john_r035

I've seen this twice now, but I don't understand why it's so high on the IMDB top 100. Apparently it's better than Silence of the Lambs, Ben Hur, Seven, and even Goodfellas. But I don't think so!

Christopher Nolan's other film Insomnia seems to be better than this, and that's not saying much.

I understood this film OK, and thought it was only mildly interesting the way it was told backwards. The ending confused me, but I'd lost interest by then anyway.

Maybe I'll watch it again soon though. Perhaps there's something in it that's escaped me so far.

The style of this film reminded me of the old 70's Hammer films, especially towards the end when Cruise's character re-visits the old mansion, and with the creepy piano music playing as he walks around.

Like in all of Kubrick's later films, the actors speak slowly and with long pauses between sentences. This is very noticeable. I think if the actors were allowed to speak naturally at their own paces, this film would only run for 1 and a half hours. But then again, maybe this way of acting is suited to this film because it adds to the suspense.

The story and the acting retained my interest from the start. 7.5/10

I suppose if the director's intention was to make each scene like a painting - where all the actors have to remain still for a minute or two, then it was always bound to be a bit boring. But the dullness is made worse by the director's technique of getting the actors to say their lines slowly after a hesitation (like in Eyes Wide Shut).

The casting is quite good. I liked the actor who played Lady Lyndon's personal reverend. He looked like he was plucked from a period painting. Ryan O'Neil was good too, with a believable Irish accent.

This isn't one you would want to watch twice, so I'd recommend renting it.