Genres

Visitors Review

Chris_Pandolfi 2012-05-23 11:37:33

Art for Art's Sake

You will see the title "Sleeping Beauty" and automatically conjure upimages of either the original fairy tale, the Tchaikovsky ballet, orthe 1959 Disney film – most likely the latter. Indeed, this new film islike all incarnations of the story in that it's about a young maidenwho will at some point be put into a deep sleep. But to deal with thisupfront, this is where the similarities end. "Sleeping Beauty," whichmarks the directorial debut of Australian novelist Julia Leigh, belongsin an unclassifiable gray zone between erotica and pornography.Although it has the gratuitous nudity men prefer, it will not appeal totheir appetite for graphic depictions of intercourse. Likewise, womenmay respond to the sensual intimacy, but they will surely be put off bythe cold detachment with which the story is told.I am, of course, speaking in general terms. Who am I to say what youpersonally will find sexually stimulating? For my money, the film ispretentious art – provocative and visually sumptuous but thematicallyimpenetrable. It is, essentially, the embodiment of art for art's sake,which states that the intrinsic value of art is completely separatefrom functions deemed edifying or moral. If you can accept the factthat this movie looks pretty but says absolutely nothing about itscharacters, its plot, or even its views on sexuality, then perhaps it'sworth going to see. You can study at depth the framing, the human form,the distinctive art direction, and especially the disturbing dreaminessof the bedroom set, where the title character lies helplessly ininduced slumber.The film stars Emily Browning as Lucy, a college student and a deepmystery. Her dialogue is sparse and we only get scraps of her personallife, but there's just enough for us to formulate a rough outline: Herunseen mother is financially dependent and a violent alcoholic; shefeels emotionally responsible, for reasons known only to her, for ateetering addict known only as Birdman (Ewen Leslie); she's behind onher rent and doesn't make enough working as both a café waitress,piling chairs onto tables after hours, and an office assistant, makingendless copies and dealing with her stuffy boss. Her situation isobvious, but what motivates her is anyone's guess. Her attitude towardssex, we will repeatedly observe, is curiously opaque. In an early sceneat a swanky bar, for example, she sits by idly as two men flip a cointo determine who will sleep with her and when. Take note of the factthat one of them uses the singular form of the word "heads."To supplement her income, she takes a job with a madam named Clara(Rachael Blake), who initially puts her to work as a lingerie waitress,pouring wine at upscale dinner parties where the guests wear tuxes.Later on, at a secluded countryside estate, Lucy is "promoted" to therank of sleeping beauty; she's made to drink a powerful anesthesiabrewed like tea, lie naked on a bed in an ornate bedroom, and remainunconscious as sexually frustrated elderly men have their way with her.The first, known only as Man 1 (Peter Carroll), compares at length hisunfulfilled life with that of Ingeborg Bachmann's story "The ThirtiethYear." Man 2 (Chris Haywood) can only light a cigarette and explain hownecessary Viagra is for him. Clara, who listens to their tales of woe,stipulates that there's to be absolutely no penetration.Leigh has a healthy interest in Browning's nude form, and indeed, herbeauty seems to have been lifted directly from a Goya painting: Snowwhite skin, hair that flows down to her shoulders, breasts that arehumble but shapely, curvy hips that naturally extend from her slenderwaist. What bothers me is that this is applied to a character socomplex that she's completely unsolvable. Her maddeningly casualattitude towards sex, coupled with alarming passivity, allows formoments of unsettling objectification. Some are imposed, as when she'sinstructed to paint her lips the same color as her labia. Others areself-induced, as when she proclaims, with just a hint of anger, thather vagina is not a temple. And consider two scenes in a lab, in whicha medical student carefully inserts a plastic tube down her throat andinto her esophagus.What does any of this mean? Leigh is not the only one viewing thingsfrom a distance; she has written the characters to be just asemotionally walled off. If "Sleeping Beauty" is in fact making athematic statement, it's done in such a way that it's undetectable. Thefilm's lack of purpose is only exacerbated by its awkward structure, inwhich Lucy's everyday life and extracurricular activities are intercut,and its ending, which doesn't feel like an ending at all but ratherlike the setup for something grander. The final scene, in which Lucyhas her first understandable emotional reaction, involves a decisionand an act that's dramatically and logistically nonsensical. Here's afilm that spends more time getting us to think about what it's tryingto say and less time actually saying it.-- Chris Pandolfi (www.atatheaternearyou.net)

tomgillespie2002 2012-05-22 23:56:00

Will resonate in your mind for some time

In a scene towards the climax of the film, we see Lucy (EmilyBrowning), taking a lesson at university where the lecturer seems to beanalyzing a game of chess. The question is proposed, asking why wouldsomeone make a move securing their defeat? This seems to be relevantfor Browning's character throughout this very interesting tale ofsexual depravity and the detachment of the female body to the masculinelibido. Lucy works her way through education, financing her way withvarious menial jobs. She begins a job with an exclusive, and veryclandestine operation, beginning simply with silver service waitressingin "risque" negligee. This of course progresses into a more dangerouslevel, when she is offered a very well-paid gig involved a drugging sothat she may sleep whilst a client does what he wishes. Although, aspromised in Lucy's first interview, "Your vagina will not bepenetrated".From first time director Julia Leigh, the film has various similaritiesto Luis Bunuel's excellent Belle de Jour (1967), mainly in it'sdepiction of a strong female character who wishes to delve into adangerous world of male desires. However, unlike Bunuel's film, Leighhas created a character in Lucy, who seems utterly detached from thepeople around her. She does visit Birdman (Ewne Leslie), who seems tobe agoraphobic, but this is not elaborated on. She seems also verywilling to do things without questioning. In one scene she is offered apill after her work in a restaurant, she asks what it is, but takes itwithout having had an answer.The film is self-consciously European in it's atmosphere and pace. Thehandling of the subject matter is never gratuitous, neither does itspoon feed a message of masochistic perversity. Browning is excellentlyvacuous in the role, gently drifting from situation to situation withnot a question or any adversity. The film is beautiful to look at (andI don't just mean the alabaster figure of the nude Browning), it'spallet of autumnal colours adding extra references to 1970's Europeancinema. There is no doubt that this film will divide viewers. Dirty oldmen ogling over a sleeping, naked 22 year old, will make foruncomfortable viewing for some, but I felt that this was notexploitational in it's depiction. We also never really see what theseold men do in the time they are given with the "sleeping beauty". Allwe get is an almost confessional from one of the customers. After beingadvised by Clara (Rachel Blake) that there is no penetration, theclient states: "The only way I can get a hard-on, is if I take 12Viagra and get a beautiful lady to shove her fingers up my arse".The films conclusion is haunting, beautifully realised and ambiguous.It certainly raises more questions than it answers about this detachedand seemingly passive female character in a world of strange maledesire. A film that will resonate in your mind some time after it hasfinished.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Adam Cronstedt 2012-05-22 09:59:32

Flawless and haunting collage of ones story

Looking at the reviews, it seemed like The Sleeping Beauty was anothertry that did not quite work out, I was excited about seeing EmilyBrowning in this film, I admire her much and her past work which isbeyond some actors imaginations. One can clearly see she has grown upand started taking responsibility, this movie really shows a new sideof the Australian actor.This movie is an endless story about young girl Lucy and her paththrough struggle, or just the ordinary day. She is clearly a troubledgirl as you can see the director clearly have showed up. No backgroundstory needed, this is not a story about Lucy herself, more about onescollage. She wakes up, takes classes, work 3 different jobs and thenends her day as miserable as the previous. Lucy don't mind, beinggentle and average she does not care less about a future. Thus shelives for today. When the new job offer strikes her, she is more thanpleased, but she never really know what goes on in the room whilesleeping. One can never really figure out the curiosity of Lucy as shenever reveals herself. If you want a story that is settled in front ofyou, look away. In the end, I was as charmed as I was in the beginning.Emily is flawless and haunting in this role, it's provocative, anddisturbing. I myself see this movie not only as a big screenfascination but also as a collection of art. The director is verycareful with not putting too much details, you're there to figure outthem yourself.Many questions left a mark on my after wards, I'm not in need to figurethem out, it's perfection for me, to not always know everything. Thisis not a movie for everyone. I fancy underground movies like this thatdoes not top everyones expectations because of the genuine style. Iwould definitely tell all my beloved artsy friends about thisextraordinary movie. This is sure a movie delicate by ones eye.

grayxenon 2012-05-21 16:43:36

Sleeping indeed..

i thought this was an adaptation of the popular fairy tale story, itturned out to be just as of what its title is, sleeping.. minus thebeauty (but not Emily she's quite attractive although much pale(complexion) in this movie..not her acting though)actually she's theonly reason why i keep my sleeping pillow out..It had a great idea for a very artistic plot but the filler shots(unrelated and unexplained scenes) films make them as it is..just somerandom thoughts to hide the soft porn side of themovie...(sleeping..then waking up just to put her panty on)it will make you question a lot of the scenes, was it necessary? orjust to make the movie longer and keeps you holding on hoping somethings may get interesting..apparently the beauty (artistry of thefilm) never wake up on the entire duration of film even the ending ishorrible..

micropotato 2012-05-17 04:18:44

one of those artsy films that leaves you with a weird empty feeling

Gawd. This is a troubling movie. The role of Lucy is very wellselected. I doubt anyone buy Browning can portray this part as well asshe did. Her face, body and everything fit perfectly with the role. Themovie is very quiet. No music, little dialogues. It wouldn't be unfairto say it's a compilation of pretty pictures (and some that aren't).The movie reminds me a lot of "Eyes Wide Shut" played by Nicole Kidmanearlier and have the same erotic feel to it. A lot of nudity and sexviolence though there wasn't technically any sex. The movie has littlecharacter development and little plot as a lot of others pointed out.But the story do have a mystique air to it. Throughout the movie, Lucyis contained and rarely show much emotions. From Lucy's being boredwith her life to wanting to know what is happening to her during her"part-time job" to finally knowing what happened and screamed andexploded into emotions. All in all, I think this is one of those artsyfilms that leaves you with a weird empty feeling. Interesting film butquite uncomfortable.

Saad Khan 2012-05-16 08:46:00

A W****House of different type so as the Movie

SLEEPING BEAUTY – CATCH IT ( B- ) Sleeping Beauty is an eroticAustralian movie about a w****House of a different kind. A young girlgets involves herself into W****house, where she doesn't have toprostitute herself but let herself to sleep for hours while other abuseher body in most disguising way. The subject matter of the movie isshocking and it shows us a side of people under their suits. How farhumans can go for to fulfill their twisted fetishes? Human may havestarted wearing clothes and behaved civilized but under closed doorsthey're worst than animals. For me watching Emily Browning in such anerotic role was surprising. Watching her for the first time in LemonySnicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events with Jim Carrey to this isdefiantly a surprise. Emily Browning has done a tremendous job, notonly she is stunningly beautiful but she allows herself to go thatraunchier in it. Michael Dorman was okay. On the whole the movie isgood but it doesn't show us the purpose of making it. Was it just ashock value or director could not go more into the reason behind thesepsychotic fetishes?

alecharris2004 2012-05-12 06:19:46

Flawed Beauty

There's a lot to be applauded in the debut feature of Julia Leigh; notleast of which the performance of Emily Browning who shows incredibletalent and fearlessness in portraying a young woman who cannot connectto the world around her and who, essentially, is sleeping her waythrough life.There's also a lot to be commended in Leigh's use of single camera,'open' takes, allowing the actors to stretch into a scene and buildemotional resonance over the arc of a scene; the same as theater. - thefirst scene shot for example was the death of 'birdman'. A scene thatis both pivotal and incredibly hard on Browning. And not one you wouldusually choice for the first day of filming and it's a credit to bothLeigh and Browning that it's pitch perfect.Where it falls however, is in Leigh's use of film making. The singleshot take is a great acting tool, but a weak and unnecessary editingone. The only two transitions used are seemingly 'cut to' and 'fade toblack' and this doesn't help the audience in terms of emotionaljourney.The use of symbolism, for example - the trail of berries, the opendoor, the house in the woods - lacks impact due to the single shotsemployed.The aforementioned death of Birdman scene is transitioned to a mid shotscene of Lucy wiping tables with no visual clues as to why, leaving theincredibly painful, beautifully acted ending somewhat lost on all butthe most observant. We may, honestly, understand the ending. We may get the relationship ofLucy & Birdman. We may even accept her choices. But I don't think thefilm maker has done enough to help us enter the world and personas shehas wonderfully.Orson Welles famously tells the tale of his first day as director andbeing taken aside by the cinematographer who 'taught him everything heneeded to know about film making in 12 hours'.What Leigh needed here was a better cinematographer.

Biggest_Loser 2012-05-11 17:26:03

It's difficult to fault the film's artistry and its originality

Lucy (Emily Browning) is a student working on a number of jobs. She's awaitress, she works in an office and she's involved with a scienceexperiment at her university too. She's not co-operating with herhousemates though and the rent is overdue. When she sees an ad in thepaper she applies for it. She's driven to a manor house where she meetsClara (Rachael Blake). Clara describes the job, which involves Lucybeing sedated in a bed and allowing men to watch her sleep. Lucy isassured that she will not be penetrated. Her first task with severalother women is to serve a group of old men dinner at the manor house.After this she is put in a deep sleep and studied individually by threedifferent men. Outside her job, one of Lucy's few relationships is withan old friend of hers called Birdmann (Ewen Leslie), a recoveringalcoholic. Sleeping Beauty, the directional debut of Julia Leigh, is a filmstrictly for those seeking a more challenging and ambiguous brand ofcinema. Its minimalism and utter restraint works mostly for rather thanagainst its purpose. The film is richly successful in creating a worldthat's entirely consuming and isolating for its protagonist. Leighrelies on desaturation, like white colour palettes, to visualise thisalienation. The majority of the film is also elegantly photographed ata distance using a wide angle shot to represent the isolation as Lucybecomes an individual, overwhelmed by her surroundings. Save for amisplaced phone box, it was pleasing to see a familiar location, withnumerous scenes being shot at the University of Sydney. Leigh has anequally skillful understanding of the power of silence too. Music isalmost nonexistent and the dialogue is sparing so we rely entirely onour vision here; making the film compelling and tense for its entirety.And it's extremely leisurely paced too, holding scenes for a very longtime, with particular still framing, from a near-invisible camera.These formal aspects work to produce a dream-like state of slow,concentrated and delicate movements. As each scene fades to black, likethe shutting of an eyelid, it becomes increasingly apparent that Lucyis almost sleeping walking through her life, with no prince to wake herup. Rather mistakenly, a lot will be made about the film's morallyambiguous view of sexuality. The film does not include any sex scenes.It is a strict rule of the organisation that there is no penetration.As suggested by the composition, the film is more fascinatinglyoccupied by voyeuristic tendencies but also the desire to awaken ourdeepest fantasies. This is visualised through a number of scenes at themanor house. The first is the most confronting, where topless women,covered in thin, revealing straps, cater for old men as they poor themdrinks and serve them dinner. It's gratuitous but that's precisely thepoint because its one geezers bizarre fantasy to another. There arethree additional encounters in the bedroom itself: one man who islightly physically, moving his hands across Lucy's back; another who isintensely aggressive and the third is someone who simply mishandlesher. The contrast to this is Lucy who as the sleeping beauty can onlyrealise her fantasies through words. The dialogue drifts betweenoutright coarse and maddeningly cryptic. Lucy asks her friend Birdmannif he'll marry her, not as a proposal, but as self-assurance. Thissuggests again that the characters in Leigh's world need to hear whatthey want to hear to be satisfied. The film falters with these sidecharacters like Birdmann because we don't know enough about them andthey tend to fade in and out of the film for lengthy stretches of time.And some will lament Emily Browning's subdued performance for its lackof personality but given the dream-like state of her character itactually suits the film. Her slender frame too makes her a particularlydiminutive outcast. The film's ambiguity, isolation and peculiarity,will be detrimental for a lot of viewers. It's unlikely to attract bigaudiences because it is a slow, unnerving experience. But it'sdifficult to fault the film's artistry and its originality. Some peopleat the screening I went to left early. More fool them. I kept watching.

matthew-flamesfan 2012-05-10 18:30:13

Don't Fall Asleep. You Might Miss It!

When you create a film and title it "Sleeping Beauty," you had betternot make it boring. Otherwise, you'll get reviews utilizing everypossible play on the word "sleep," but more importantly, word of mouthwill spread using the same types of puns. When you use a title madefamous by the Disney animation, you're going to have to guard againstthose comparisons as well. As you can see, this film is already on thedefensive.To put even more pressure on "Sleeping Beauty," before it has evenbegun, is the fact that it is the directorial debut of a novelist.Julia Leigh also wrote the screenplay, but it is her first timestepping behind the camera to helm a film production. This isn'tnecessarily a bad thing, but it means an even bigger risk was taken bythe studios, and just as many debuts fall flat as they do flourish.Luckily, Leigh's is a success, even if her film isn't going to besomething that many people are going to enjoy.To start the film, we begin by watching the daily routine of a youngwoman named Lucy (Emily Browning). The first scene made me cringe, aswe find out that one of her many jobs involves testing out medicalequipment. We watch a tube being inserted down her throat. This is donein one unflinching shot that has the opposite effect on the viewer.Later on, we learn she also does office work and works at a restaurant,but the medical testing was by far her worst job.Why does she need to work three jobs? That's really a good question. Welearn that she's behind on her rent, and also goes to school. Maybeschool is really expensive, but she only seems to have one class, whichcan't be too heavy a burden. She's renting a room from people sheknows, and I wouldn't think that would be that expensive either. Whyshe doesn't pay her rent on time, I'll never know. This isn't a filmthat's going to lay things out for you.Because working three jobs isn't enough for Lucy, she inquires about anad in the paper that requires her to serve dinner to old rich men whilewearing lingerie. It pays $250 an hour, although it's freelance work,we're told. She works once, and after she gets home, she burns a $20bill. Why? Again, I don't know, and it's actions like this that make methink she isn't wanting for cash. Regardless, working multiple jobs,including the dinner-while-wearing-lingerie one, continues for most ofthe film, even as her performance gets so bad that she sometimes sleepson the floor while working.Sleeping is something she'll end up doing quite a bit as the filmcontinues on. She was told when she took the server job that there wereopportunities for promotion. She gets that chance later on, when she'stold that she can take a drug, lay naked in bed while passed out, andsleep for a few hours. Oh, and an elderly man will come in and sleepwith her while she's knocked out. "Sleep with" in the literal sense ofthe meaning, as actual intercourse is forbidden.Not that Lucy really cares. She doesn't seem to care much aboutherself, and would probably have accepted the job without the bindingrule. She's the type of nihilist that will do whatever anyone wants herto do at the flip of a coin. At a bar, she's approached and asked ifshe wants some cocaine. "Why not?" is her response. Later, two men shejust met actually use a coin to decide which one would have sex withher that night. She doesn't care, although come to think of it, I can'tremember her saying "no" once to anyone in the film. She's very polite,even if she has no regard for her own body.There's a lot of symbolism in the film, and if you thought this was afilm that's going to make it easy on you, you can look elsewhere.You're going to have to infer a great deal about the characters andtheir reason for doing what they do for most of the time you watchthem. I can see this being seen by some as a lack of character depthand development, but I think it's all there and just hidden behindimagery and a classic fairy tale. The way I saw "Sleeping Beauty," itactually does steal a couple of things from Disney cartoon.Unfortunately, giving that away now might change the way you view thefilm, so instead, go in with as fresh a mind as you can. This is amovie that will reward subsequent viewings.If there's a problem here, it's the character of Lucy. She's oftendifficult to like, and because she's such an apathetic person, not alot goes on. She's little farther, for better or worse, when the filmends than when it began. None of the blame can go to Emily Browning, asshe plays her without fear, but the way the character is written meansthat she's not exactly amiable or has a decent enough personality tobuild a film around. This is largely forgotten about once it getsgoing, but upon reflection, making her grow as the film progressedwould have improved it as a whole.Regardless, I was engaged by "Sleeping Beauty." Is it for everyone? Notat all. If you like artsy films that are there for you to figure outinstead of being told everything about them, then it might work foryou. It has a solid performance from Emily Browning in the lead role,and it has enough imagery and symbolism to keep you coming back foranother watch. That is, if you don't fall asleep during the first time.

jimjimjimjim-167-495946 2012-05-10 16:06:20

Er, what was that?

When writing a review for IMDb you have to select whether or not thatreview is going to contain spoilers. On this occasion however I canconfidently say that this review will not contain spoilers, mainlybecause I've no idea what just happened!I like a good art house film, and totally understand storytelling inwhich "less is more". It's nice to be treated with enough respect by awriter/director that I don't have to have everything spelled out forme. But Sleeping Beauty took this to the extreme being giving awayvirtually nothing.This film consists of a series of seemingly unrelated snippets; Lucy'sflatmates, the Birdman, the various temp jobs, and then ultimately thestrange/erotic sleeping arrangements which the film is sold on. I've nodoubt that the writer and director have something they want to saythrough this (no one makes a film for no reason and I love art-drivenfilm because that reason tends to be more meaningful that the boxoffice take) However, you can't put a few streaks of paint on a canvasin the style of another great Austrailian artist, and then down toolswith "Can you tell what it is yet?"In some ways you'll find this film even more disappointing because insome ways it's very good. It is so beautifully shot and Emily Browningputs in a good follow-up to Suckerpunch. On this occasion there justisn't enough to bring those bits together into a coherent whole. Inmuch the same way as we would all deride CGI heavy films that don't hitthe mark; being pretty isn't enough if you don't have the substancebehind it and they just forgot to put in enough ingredients to make acomplete film this time.

t kim 2012-05-04 19:45:41

Don't waste your time

I just watched this movie, and it is awful. Not only did it NOT keep myattention, but it has creepy old men naked! The whole movie was a wasteof time I will never get back. The lead actress did good with materialshe was given. If you watching to see naked people, its not even worthit ( don't take it like I'm calling anyone ugly), I'm just saying thatthe entire plot makes you so bored out of your mind you just don't careanymore. It shouldn't be called "sleeping beauty" because half the timeshe is awake, and when she is "sleeping" its because she drinkssomething on purpose so creepy old naked guys can have her tothemselves dead to the world and naked.

2012-05-04 02:23:40

Interesting study on feminine psychology; but too cold and utilitarian

The movie essentially explores the tragic aspects of being asubmissive, beautiful woman that is largely powerless in a modern agewhere rich men with money dominate and that primarily value a womanonly for her body. The lead character is Lucy, a unique beauty that isstruggling paying her rent as she tries to survive on the wages of acommon office clerk. Lucy is contacted by Clara who pays her $250 perhour to work at a house that is a kind of upscale brothel for olderrich men.I was excited for this movie upon reading the summary and watching thetrailer. I was expecting a fascinating exploration of femininepsychology and beauty and to see a beautifully artistic movieinfluenced by rich, classic expressions of architecture and art. I wasexpecting something more mysterious and elitist along the lines of someof the scenes in Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut.What I got instead was disappointing. I expected the mansion sets to befiner and more artistic. The mansion itself was more of a utilitarian,cookie cutter upper middle class house than a truly fine mansion withclassical architecture. The bedroom set itself, wherein the scenes arethe crux of the entire movie, was minimalistic, utilitarian,mechanistic, and looked more like an empty hotel room than a refuge forthe rich. While I am OK with the story itself being essentially gloomy,nihilistic, haunting, and morbid, I needed a better contrast betweenLucy's poor life as a struggling office clerk and the "upscale"clientele she services at the mansion. She essentially cycles betweenher drab utilitarian environment (the office, her house) to the"mansion", which itself is very minimalistic and utilitarian. Thatswhere the movie loses its appeal. There is little stylistically orartistically redeeming about the movie. It's really disappointing, because the movie could have been great. Thescreenplay was an interesting psychological exploration full of verygood ideas and the acting was good. If the mansion scenes were finerstylistically and artistically it would have enhanced the contrastbetween Lucy's regular life and her life at the mansion and gave atleast one redeeming quality about the movie.Instead the viewer is beaten down relentlessly with gloomy scene aftergloomy scene. Instead of an uplifting appreciation of femininity, art,and beauty, you get a movie filled with hostility towards men, guiltfor the exploitation of Lucy, and a miserable commentary on theinjustices of being a woman.

Ruben Mooijman 2012-05-01 22:19:11

Complete emptiness

I had a very hard time finding any quality in this movie. No story tospeak of, no characters to identify with, no humor, no suspense, nointelligent dialog, no message, no link to what actually happens in thereal world. And I could go on. The movie is filled with seemingly unrelated scenes, incomprehensibleimages and people talking nonsense. It is about a female studentsleeping with old men for money, without really having sex with them.Sounds weird? It is. There is a slight possibility that I missed the point. That the filmhas certain qualities I wasn't able to discover. Therefore, I read someof the other reviews posted on this site. As far as I could see, theyvary from extremely negative to mildly negative. So, if the film hasqualities I didn't discover, at least I'm not the only one. I left the cinema with a feeling of complete emptiness. I had justspent 102 minutes watching something I couldn't relate to at all,something that couldn't offer me anything appealing. The only reason I didn't give this film the lowest rating of 1 star isthe actress, Emily Browning. Not for her acting accomplishments (itconsists mainly of being nude or semi-nude and showing no emotion atall) but for the audacity it took to accept this part. I only hope shedoesn't regret it.

skydancers 2012-05-01 20:26:32

Better than I'd been led to believe.

OK, after reading review after review that deliberately refused toengage with the content that was clearly on the screen, I decided torespond to this one:"However the viewer is distracted by wondering how she manages to fitin her tertiary maths course, a day time job collating documents thatyou'd expect the machine in the same room to do, second job at thecafé, visiting a dried out case who has muesli and gin for breakfast,getting picked up in bars and hiring on as a fetish object."The muesli and gin (vodka?) episode comes when she visits a friend whois an addict/alcoholic, and she obviously is displaying that the onlyway to get some food into him is to mix it with alcohol. (Also apparentthat she's taking the p-ss.) The other scenes are to set up the ideathat none of the things she is engaged with in her life --work, school,family --really matter much to her, and that she's pretty muchdirection less. Also that she needs to work hard to get by, whichshould be obvious enough. It establishes enough drudgery to explain whyshe might be attracted to the danger and risk-taking she embarks on."Lets not start in on why she burns the hundred dollar note insustained shot, like the opening with white coat shoving a tube downher throat."The first is to show her reaction to having some money --as someone whohad to struggle for it for so long, she enjoys the sheer pleasure ofacting out the idea of having "money to burn". The lab tests,meanwhile, are to show you how desperate she is to pick up some cashthrough odd jobs -- it also sets up the irony of her being "penetrated"in her straight job, while not being penetrated in her sleeping callgirl one."As for the performers, our sympathy for the actors' humiliationoverrides any criticism of their performances."Browning did an excellent job, and certainly better than anyone had aright to expect after "Sucker Punch". I hear over and over about what a"blank" she was; I did not find that to be the case at all: nearlyevery scene plays out on her face and reactions, and I was constantlyfollowing her closely for clues as to where her character was comingfrom. And yes, there were plenty. As for the nudity, this emphasizesher character's vulnerability, especially when contrasted with herclients. The key moment here is when she finds, after starting her"sleeping beauty" job, that she's no longer comfortable sleeping nakedat home, and puts on some undies. What her eyes don't remember from hersleeping sessions, it seems her body memory does. Like the above review suggests, there are a lot of opinions out thereabout how opaque the film is supposed to be; that's not true at all.The film does leave some gaps for your imagination, and it tends tomake you focus on detail and draw your own conclusions --everythingisn't spelled out in neat little packets of dialog, as some seem towish for. ("I'm prostituting myself because my daddy didn't love mewhen I was young and my mother's an alcoholic." -- I suppose that wouldbe the American version.) This is hardly "Inland Empire", though, andthe plot dots are certainly there to be connected for anyone who'slooking. The pace is hypnotic, which some will call "slow", and theending is deliberately vague, but I was surprised how much it left methinking about the characters, what happened to them both before andafter. Haunting.

oneguyrambling 2012-04-27 07:57:57

This isn't art. This isn't poetry. This isn't good.

The movie is called Sleeping Beauty.Women who watch might call it Stupid Beauty.Guys will see it as Sleeping Booty.I see it as an amazing feat for star Emily Browning, who managed tosegue effortlessly from her role as the scantily clad pouting idiot inthe execrable Sucker Punch into this. The film that I would chooseSucker Punch over.Hang on, I just threw up in my mouth.By day Beauty is an everyday teen, juggling school and multiple parttime jobs and supplementing her income with submitting herself as atest bunny for medical and/or scientific research, (apparently into howlong a woman can have a tube in her mouth without vomiting). She isapparently so busy that she never sees the Australian sun – albinoEskimos have better tans than Emily Browning.Personal relationships seem fleeting at best, and generally see Beautyplacating various people, an alcoholic (possibly abusive) mother, afriend with addiction, and more mundanely flatmates by coming up withthe rent on time and doing some cleaning.By day she is known as Lucy.The evenings are spent with casual drinking, drug-taking andprostitution… After responding to a classified as Beauty finds what shesees as a promotion. No longer casual and freelance, she now gets towear a uniform and serve clients – only her uniform is by no means inthe Macca's style, and her clients are little more than rich old pervs.By night she is known as Sara.'Sara's' boss/madam/pimp is Claire. Claire is prim, proper anddemanding. The customer is always right, regardless of how messed up orcreepy he is.The work is well paid but sporadic, but Beauty doesn't do it for themoney. In one scene she casually burns a $100 note and watches itcrinkle and melt without emotion. The 'job' involves nudity andsubmitting oneself to potential abuse and ridicule, but Beauty doesn'tdo it for titillation, satisfaction or compulsion. She just seems to doit. In fact, half way through the film I thought a better title mightbe The pasty girl who never says no. The phone rings, she answers, andwith monotonous frequency heads of immediately at the caller's bidding.Whether the director meant this to appear empowering or pathetic isbeyond me.Regardless of intent eventually Beauty finds another promotion,essentially becoming little more than the world's largest Pillow Petfor essentially the same clientele.We learn practically nothing about Lisa/Sara/Beauty. The film haslittle music, minimal dialogue and moves at a languid pace like meltedicecream down a kerb, but I would argue watching this is more of atragedy than dropping your Drumstick.Then with a scream it all finishes, and you wonder why. Keep yourartsy. Save your fartsy for another day. To me this is 100% uncut dulland pointless fare. Sure we have an up and coming Hollywood starletshedding her clothes frequently, apparently this is challenging, daringand mesmerizing.I just wonder how challenging, daring and mesmerising it would all beif – how you say? – a more natural woman was in the lead. Say the girlfrom Precious instead of Casper's sister… Final Rating – 3 / 10. This isn't art. This isn't poetry. No-one learnslessons. No-one is better for the experience. What it is is a drab twohour exercise in making beautiful female nudity distasteful andunlikable. If anything that is perhaps the film's crowning – and only –achievement.

nihao 2012-04-27 00:20:14

No anaesthetic, thank you, doctor...

An interesting choice. Prostitution amidst university students. Richold men who spend their money on flesh. Modern 'dettachment'...separating the body from the heart, the soul, the mind. Most of thecritics of this film seem to dwell on complaining that "our world isnot like that! All the people here are horrible...!!!" Of course theyare missing the point. We are watching crude realities, but alsodreams, symbols, Freudian/Jungian fetishes... A woman is directing.Jane Campion is producing. This is also a 'clue' that MAYBE there ismore to this film than meets the eye... Behind the veneer are MANYhidden truths.( Behind the Twin Towers, behind the choice of a blackpresident after a guy like Bush jr.) Separation from the truth. We areall 'anaesthetised'... so Lisa is NOT so strange, after all. Moneyrules. Maybe we are victims of our society, of our times. We are'dead', as T.S. Eliot wrote some years ago. Of course the world is fullof wonderful, hearty, passionate and generous people. But this filmaims elsewhere, and I myself feel grateful to its director,scriptwriter (and , why not, actress) for taking the plunge, andre-floating Pasolini's 'Salò' in a more digestible (maybe moreintelligent?) guise. Kubrick? His last movie may still reveal somethingin the future (ALL his films age very well), but he was an elderly man,and this young director seems to have the upper-hand in as much ashitting the nail on the head with the 'ésprit-du-temps', the'Zeitgeist' or, more plainly,(and painfully), the new age our youth areforced to grow up in. Somewhat puzzled at first, I gave this film achance...let it 'breathe', in my conscience and intellect. I'm glad Idid. It contains more than one morsel of food for thought.

Alexey Zinger 2012-04-26 10:14:35

not only a terrible film, it's not even original

I left the theater after seeing Sleeping Beauty shaking my head. Bothmy wife and I felt more than a little cheated. It really takes aspecial kind of bad to make a beautiful girl -- prostrated naked allover the screen for the better part of the movie -- boring andunappealing. And yet, this is precisely what we got from it. Why? Theproblem seems to be that much of the tension and drama hinges onempathizing with Emily Browning's character, a girl shallow and adrift,yet simultaneously cold to the world. Financial predicaments anddissatisfaction with life make her teen angst blossom into ugliness.The expression "bored people are boring" comes to mind.I do not wish to recount plot details beyond what is outlined in thesummary, in case you decide to see the film for yourself. However,tonight my wife discovered an earlier film from Germany, which shockedus, having seen Sleeping Beauty so recently. The film is called "Houseof the Sleeping Beauties", directed by Vadim Glowna in 2006, based onYasunari Kawabata's much older novel. What's peculiar is that House ofthe Sleeping Beauties is so painfully close to Sleeping Beauty, it'snot funny. Virtually every critical plot point is present in bothfilms. And yet, House of the Sleeping Beauties is made from acompletely different perspective and strikes a decidedly differenttone. It's more nuanced, more three-dimensional, more mysterious.It's... just better. The night we saw Sleeping Beauty, my wife and Iagreed that despite all the drawbacks, the premise held something andthe film could have been good. House of the Sleeping Beauties is thatbetter film.I sincerely hope that Julia Leigh meant to reference the earlier Germanwork and create an interplay between them. It's an interesting idea.Though, I'm a bit skeptical, seeing as there appears no mention of theother it anywhere in the credits, nor in marketing or writing aroundSleeping Beauty itself.

Rockwell_Fassbender 2012-04-25 16:41:19

A great idea poorly executed.

I was hoping for a lot from this movie, but it didn't really give memuch of anything. Julia Leigh had some interesting ideas when it cameto her approach, but I don't think she executed them well enough and asa result the film was just void of anything really. Obviously therewasn't going to be much by way of emotional influence, but there wasn'tmuch on an intellectual level either. People are praising EmilyBrowning's performance as being incredibly "brave", which I suppose itis in the sense that it's brave to take off your clothes and have thethings done to her on screen happen, but that doesn't make it aparticularly good performance. She's not a competent actress by anymeans and this is just the strongest example of that so far.

he_who_leads 2012-04-24 11:27:49

5/10

This movie's trailer got people talking because of its very Kubrickvibe. And, in fact, the movie explores territory very similar to 'EyesWide Shut'. How sex has become more liberal and extreme, yet alsosterile and disconnected.The lead character, Lucy, (Emily Browning - a long way from LemonySnicket) exhibits this. She'll sleep with people at the drop of a hat,yet with little evidence of desire. In fact, there's hardly anyevidence that she processes strong emotions at all. She just goes abouther business. Things happen to her, and she's too reticent to shrugthem off.To solve financial worries, Lucy gets a job at a posh, exclusiveestablishment where she is willingly placed naked and unconscious in abedroom for a client, to do with her as he wishes (except penetration).Through Lucy and the various clients, we see how we need vulnerabilityin others to relax the masks that we wear. Otherwise, we are sopreoccupied with maintaining an image that we don't even try andconnect with others. Emily Browning does well at rounding out theexpressionless Lucy, and the voyeuristic nature of the material makesthe movie entertaining. Unfortunately, the ending, though a prettylogical conclusion, also feel anti-climatic, a tad obvious and leavesus feeling short-changed. The film is an interesting, respectful, non-gratuitous effort, yet manywill ultimately find it like the leading lady - pretty impenetrable.

Mohammad Umair Khan 2012-04-23 19:09:15

You can defend your art by calling it art.

But I still call it bullcrap.Maybe its because I was already turned off by Emily with her characterin Sucker Punch. She is a terrible actor and I find it annoying thatthroughout the movie "Sleeping Beauty", they all had to say out loudhow beautiful she is and how much they are taken aback by her. She isnot. Not really if you judge her by superficial standards. Or maybe itsbecause the writers and actors figured that "Hey, who gives a crap? Whyeven give our 60% when the word "Art" will take care of it all?"Honestly, I believe the director is to blame. Also, Emily. Sex andviolence sell...this movie has none. Just scenes that are thought outto be creepy but are not (Maybe the director was trying to regeneratethe Eyes Wide Shut or Sodom vibe but settled for silent hidden farts onscreen), and even though nudity is abundant, the lack of charactergrowth and plot line kill the whole experience.