IMDb RATING
5.2/10
1.2K
YOUR RATING
A comic drama about a time in the near future when citizens are happy to be property traded on the stock exchange.A comic drama about a time in the near future when citizens are happy to be property traded on the stock exchange.A comic drama about a time in the near future when citizens are happy to be property traded on the stock exchange.
- Awards
- 1 win total
Jennifer Seastone
- Martha
- (as Jenny Seastone Stern)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Consumer goods corporation takes over the world.
The first alien corrupts the world and himself.
Revolutionaries are also good for the economy.
The second alien (The girl from Monday) searches for the first alien.
Will the second alien also get corrupted?
Or will she save alien number one?
Or are they both stuck here forever?
And who cares?
The pace of the movie can challenge a snail.
The loud background noise cannot pass for music.
Luckily, they did not try too much CGI as it is a very stationary story.
Lots of potty mouth but no really gratuities sex scenes.
Even the DVD extras are boring and non- informative.
The first alien corrupts the world and himself.
Revolutionaries are also good for the economy.
The second alien (The girl from Monday) searches for the first alien.
Will the second alien also get corrupted?
Or will she save alien number one?
Or are they both stuck here forever?
And who cares?
The pace of the movie can challenge a snail.
The loud background noise cannot pass for music.
Luckily, they did not try too much CGI as it is a very stationary story.
Lots of potty mouth but no really gratuities sex scenes.
Even the DVD extras are boring and non- informative.
"Simple Men," "Amateur," and "Henry Fool" are among the films of Hal Hartley--one of the wittiest and most sophisticated independent directors working in America today.
After seeing "Simple Men," I eagerly waited the release on video of each new Hartley film, and relentlessly hunted down his early work and short films as well. Mostly, I found his movies to be totally and refreshingly offbeat, unpredictable, and irreverent--yet also very watchable--with great plots, likable characters, and a sense of humor that was wry and goofy by turns.
His photographic style was crisp and painterly; and though it may it may have looked conventional, its flat lighting and muted colors, coupled with deadpan dialogue and the movement and ear of a good play, it was obvious to anyone that this was genuine "auteur" direction.
But Hartley's more recent work"The Book of Life," "No Such Thing," and now "The Girl from Monday," has failed to stir in me even the slightest interest. There are vestiges in these films of vintage Hartley; but the thrill is definitely gone.
As he did in "The Book of Life," Hartley once again decides to offset the horizon in almost every scenea few degrees to the left, a few degrees to the rightand he indulges in other eccentricities as well, like cutting out frames to make the motion jagged, or moving the camera in and out of focusin short adding disruption after disruption--all to no purpose that I can discover. Personally, I find nothing interesting and nothing functional in this new, crabbed style of his.
The plot of "Girl" is jejune in the extremeyet another distopic look at a future of totalitarian rule, with a bit of alien intervention to muddy the mix still further. (Someone on this list compared the sci-fi facet to "The Man Who Fell To Earth." Indeed, the theft is so blatant, Roeg should have been mentioned in the credits.) This movie has little to recommend iteven for a Hartley enthusiast like I (was).
After seeing "Simple Men," I eagerly waited the release on video of each new Hartley film, and relentlessly hunted down his early work and short films as well. Mostly, I found his movies to be totally and refreshingly offbeat, unpredictable, and irreverent--yet also very watchable--with great plots, likable characters, and a sense of humor that was wry and goofy by turns.
His photographic style was crisp and painterly; and though it may it may have looked conventional, its flat lighting and muted colors, coupled with deadpan dialogue and the movement and ear of a good play, it was obvious to anyone that this was genuine "auteur" direction.
But Hartley's more recent work"The Book of Life," "No Such Thing," and now "The Girl from Monday," has failed to stir in me even the slightest interest. There are vestiges in these films of vintage Hartley; but the thrill is definitely gone.
As he did in "The Book of Life," Hartley once again decides to offset the horizon in almost every scenea few degrees to the left, a few degrees to the rightand he indulges in other eccentricities as well, like cutting out frames to make the motion jagged, or moving the camera in and out of focusin short adding disruption after disruption--all to no purpose that I can discover. Personally, I find nothing interesting and nothing functional in this new, crabbed style of his.
The plot of "Girl" is jejune in the extremeyet another distopic look at a future of totalitarian rule, with a bit of alien intervention to muddy the mix still further. (Someone on this list compared the sci-fi facet to "The Man Who Fell To Earth." Indeed, the theft is so blatant, Roeg should have been mentioned in the credits.) This movie has little to recommend iteven for a Hartley enthusiast like I (was).
So hopefully this was just a blip on the screen of an otherwise good career. Was the talk of the Sundance shuttle bus...but not in a good way.
Too many amateurish techniques. Voice over narration in an attempt to get a noir feeling but most of the time was actually for exposition because the story wasn't getting told on the screen.
Bad camera technique that would be okay in small doses (ie: a dream sequence) but was tiring and distracting from the opening credits onward. Kept waiting for the "real" movie to start.
The girl from Monday doesn't make an appearance for quite awhile in the movie and then gets left in an apartment to learn to use her body (or course she swam out of the ocean quite well).
Anyway...I had to leave about the time the boy was getting "raped" in the school bathroom. Time is too precious at Sundance and I went to "Rory O'Shea was Here" and the contrast couldn't have been higher between the two.
Is probably a waste of time to anyone but his fans.
D.
Too many amateurish techniques. Voice over narration in an attempt to get a noir feeling but most of the time was actually for exposition because the story wasn't getting told on the screen.
Bad camera technique that would be okay in small doses (ie: a dream sequence) but was tiring and distracting from the opening credits onward. Kept waiting for the "real" movie to start.
The girl from Monday doesn't make an appearance for quite awhile in the movie and then gets left in an apartment to learn to use her body (or course she swam out of the ocean quite well).
Anyway...I had to leave about the time the boy was getting "raped" in the school bathroom. Time is too precious at Sundance and I went to "Rory O'Shea was Here" and the contrast couldn't have been higher between the two.
Is probably a waste of time to anyone but his fans.
D.
Being a huge fan of the films that Hartley did in the 90's, I couldn't wait to see this movie at Sundance. In fact it was one of the two movies I absolutely had to see (the other one was Mirrormask).
I can't say that I got what I expected. The movie proclaims itself to be a "Science fiction film by Hal Harley". It is neither science fiction (unless you count Kurt Vonnegut as science fiction), nor a typical Harley film. The special effects that you expect in a science fiction are nowhere to be found. In fact, big chunks of the movie aren't even in technicolor.
The whole movie is shot with very long exposure times and frame rates reaching down to 5-10 fps, leading to a totally dreamlike look.
But enough about technicalities... 'As I said the movie was a surprise but a very pleasant one. Harley uses his favorite themes of alienation (this time with actual aliens) and random, but very deep personal connections. He paints a weird but very familiar world of people treating sex as a means to getting what they want -- but with a quite interesting twist. Other current subjects, like civil liberties (ie: the lack thereof) and teenage crime are also treated to a round of deep black, dripping irony.
All in all I would recommend the movie, but not as a mindless Friday-night excursion. I give it an A.
I can't say that I got what I expected. The movie proclaims itself to be a "Science fiction film by Hal Harley". It is neither science fiction (unless you count Kurt Vonnegut as science fiction), nor a typical Harley film. The special effects that you expect in a science fiction are nowhere to be found. In fact, big chunks of the movie aren't even in technicolor.
The whole movie is shot with very long exposure times and frame rates reaching down to 5-10 fps, leading to a totally dreamlike look.
But enough about technicalities... 'As I said the movie was a surprise but a very pleasant one. Harley uses his favorite themes of alienation (this time with actual aliens) and random, but very deep personal connections. He paints a weird but very familiar world of people treating sex as a means to getting what they want -- but with a quite interesting twist. Other current subjects, like civil liberties (ie: the lack thereof) and teenage crime are also treated to a round of deep black, dripping irony.
All in all I would recommend the movie, but not as a mindless Friday-night excursion. I give it an A.
It has a promising plot line, and some quite interesting performances and direction, but overall I felt the film lacked substance.
Except for its unique idea of sex-for-points, it's filled with simple notions such as "advertising is bad" and "freedom is good." Both are valid beliefs, but neither are explored with much originality.
It played out like a weak version of an excellent novel or short story. Great soundtrack, though.
(BTW, I believe the opening credits read "A Science Fiction by Hal Hartley," not "A Science Fiction Film by Hal Hartley," as the first reviewer wrote. Not sure exactly what he means by that, but it is probably significant to Hartley.)
Except for its unique idea of sex-for-points, it's filled with simple notions such as "advertising is bad" and "freedom is good." Both are valid beliefs, but neither are explored with much originality.
It played out like a weak version of an excellent novel or short story. Great soundtrack, though.
(BTW, I believe the opening credits read "A Science Fiction by Hal Hartley," not "A Science Fiction Film by Hal Hartley," as the first reviewer wrote. Not sure exactly what he means by that, but it is probably significant to Hartley.)
Did you know
- TriviaWhile Cecelia is listening back to test scores, one student's name mentioned is "Warren Cuccurullo", the name of a guitarist who's played with Frank Zappa, Missing Persons and Duran Duran.
- Quotes
Jack: There was a dictatorship of the consumer now. What most people wanted most of the time, and were willing to pay for, was good. Whatever defied the logic of the market was bad. Automatic world. Disposable income was the chief revolutionary virtue. Everyone had what they wanted, always. As long as they did their part and threw themselves, body and soul, towards the aim of economic supremacy.
- How long is The Girl from Monday?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Девушка из понедельника
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $921
- Runtime
- 1h 24m(84 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content