The Brown Bunny
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.57 You Save: $8.42 (56%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.69 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Brown Bunny
Movie Review: Genius way of portraying a real-life problem!
Summary: 5 Stars
If you have short concentrating span, I suggest you skipped some scenes but it may elude you from the portraying of the tormented feelings.Movie Review: Brown Bunny
Summary: 5 Stars
Vincent Gallo's The Brown Bunny is a masterpiece. Its heartbreaking and totaly original. One of the best films of the year.Movie Review: Lush and Breezy
Summary: 5 Stars
I liked the film...esp the soundtrack choices....a little oral sex never hurt anyone.....an enjoyable experience.Movie Review: You can make up your own mind about "The Brown Bunny," if you want to
Summary: 4 Stars
I suspect most people end up viewing "The Brown Bunny" because of the controversy surrounding it, because writer-director-actor Vincent Gallo's 2003 film is not exactly the sort of film you are going to stumble across. If you are a fan of Chloë Sevigny or Cheryl Tiegs that might be the case, but given how earnestly the promotion of this film courts the controversy that will almost invariably be the conduit by which most people come to see it. The teaser trailer has the scathing line from "Entertainment Weekly" that "No one in America will ever see a frame of this film," shows us only Gallo in profile driving his van, lists the main actors, and then fades to white with the final enticement "ADULTS ONLY." The other, second, trailer should be avoided because it gives away the twist at the end of the movie and what is the point of having a twist if you see it coming? Rethinking the movie in terms of that new knowledge is a retroactive experience, or something that should be reserved for a second viewing, and not anything that should spoil the first viewing.
However, the controversy that is being stoked is somewhat disingenuous at this point because after the disastrous screening of "The Brown Bunny" at Cannes, which initiated the angry exchange between Gallo and the critic Roger Ebert, the director re-edited his film and cut out 26 minutes of the film. So this version is not the original version, and apparently everyone who has seen both versions (including Ebert) finds this version to be superior. One choice example can explain why: when Gallo's character, motorbike racer Bud Clay visits the Bonneville Salt Flats he takes out his bike and rides off into the distance. Originally there was a shot of him coming back as well, which could well produce a laugh at the rather pointlessness of the exercise. See Bud go. See Bud come back. But by simply letting Bud disappear in the distance before resuming his cross-country trek gives the scene more weight.
At the beginning of the film Bud finishes a motorcycle race, shot in long distance so that sometimes the sound fades away, and then decides to head for California to race. Before he goes he does two things. First, he persuades the young girl at the convenience store where he buys gas to come with him, only to abandon her when they stop at her house for her to pick up a few things. Second, he visits an elderly couple and tries to get them to remember that he used to live next door. Together these two scenes provide our initial oblique cues as to what this journey is about. But it is hard to know if a character is running away or running towards something or someone if you do not know the reference point, and therein lies the maddening quality of watching this film.
"The Brown Bunny" is what I would most decidedly call an art film, based mainly on Gallo's preference for leaving the camera in place and letting action take place on the other side of the car window with the characters not always adequately captured by the frame. However, this style matches the substance of the film, because these moments in Bud's trip across the country are neither clearly seen nor completely understood. Consequently it is not surprising that many people would give up on watching the film because they find it to be so tedious, while others will look at the same thing and find it indulgent.
I picked up on a key clue regarding the twist when Daisy (Savigny) appears in Bud's hotel room, but I did not see it coming and I have to say that it was more Gallo's performance at the end that bothered me that the sex or the final revelation. He says so little for most of the film that when we finally get to the point where he talks he whispers and then he whines. The former is unsettling once you understand what he is saying to Daisy and since the latter sets up a jarring contrast between their tones that reflects the dynamic. So if a film intends to provoke an emotional response adn does so, that would speak to some level of success.
Finally, is the sex scene gratuitous? No, because throughout his journey Bud has essentially been saving himself for this moment. Is the graphic depiction necessary? I would argue yes, provided that it is indeed a prosthetic, because then I can see it as fitting into the twist. If not, then it is an example of gross indulgence. Despite the claims of some that it was real I think the fact there is no difference between the before and after shots (which may be a telling clue in itself), and that Gallo avoids rendering the whole question moot by showing the point of connection, confirms my suspicions. More importantly, if it is really real then it destroys the illusion Gallo works so hard to craft in the climactic scene of his film. "The Brown Bunny" gives you plenty to think about, if you are so inclined to try to unravel it all and come to your own conclusions.
Movie Review: Not for Everyone, But an Interesting Vision
Summary: 4 Stars
This movie is hard for me to review. One of the hardest films I've ever written a review for in fact. I didn't notice Vincent Gallo until this film came out and I heard about the big Chloe Sevigny oral sex scene. I was intrigued and wanted to see this movie for a long time. Then I stumbled upon the movie 'Buffalo 66' and thought it showcased a talented filmmaker (Gallo)
and someone with enormous potential. Buffalo 66 was a movie shrouded with mystery and left you questions. It showed you a story and gave no explanation for it. So when I finally bought 'The Brown Bunny' I knew it was going to be weird. Hell, this is the movie that Roger Ebert called the worst film in the history of the Cannes Film Festival. Although he later recanted this when Gallo re-edited the movie. Well, here is 'The Brown Bunny'. Written, Produced, Directed, Edited, and Shot by Vincent Gallo. Yes, he's even the Director of Photography. This movie is odd. It's unlike anything, even 'Buffalo 66'. All the shots in the movie are way too closeup or too far away or too grainy. But that's the look of the movie, so It's OK. That's the way the movie needed to look. Then there's the storyline. This film is 92 minutes long with very little dialouge. It's almost as if someone put a camera in someone's van and just let it film them as they drove across the country. Except, there's no radio in their van. There's nothing. This movie really is dull and seemingly uninspired; but that's what Gallo wants it to be. It's not a just a movie showing us a lonely guy...It wants us to feel his loneliness. Gallo plays Bud Clay, whom we meet as he competes in a motorcycle race which he loses. He gets in his van, with the bike in the back and drives. He stops at a gas station and meets an attendant named Violet. He tells Violet he's going to California. She mentions that she's always wanted to go to California. He says "go with me". She says "I don't know you". He says "go with me".
Then she's in the car. He leaves her at her house and continues to drive.
He eventually meets a woman named Lilly. Well, kind of...He doesn't meet her. He sees her sitting on a bench looking as lonely as he does, so he sits next to her. Then he gets back in his car and drives. This is pretty much how the film goes until 75 minutes in, Bud ends up at the motel to see the love of his life Daisy (Sevigny) and we've all heard a thousand times what happens at this point. A lot of people, especially viewers but a lot of critics too, see this movie as a film maker who thought he was making a masterpiece who instead makes a boring, slow, ridiculous movie. This movie is boring, there's barely even a plot. But, as I said, that's what Gallo wants it to be. Unlike 'Buffalo 66' our questions are answered at the end of the movie for the most part...But that doesn't mean we're given a resolution. Just an explanation. Bud is a lonely guy, suffering a devastating loss and if the movie continued to follow him we'd no doubt watch Bud Clay finally committ suicide. This movie is not for everyone. This movie is not a movie you rent Friday night, kick off your shoes with some popcorn and watch. This is an art-house film that takes some tolerance from the viewer. The fact is, the most powerful scenes of the movie occur in the last 15 minutes. During and after the oral sex scene. This is not just a pointless sex scene Gallo wanted to put in to intrigue people. This scene needs to be in here, in it we see the pain of a man.
If the moments leading up to these final minutes had been more entertaining and less dull; a lot more people would like this movie. But, it's simply not so.
So, yeah. I liked this movie. In the end it becomes a beautiful and poignant film. I'm not saying you'll like it or even agree with what I've said in this review. But, this is life, love, and loneliness told in the most painstaking boring way possible. It's Vincent Gallo's "The Brown Bunny".
GRADE: B+