Genres

Visitors Review

howard4309 2012-05-20 19:40:55

Stealing lines from other films does not make for a good film

This movie was a total waste of film. Why would the director think theaudience would enjoy seeing someone sitting on a commode taking a crapand then wiping themselves. Ralph Fiennes and Donald Sutherland are twoaccomplished actors and should have thought twice before having theirgood reputation connected with this drivel. One part of the emperor'sdialog, during his trial, was taken from the movie "Gladiator" andshould have never been used. I rented this movie from my local videostore with no prior knowledge about it's content. Sometimes I amfortunate in renting what I a call a sleeper. In the case of this movieI feel I wasted gas money and the price of the rental,

Sam Munshani 2012-05-20 07:57:48

A Society of Anarchy

Robert Edwards is an extremely imaginative individual and very in touchwith the psyche of his characters and transcends that quality very wellin this production. The title of the Film being so appropriate to thelives and societies we live in today referencing how clueless mostpeople are when it comes to Government Bodies and Regulations thatdictate both Internal and Foreign Policy.Land of the Blind is an exceptionally good account of how a societyformed by anarchy and terrorism could exist. Many films of this genredon't seem to be getting old due to the high level of intrigue in ourpolitical systems today.

2012-05-19 18:33:03

You get what you pay for

I picked this up for $ 2 in a bargain bin at Blockbuster--but it's actually worth much less than that. I've love Donald Sutherland since "Klute", and Fiennes since "Schindler's List"s but this is clearly one of those films actors do before or after they do a "Scooby Doo" film for big bucks. Tedius, hard to follow, full of metaphors I didn't get. I'm a "cave man" when it comes to movies I guess. When I saw the cover with Ralph Fiennes in what appeared to be French Foreign Legion uniform I thought he was going in as a spy to one of France's Colonies to assisinate someone. The joke was on me!

edwagreen 2012-05-19 01:49:21

Land of the Blind- Cuba Si, Yanqui and this Picture, No!!! *

Just one step below awful. It's basically a satire on the idea thatwhen a revolution comes to a country, the new leaders may turn out tobe just as bad if not worse than those they usurped power from.The scenery and mood make this picture very dull. It is as if it hasbeen shot circa 1927 when the film industry was just finding sound.Ralph Fiennes gives his all but the writing is so convoluted as well asdull. Ditto for Donald Sutherland. Note how a writer eventually attainspower and becomes worse than his predecessor.Which beast of history does the wife of the first dictator represent?She is supposed to represent the idea that there is a woman behindevery man. Conniving and vicious, she meets her her just end. Note how the film emphasizes the idea the violence begets moreviolence. All of our dictators die through assassination.

emuir-1 2012-05-10 02:42:06

Something a little different

Most reviewers have already noted the similarity to Brazil, Animal Farmand 1984, which struck me right away. A dictator is overthrown in apopular uprising, only to become a dictator himself. I enjoyed thecontrast between the opulent lifestyle of Maximilian II and the squalidprison where Thorne the dissident writer was being held. DonaldSutherland plays the writer, looking for all the world like Karl Marx.The scenes of the saccharine TV anchors playing verbal ping pong werejust priceless and right on the mark. Tom Hollander, who previouslyplayed Kim Philby in "Cambridge Spies" was superb in the role ofMaximilian.My only gripe is that I had the impression that this would have been agood film if I had been able to hear it rather than just watch.Unfortunately, I saw this film on DVD, and there were no closecaptions. This is incredible! As a hearing impaired person I need thecaptions to know what they are saying, otherwise, by the time I havefigured it out, I have missed a few sentences. With a detailed plot itis essential to be able to follow the dialog.

2012-05-09 11:26:58

Depressing Political Satire

I just wanted to pass on the information that this film while it tells the all to true story of how dictators works, it is a real downer that drags on and on. Our hero was stupid, he was to idealistic and should have gone with the flow. END OF THE STORY.

ifheringa 2012-05-05 16:19:28

There are certain rules a film needs to obey!

I wont devote too much time to reviewing this film for the followingreason:There's nothing wrong with a political message if you respect themedium that's being used to express it.This film has bad cinematography, bad directing, bad lighting, veryaverage music, a bad pace , bad dialogue, and none devoted actors...What are Fiennes and Sutherland doing in this film?Robert Edwards may be a more intellectual type than Uwe Boll but hisdirecting and writing skills are of no higher standard.Please Edwards, do better next time or make use of other mediums foryour idea's. I don't however believe you'd be very successful with sucha horrible movie on your resume.

2012-05-05 03:08:14

From rags to a hero and back

Unlike "Kiss of the spider woman" [...] this movie provides inside into the makers of history, where deception, personal gist for power and by-date imminent interest rule. Due to an accustomed trend of contemporary show- bestsellers, creators deploy sexual fantasies game and dominantress to memorize a dramatic eclipse of a story where a way from rags to a hero and back lasted about a quarter of century, blood, tortures and murders follow. Nice performance, beautiful cast and intrigue depicted simplistically, and a "naïve soldier" Joe does not look like a young recruit at all.This dramatic story is of a very gloomy vogue final.

Nullness 2012-05-02 10:53:00

Too Clever By Half

The Land of the Blind is a rather decent first movie and script, yet ithas many glaring faults, the most obvious one simply being it doesn'tknow where it wants to go halfway through. One gets the impression thatif the creator had it his way, the film would be two hours longer.The first hour of the movie is more or less superb. Especially craftyare the news broadcasts (reminiscent of the forced lightheartedness ofJapanese television) that include advertisements of products. The newssegments are irreverent, silly lampoonery, and could have easily beensituated in Mike Judge's Idiocracy world- yet somehow, unbelievably,the news segments and other over-the-top lampoons are never taken forbeing quite as idiotic as they could be, which I think is a greattestament to the overall serious tone the movie holds. Like Catch-22,the more absurd moments in the first half of the movie might make uslaugh, but if they do it is at our own expense.Yet after Joe's fateful decision, and the changing of the guard, themovie diddles and pops out of cohesiveness and all but loses itsfooting. The difficulty the creators of this film face is fierce: howdo they show things haven't changed while changing things enough sowe're not bored? Their answer is a muddy montage of images that take usmore out of reality and into a confusing state that lacks any emotionaleffect. No new insight that hasn't been told by the simplest moralityUtopian tale is offered; the last quarter of the movie seems like thebeginning of Papillon.And indeed, where once the satirical elements of the first half wereinspiring, now they become grating. It becomes sadly obvious that Joeand Donald Sutherland are the only characters in the film's world withany semblance of intelligence or free will; everyone else is mere blindsheep, ciphers, straw men. The serious satirical tone the film masteredin the first half fizzles into parody, a Green Acres squalor offamiliar set pieces and situations. The movie's credibility is totallylost. The Land of The Blind is a satirical place, and its inhabitantsaren't to be taken as anything more than straw men, but by the secondhalf the pathos and music montages and fancy CG cuts are sprinkled alittle too graciously to spice the film up, and the viewer's patienceand involvement with any sort of parallel reality wears too thin.I enjoyed the settings, and how they were filmed. All the acting wasbrilliant, especially Junior as the Vista Street-directing littletyrant and Donald Sutherland as the complicated revolutionary. EvenRalph Fiennes (who I've always though looks a little bit like Mrs.Doubtfire) was in top form. But I did not like the puzzlement aspect ofsome things. Too many puzzle and references may make the audience feelsmart, but ultimately they are a magic trick, hiding the lack oforiginal content. And ultimately there is nothing very original aboutLand of the Blind, and there will be little consequence to its lack offanfare.

2012-05-02 03:56:21

quite brilliant but ham handed

This is an almost brilliant film, close in greatness to Brazil but misses the makr because of its ham handed idiotic references to current 'terrorist' lingo, which makes it not a timely classic, so it fails becuase it will not play well in ten years, the verbage used in the film will be lost. However there is brilliance here. A mosaic of time periods and dictators, this film references many things, Franco, monks burning themselves, political prisoners, the war on terror, bin Laden, France's war in algeria, Nixon, and even a little known or recalled story of a vietnam POW who blinked morse code on TV. In addition it even references Pol Pot and Kim Jung Il. This political satire and dark comedy is fascinating in its ability to portray dictatorship, but its use of American uniforms, those used in the war in Iraq, on soldiers shooting civilians is gratuitousa and degrading. Making fun of Pol Pot is one thing, comparing genocide to current U.S policy is sad and too easily.Set in a fictional country it stars Ralph Fiennes and Donald Sutherland, who deliver great performances. It sourounds a child dictator-director, his tarror card reading wife(ala Noriega) a prison guard turned collaborator with a celebrated terrorist-philosopher. A must see film, brilliant but has some real tragic drawbacks.Seth J. Frantzman

jjmfe 2012-04-29 22:57:45

Disappointment with "Land of the Blind"

I was very disappointed in this film. The story and the point of theauthor is presented in a heavy-handed, and cliché manner. The author'shyperbole denies the possibility of balance. He argues against change,and allows that only extremes in the swing of the pendulum of socialchange are possible. He makes his point unapologetically withoutsubtlety.His indelicate way of making this point is a little like writing into astory too many soliloquies to describing the feelings of the principalcharacters without just showing those things, and letting the audiencefigure it out. He over tells his story. He's taken too big a picture intoo short a span of time, and indelicately made his transitions. Thefilmmaker says to his audience, "I'm not a good enough filmmaker tomake my point subtly, or you're is just too stupid to get my pointunless I explicitly tell you.Its good casting, they're good actors but Sutherland plays his part alittle too smug too self-righteous to be believable, rather like histhief in the "Italian Job." Not the best work in either place of anormally good actor. The characters are waterfront artist'scaricatures.Whose story is he telling? Is it Cuba, South Africa, Haiti, WW2Germany, or Romania? He's hyperbolized elements of all those placesinto one. The story could have been very good, and a more effectivepolitical statement with a lot less. It tries to hard, and fails to bean effective vehicle as a political statement, or a good story. Skipthis movie. Don't waste your time or money.

tomnewsom 2012-04-29 06:41:05

Highly Enjoyable and Unique

I saw an almost finished cut of this film at the Human Rights Watchfilm festival, London last night. I'm not a fan of writing, so I'llkeep this short.This is a film about power, revolution, loyalty and sanity. It is setin a fictional country in a semi-fictional world at an unspecifiedtime. The 'President for Life' has died and left his son as successor.A political prisoner (Sutherland) encourages rebellion from his cell,and strikes up a relationship with a guard (Fienes). The relationshipsbetween these three characters drive the film on to its soberingconclusion. We get very strong performances from the two big leads, asyou would expect. Expect to see many familiar faces from British TV andfilm in support roles as well.If anything is wrong with the film, it could be said that it'sderivative. There are strong threads of 1984 woven into the whole story(including a 'room 101' of sorts). There are also occasionalmis-matches of comedy. Most of the film has a very black sense ofhumour, but there are a handful of farcical or throwaway jokes thatseem out of kilter.Despite these minor flaws, I highly recommend this film. Seeing as thecut I saw was not quite complete (timecode in places, archival footagewith Gettty watermarks and the odd digital artifact), there may be somechanges before general release.

rhodawalk 2012-04-29 05:29:49

Wow!!!

Never heard of the movie but when I saw that Ralph Fiennes and DonaldSoutherland were in it I brought it home. To say the least it isBizarre, compelling, thought provoking, and comical at times. It is nota movie that you watch and a hour later you forget you ever saw it.There is much truth to this film as we see looking back into historyand in the presence. In my youth when I read Animal Farm by GeorgeOrwell I thought it strange. We know that this story is being repeatedconstantly all around the globe and it is good to have it as areminder. Unfortunately I do not think the word has gotten out to thepublic about this film.

Gordon-11 2012-04-28 18:05:24

Stylish and artistic

This film is about a prison guard siding with a political prisoner in afictional country. The prison guard helps overthrow the government,only to find out that the new president is a worse dictator.The story was a bit slow to start with, but it becomes mesmerisingsoon. The political tones in the film cannot be underestimated. Thefilmmakers are careful not to criticise any kinds of regime, in orderto avoid a political war.The two leading actors, Ralph Fiennes and Donald Sutherland both givestrong performances in the film. They make the film very enjoyable towatch.In addition, the stylish editing and cinematography makes the film veryartistic.

MatthewR 2012-04-22 23:19:10

Good

To describe this film in one word would be quite impossible. It's a classic example of a government opressor being overthrown by a revolution, a revolution that did not bring forth democracy or liberty but replaced the dictatorship with another dictatorship. If you like political movies, sexual references, irony, and a movie that requires thought this film is for yourIf youre going for a layed back easy to watch film that the whole family can enjoy, you may want to reconsider this and go back to the video store.-- the royal complainer

2012-04-22 09:38:45

Room 101 Revisited

After expecting "The English Patient, Part VI" We were pleasantly surprised to see Ralph Fiennes head off into uncharted waters. A dark blend of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and "Brazil" emerges in a fully-formed recreation of the Stalinist revolutionary state, with subreferences to practically every dictator who graced the Twentieth Century.Donald Sutherland has a chance to shine in a fabulous Castro-esque (the early years) beard, and We were also highly impressed with Lara Flynn Boyle, and Tom Hollander as the son-turned-heir, an unfortunate dictatorial truth still being played out in North Korea. Mr. Hollander was suitably portrayed as a short man next to the leggy Boyle, and the 1950s Peronist costumes set an appropriate tone.Draw whatever conclusions you will from the film's final scenes- they are the results of torture and re-education camps- but many Russian, Cuban, Argentinian, North Korean, Chinese, Afghani, Italian, Cambodian, George Orwellian dissidents would agree that "Land of the Blind" is a superbly accurate and ironic piece of work.

2012-04-18 02:53:37

Gift Recipient Loved It

This review is from: Land of the Blind (DVD) I saw the movie some time ago - I did not really understand the point of the movie. My son loved it so I purchased it for him.

johnnyboyz 2012-04-17 16:49:06

No one eyed man in charge here, just corrupt; depraved and evil minded men with one eye on their oppressive regimes in a teetering, often frustrating film.

Robert Edwards' 2006 film The Land of the Blind is ultimately a tale ofhow absolute power corrupts, absolutely. The film is stark in itsimagery and tone, its gross mixture of everything from its colourpalette to other general, discomforting and disorientating contentgiving it a very distinct feel; so much so that it's an odd thingEdwards has not gone on to produce, by way of writing or otherwise,some more projects since. I got the feeling this was, indeed, one man'sview on how the hypothesis of complete control completely corrupts anddestroys an individual from within and those they might watch over;unlike Donald Sutherland's character very early on in the film, we donot necessarily have a complete turd on our hands here. But somethinglacked; something was missing. The film's sole source of shocks derivesfrom its sporadic and disturbing imagery spotted along throughout, notfrom its would-be disturbing and enthralling in equal measure declinein well being and moral consciousness of the leaders on show; as if thecoming and going of the two chief characters in charge plays secondfiddle to the grotesque other stuff dreamt up so as to shock. While thefilm just about pulls off what it sets out to achieve, it's at awavering and frustrating cost.The film provides us with the character of Joe, played by RalphFiennes; initially a security guard at a high security prison in anation run by a remorseless; disgraceful; gross and politicalcorrectness disregarding dictator named Maximilian II (Hollander), aman who has inherited the kingdom from his father and continues thebrutal ruling of it. Hollander does a good job in playing this small,wormy, measly little man whom just happens to have landed the mostpowerful job in the world. The third member of the triple threat thefilm revolves around is the prisoner Joe is charged with observing, acertain free thinking elderly man of a supposed politically drivenopposite to that of Maximillian II, named Thorne and played by theaforementioned Sutherland. The first time we see Joe, he is sitting inan alarmingly small Gilliam's Brazil-style room typing his memoirs,thus recounting to us the tale of the two regimes. In providing him asthe middleman, the film has a lynch-pin or anchor around which thegeneral study of two differing political men, be it stark differencesin items ranging from overall age to intelligence, with power can justbring about their own downfalls. In beginning and ending with Joe theprison guard, although ambiguously so nearer the end thanks to somesomewhat frustrating scenes that suggest mental illness in our Joe,we're able to see that regardless of who it is that's in power; thereare winners and losers of each and every belief or political ideology.In thinking he was initially lending a helping hand for the opposition,despite things looking good for him, things were never quite as rosy asthey seemed.Edwards' idea that the state within his film could be representative ofany nation throughout history, corrupt or otherwise, is impressivelyestablished with a glut of varying mise-en-scene, further still aidingin the disorientating feel the film has. Maximillian II rules a localewhich on the surface, is a visually-driven clash between StalinistRussia with Georgian England, with various other items such as themusic characters play to themselves straight out of the 1940s; butwhose flag looks like Argentina's (no doubt a reference to theArgentinian regime of the late-1970s) and whose language is certainlyEnglish with the national sport seemingly being basketball. Thorne is aprisoner of beliefs and publishing's, thus is suffering the regulationsof censorship so knows the trials and pains of being a prisoner of thatilk. He seems to win Joe over as they talk through the prison wallswith poem quotations; tales of his plight and so forth, but later onwhen Thorne gets into power, he goes on to enforce a degree ofcensorship on certain things. I like to think of this as the pointrather than character inconsistencies within Thorne; that with theobtaining of so much power after so much graft, no matter how wellmeaning the individual came across as in times of great strain, thebeing granted of so much power will usually have a detrimental effecton the individual.After suffering a great deal in a world that sees the shallow andnarrow minded rewarded, with the creative and academics punished, wefeel Thorne's attitudes were merely the lesser of two evils on thewhole; particularly evident when the hate supposedly transfered ontothe victims of the state come back to haunt them when the uprising seesa ridiculously unfair trial of the former leader, which features thegagging of one person on trial and the sole witness being the one who'sin the process of electing themselves the new leader. For all Thorne'sstruggling when we observe him in his jail cell citing poems; having towrite with his own excrement and suffering brutal beatings at the handsof the guards, he certainly packs a mean political punch of his own indealing with those that do not entirely agree with him and hispolitical ideologies. The film's colourful look and somewhat comedicoverall tone stands in deliberately stark contrast to what's playingout, a tale of absolute power absolutely corrupting; two differentplights: in the character of Joe, one of morality which later manifestsas one spawned by suppression suffering by the state with Thorne'smirroring this in that it takes a similar structure but the other wayaround. Its successes lie at its core, around which an often lumberingand usually disgusting spectacle of very little drama unfolds. I likedsome of what I saw but the point is made relatively rapidly and thefilm knows this is all it has while things generally fall apart afterthe first third.

2012-04-15 08:26:34

For those interested in Dystopia and Revolutionary Politics themes...

This review is from: Land of the Blind (DVD) If you were a fan of Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" then you will most likely enjoy this movie. There are many great historical references, so a basic understanding of various revolutions like the French Revolution, the Irish Troubles, WWII Germany & Russia, South Africa's apartheid, etc, will definitely help the viewer get the most out of this film.

2012-04-15 00:12:42

Pointless and Tasteless

I don't know how distinguished actors like Feines and Sutherland can let themselves be degraded by performing in such a piece of trash. The writer and director have a truly sick bathroom obsession. Skip this one.