 characters.I realized over dinner after seeing it last night (my last film of2004!) that Closer is basically an s&m film, without one whip or chainever appearing, and it's an unbelievably violent film, without one headrolling across the screen and without the male characters resorting toduking it out in the streets a la Bridget Jones. I also appreciated howONLY the 4 characters have speaking parts in the movie, and how all 4are very articulate and somewhat self-aware: they sort of know whythey're doing what they're doing, they do understand themselves on somelevel, but they're still helpless to stop their behavior because theiregos are involved, particularly with the 2 men.What they don't understand - or want to understand - is the meaning of'truth', which is essentially a 5th character in the movie: 'truth' isused as a blunt instrument by all 4 of the characters, and ironically,when one of them actually TELLS the truth in a non-hurtful way (it'sAlice, who admits to Larry at one point that her real name is Jane) sheis of course not believed. At the heart of this is the sad truth thatmost of the time, whenever anyone tries to get closer to anybody else,whether the attempt is sincere or otherwise, he or she eventually comesto understand that most people cannot deal with the truth, do not wantto hear it and certainly not from someone they're intimately involvedwith, even if that person is sincere and not using 'truth' as a weapon,and so all relationships wind up being untruthful in one way oranother.Law's Daniel commits what I think is the most mean-spirited act in thefilm, by chatting with Owen's Larry in an internet sex room (in one ofthe edgiest scenes in the film or rather it's tied with the scene inthe strip club between Larry and Natalie Portman's Alice aka Jane - tooprovocative to even begin to describe, where the power shifts back andforth like in an especially well-matched chess game). In the chat roomscene, Dan poses as Anna (Julia Roberts, who has never looked morehuman or been presented more effectively as seen through fellow-ScorpioNichols' probing lens), but then he takes the chat one step further bytelling Larry to meet 'her' at the aquarium, where he knows Anna goesall the time. Larry goes and Anna's there and Larry makes a major foolof himself, and he doesn't forget it - he gets his revenge indirectlythrough Anna and then directly, in the film's most brutal verbalconfrontation between him and Daniel, later on.It also wasn't lost on this viewer how ironic the characters'professions in the film are: Anna is a photographer - she takespictures of strangers, hoping to show their humanity but in realityshe's using them because she doesn't really seem to be learninganything from her work. Alice is a stripper, which she digs because ofthe obvious power trip involved. Dan is a writer of obituaries by dayand a fiction writer the rest of the time - he admits early on to Alicethat his obits are all resplendent with euphemisms (i.e.: "'he enjoyedhis privacy' means he was a raving queen", like that), and his fictionis apparently sex-driven accounts of his relationships; he's in essenceusing his partners as fodder for said fiction. Larry is a doctor,specifically a dermatologist: skin - superficial layers that get deeperas they are revealed. He has one of the best lines in the piece, whichoccurs during the final confrontation between the men, where Dan iswhining about 'the heart' and Larry shoots back, "have you ever seen ahuman heart? It looks like a fist covered in blood", words to thateffect - not the most subtle imagery, but in context it speaks volumes.My IMDb rating: 10 (****)
Breathtakingly cruel and quietly devastating, Mike Nichols' adaptation of Patrick Marber's acclaimed play peers beneath the sheets as two couples wrestle with their own self-destructive impulses.
Jude Law gives another strong performance in an otherwise turgid pieceof artless ham. Patrick Marber's script contains the sort of 'state ofthe nation' drivel which was popular amongst literary types in thenineties. It has not aged well. An excruciating piece of Brit-flick'product', mistaking profundity for profanity, heavy on histrionics andsexual confrontation; an egregious and deeply unconvincing portrait ofa London which does not exist outside of the shallow self-referentialimagination of the enormously smug Marber. The judgement of thepicture's stars must now forever be held in doubt. Jude Law manages toinject some charm and amiability into a role which appears designedsolely to humiliate him. Clive Owen (disappointing since Croupier) is asort of uber-Nic Cage, but overplays the machismo of his stock-in-tradeto the near brink of comedy. Natalie Portman is faintly disturbing asthe barely legal pole dancer and American enigma. The film is saved bythe music of Damien Rice, which provides the first and last scenes withan emotional integrity otherwise entirely absent. But the decision touse The Smiths' How Soon Is Now as the elevator accompaniment to Cliveand Natalie's strip club showdown will provoke righteous indignationamongst Morrissey fans. The lyrics are much, much better than the linesthe actors are paid to recite.
The dialogue is often lacerating, as lovers wield words like lashes, striking out to get what they desire.
To quote the haunting Damien Rice song that bookends the film, you can't take your eyes off of it.
I was surprised to see this incredible movie snubbed at the Oscars fora couple of awards, bit I digress.Not often is it that the public gets a chance to see a movie with suchrelevance, such beauty and insight, such genius dialogue masterfullyportrayed by some amazing actors.The story focuses on 4 individuals in London who are in love with theidea of love. Though their individual dependence on one another bringsthem closer, their insecurity breaks them apart. Anna (Julia Roberts),Alice (Natalie Portman), Dan (Jude Law), and Larry (Clive Owen) eachlust for strangers, thus having jobs that usually brings strangers'closer.' To borrow a tag-line from the movie, "If you believe inlove... Take a closer look," this film sucks you into a non-existingworld that so closely both reflects and fictionalizes our society.Though some may say it lacks any realism, anyone who's lived in a largecity on their own knows that the film pays homage and respect to theirexperience.Brilliantly captured by one of the best directors of all time, MikeNichols, it presents true messages and themes of passion, anger,jealousy, and of course love.If you have never seen this movie I suggest you pick up a copyimmediately. And hey, if you've seen it once already, see it again, Iguarantee you'll pick up stuff you couldn't the first time you viewedit. The complex screenplay is worth examining thoroughly.Definitely one of the best movies of all time. Ten stars!
CLoser is an amazing story, told in a beautiful context. The actors, were supurb, especailly Natlie Portman and Jude Law. This is the kind of movie, where if you turn away for a second, to go to the bathroom, your gonna be lost. You need to pay attention. It's also not a kid's movie, though it does not really show anything, it does say quite alot of mature things. It's a complicated, twisted, sad story, but also very, true to life. I mean when has a realtionship ever really been simple? The way they portrayed this movie, I loved. The opening sequence, WOW! It toally blew me away. Another great thing, is there's nothing to distract you from the story, in this movie. There's no background music, all there is, is the raw emotion, of the characters. The only music, is at the opening sequence and closing sequence. Same song at both. I think that is a very smart idea. The story follows, 4 characters. Dan (Jude Law), Alice (Nataile Portman), Anna (Julia Roberts), and Larry (Clive Owen). It shows how connected, and twisted they all become, over the course of time. Really, it's amazing how connected these people, wether they know it or not. It's sickenly twisted, but not enough so you can't help but want to see nore. From, one meeting, between Dan and Anna, it changes all of them, forever. It shows every angle of a relationship, that has been torn apart by infidelity. From the cheater, to the cheated-on, and then how they can switch rolls, without a thought of how it made them feel. In the end no one, is really left happy. It has some excellent acting. And it really makes you think about your own relationships, and what they will become/are, and what is love really?I highly recomend it to anyone, who enjoys a good thoughtful drama, with some twisted situations, and raw human emotion.
What an amazing concept. A story that perfectly captures the emotionsthat we feel when involved in a love spat. The complete desire and needfor another person, wanting to hold them close to you, while at thesame point in time the mere vision of seeing that person and hearingtheir voice sends you into utter misery and you feel repulsed by them.Jude Law is masterful in his role, and he is matched equally by theperformances of Clive Owen, Natalie Portman and Julia Roberts. Abrilliant movie with many mixed emotions. As soon as you think, okay,this is where they live happily ever after, another twisting taleoccurs. This is as real as it gets folks. Definitely one worthpurchasing when it hits DVD, apart from that, watch it on big screenand you will be amazed at how you relate to this master piece.
... but then I saw this one. Absolutely void of any reason or meaning!On technical aspects the movie might be okay, but it's booooring andextremely repetitive: the author repeats the same sad story over andover again through each of the 4 characters. 1 character with a longmonologue would have sufficed, thank you.The person who wrote this story and all of those who can identifythemselves with this movie should consult a shrink / sexologistsurgently, because they must have one hell of a problem on therelational side. I truly feel sorry for them.As for the cultural value of this movie... I would have given it anabsolute 0, but the ranking system only allows for 1 and up... In myopinion it's an absolute waste of resources...It's definitely the worst movie I ever saw...
I just saw this movie last night, after hearing a lot about it, and Ididn't really like it. It failed both as entertainment, and as art.It's not a love/hate response like some reviewers seem to be implying,it was just boring. Normally, for a movie this boring, I wouldn't wastemy time writing a review, but I figured since so many people are ravingabout it, and that influenced my decision to see it, I'd warn othersbefore they watched it.I wasn't put off by the vulgar language, or the frankness about sex. Ijust didn't find the movie engaging. I already knew from a review Iheard on the radio that none of the characters were going to belikable, so I was prepared for that and it didn't put me off. But ifthe purpose of art is supposed to be to evoke an emotional response,this movie failed. It's about four dislikable people, doing what you'dexpect them to do. There's no sympathy towards the characters when theyget screwed, because you don't like them to begin with, and no angerabout what they're doing to the other characters, because the othercharacters are just as bad. So, it just ends up being a rather blandmovie from the point of view of emotional response from the audience.So, I wouldn't ever buy this movie, or take the time to watch it again,but that being said, not everything about this movie was awful. I thinkthe actors and actresses did well acting their parts, there were a fewhumorous moments where me and my wife laughed, and (to completely loseall credibility of this review) Natalie Portman was easy on the eyes.But after watching this movie, I really just didn't like it. However,it seems that many people do, so if you like relationship movies aboutcharacters you don't like, where everybody gets what they deserve, andnobody ends up happy, go ahead and watch this movie.
The entire movie hinges on that one high-voltage altercation betweenAnna and Larry. While the first half of the movie is just a build-up tothis word flinging extravaganza , the rest of it just a cheap attemptat making whores out of the characters . Reality ? What reality ?Swapping partners at Cupid's every unpredictable turn ? or Border-LinePersonality Disorder ? The movie's nothing too great. I wouldn't botherwith these lines if it wasn't for the rating that this movie hasmanaged to garner. God! How did the quartet of recklessly sketchedcharacters manage to populate 100 whole minutes before the creditsdecided to show up ? Natalie Portman's performance however, is outstanding. The rest of thecast too have turned out decent performances. The movie does have avery mature soundtrack which is probably the savior lobbying her intothe 7-7.5 range . Apart from this , the movie can offer you some clevermentions of the "F" word . Overall, it's just "Zebra Lounge" where theamoral sleaze has an honest purpose called Love.This movie is strictly not suitable to watch with your parents. Apartfrom that I am guessing a present day 16 year old has handled moreoffensive language than this movie does offer.