Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.
Possible spoiler alert? The artistic meditativeness to Refn's approach to this film may be a little more realized than it was with 1996's "Pusher", but nevertheless, this effort is even more of the very thing that ruined Refn's breakout, and even seriously threatened Refn's decent follow-up, "Bleeder", having an experimental, almost abstract, and perhaps even intentionally incoherent structure that is not only questionable, but frustrates with pretentiousness, or at least too much ambition.
Cinemark
8/10 – Worth one viewing.
With an elliptical style and open-ended interpretations, it is definitely not for those who like their mysteries spelled out and tied up neatly. Was this review helpful to you? Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn and written by Refn and Hubert Selby Jr. from an original story by Selby, Fear X is the story of a man who deals with strange visions that he believes has something to do with his wife’s murder. View All Photos (2) Eventually, he thinks he's on the right track, and tries to track down old Mr.
|
His …
Paramount. While aiming for a certain dreamlike aesthetic ala David Lynch for some odd reason, the movie falls flat on its face.
Very bland. Once the fear has passed, just in time for nap, visual and musical style are sometimes played in an immersive fashion by highlights in a directorial performance by Nicolas Winding Refn that bring some life to the film, though not as much as John Turturro's inspired lead performance, which does about as much as anything in bring the final product to the brink of decency, which is ultimately defied by the serious underdevelopment, overambition, monotonously unfocused dragging and near-punishingly dull atmospheric dryness that back a questionable drawn non-plot concept, and drive "Fear X" into mediocrity, in spite of highlights than can't quite obscure the many shortcomings. Johnny Carson Recommended for you
I found it to be quite effective and genuinely intriguing up until halfway, then it became gradually apparent that there really was no cogent story. The film feels a little less amateur than "Pusher", - a cheap debut feature for some underexperienced Dane trying to make abstract art - and it's that which brings the final product closer to decency, because many of the missteps that ruined "Pusher" feel more considerable in this superior, but still misguided effort, which has a good bit to commend, but even more to complain about as questionable "story"telling notes that ultimately send the final product crashing into mediocrity. Revisit the roles that put stars like Keep up with all the biggest announcements and updates with IMDb's breaking news roundup of Comic-Con@Home 2020.Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site?
January 25, 2005 What happens afterwards, in Refn and the late Hubert Selby, Jr.'s can't-resist-obscurity-and-ambiguity screenplay will disappoint most filmgoers. Trying to underplay conventional plotting as much as it can, this film is seriously meditative upon the life of a man who we barely known anything about, and makes matters worse by portraying gradual exposition in too abstract of a fashion for you to receive the impact of the would-be remedies for characterization shortcomings that do indeed go a very long way in distancing you from a conceptually sympathetic and worthy lead. PG-13 (for intense thematic material)
Moviehouse Entertainment (One would think the most prudent course of action would be to not bring up the subject at all and to try to subtly get his mind onto something else.) Still, in the end, despite the best efforts of the onscreen and offscreen talent, the final product falls flat in way too many places, even as a character study, in spite of Turtorro's inspired performance.
Two stories for the price of one: Lenny works in a video shop and tries to get aquainted with the waitress Lea.
