njd123
Joined Jun 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews4
njd123's rating
I will not bother with a plot description of L'Iceberg, since that has been done adequately by a previous reviewer. However, I must disagree with that same person's opinions about the film.
In short it is a very bleak and rather depressing type of comedy. The central character and her family lead a desperately empty existence, which is portrayed well by the bleak cinematography of Belgian suburbia and a dreary port town.
There is precious little dialogue and yet plenty of Belgian-style slapstick interaction between characters. The effect of the film is not uplifting, cheery or even diverting. I have watched many many French-language films - and unfortunately this was the worst I have ever seen.
You have been warned.
In short it is a very bleak and rather depressing type of comedy. The central character and her family lead a desperately empty existence, which is portrayed well by the bleak cinematography of Belgian suburbia and a dreary port town.
There is precious little dialogue and yet plenty of Belgian-style slapstick interaction between characters. The effect of the film is not uplifting, cheery or even diverting. I have watched many many French-language films - and unfortunately this was the worst I have ever seen.
You have been warned.
The reviewer who has written the glowing report on this film is wildly exaggerating, and I can only assume that he/she is associated with the film in some sense.
The reason that the film was re-released in the UK in 2005 "Island of the Damned" is because the film was initially a flop, so the distributors tried to re-market the film as a horror movie. This is no horror movie, it's barely even a thriller.
It's slow to get going, and to be honest - it's slow all the way through. The director could have cut at least 20 minutes of the version that I saw (120mins). There are a couple of very good twists, and there is some good acting, particularly from the female lead. The camera work is sloppy in some parts, but elsewhere it's rather average. There are also a few plot inconsistencies and quite a lot of continuity errors.
However, the film does have an other-worldly feel to it in parts, which is more characteristic of European art-house cinema, which I applaud. I will not say anymore on the film, except to recommend it as something to watch when there really isn't much else on TV or in the video shop. Not a bad effort - but there are so many better films out there...
The reason that the film was re-released in the UK in 2005 "Island of the Damned" is because the film was initially a flop, so the distributors tried to re-market the film as a horror movie. This is no horror movie, it's barely even a thriller.
It's slow to get going, and to be honest - it's slow all the way through. The director could have cut at least 20 minutes of the version that I saw (120mins). There are a couple of very good twists, and there is some good acting, particularly from the female lead. The camera work is sloppy in some parts, but elsewhere it's rather average. There are also a few plot inconsistencies and quite a lot of continuity errors.
However, the film does have an other-worldly feel to it in parts, which is more characteristic of European art-house cinema, which I applaud. I will not say anymore on the film, except to recommend it as something to watch when there really isn't much else on TV or in the video shop. Not a bad effort - but there are so many better films out there...
A good thriller. At times it did feel like a made-for-TV film, but maybe that was due to the small cast and the constant hospital setting (both of which do give the film a claustrophobic feel).
Unfortunately I missed out on the Q&A session with the director who had attended an earlier showing at the Institut francais in London, otherwise I have nothing much else to add to the other comments posted here.
In short, a creepy film set in a hospital with a good enough cast - but nothing out-of-the-ordinary. One thing that I couldn't get out of my head though: all modern hospitals have CCTV cameras, which would have prevented the events in this film from taking place.
Unfortunately I missed out on the Q&A session with the director who had attended an earlier showing at the Institut francais in London, otherwise I have nothing much else to add to the other comments posted here.
In short, a creepy film set in a hospital with a good enough cast - but nothing out-of-the-ordinary. One thing that I couldn't get out of my head though: all modern hospitals have CCTV cameras, which would have prevented the events in this film from taking place.