Blindness
October. 03,2008 RWhen a sudden plague of blindness devastates a city, a small group of the afflicted band together to triumphantly overcome the horrific conditions of their imposed quarantine.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Sorry, this movie sucks
From my favorite movies..
I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.
The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.
Reading the book by Jose Saramago, one of the first things that struck me was the dark tone with which the story was developed. To me, one of the main points of Saramago's writing in this case is making you feel as blind as his characters; you don't know their names, their past, what exactly is happening to them or why. In this sense, it was hard for me to imagine this story being told in a media that relies so much on the visual aspects of a narrative as the cinema. Part of what made possible for me to put myself into the shoes of the characters and, consequently, relate with some of them, was being in the dark with them, having nothing but my imagination to rely on. Watching the movie, however, I was rather surprised by the final result. I had already watched City of God, so I knew how good Fernando Meirelles was, but, given the circumstances, I was trying not to expect too much from this movie in particular. Nevertheless, the choices made by the director made all the difference. After all, he focuses on another idea present in the book to convey the same message, which is that, even though the whole country is going blind, one of the main characters (Julianne Moore) isn't. So, to me, the movie puts you in her place; it makes you able to see in a world where everyone has gone blind. The only time you can't see what's happening is when she is in the dark. Rather than not being able to see, our biggest curse ends up being the very opposite, which is being able to see so many bad things with tied hands. This is what sets the tone to the movie and, in my opinion, one of its greatest achievements. On another note, Julianne Moore's amazing performance creates an antithetic feeling in the audience, some kind of painful hope. If, on the one hand, we are forced to see things the way she does, and she is the one whose hope is the most powerful, on the other hand, we know that we can't go back in time, and that everything that was done will remain in the memories of those affected by it. The photography is both beautiful and brutal at the same time, and the usage of very bright scenes which blur our vision for some seconds is yet another positive point of this adaptation. It conveys the idea that the white blindness might be seen as a metaphor for a kind of "image overdose" as the one discussed by Jonathan Crary (2016) in his book entitled 24/7: Late Capitalism and the Ends of Sleep ("With an infinite cafeteria of solicitation and attraction perpetually available, 24/7 disables vision through processes of homogenization, redundancy, and acceleration.", claims the author). In fact, if you watch the documentary by Brazilian directors João Jardim and Walter Carvalho entitled Janela da Alma (The Window of the Soul), you may realize that it was possibly Saramago's idea from the beginning. More than respectful to the source story, the movie rewrites it with a new perspective while keeping untouched all important events. It's a movie worth watching whether you have read the book or not (even though I definitely recommend that you check the book out) and a piece of art which stands in its own merits.
*Disclaimer*I have read the book before watching the movie, but not completely. So if you are trying to find a review for which the reviewer has not read the book, you were close. Also spoilers.The first thing which struck me when watching the movie was the ethnicity of the first character introduced. My reason for this is the fact that the book made no mention of the man's ethnicity in the book, so the choice is something which I am questioning. Not to say that he was a bad actor, but I do wonder the reasons for the choice.The world was very grey and bland. Even before the blindness struck the city, the sky was grey and everyone was wearing grey or dark colors. Although it fit with what I imagined beforehand going into the movie, I was taken aback by exactly how much grey I was presented with within the first 20 minutes. The plot was consistent and linear, with some scenes questionable, and it is clear within the first minutes of the movie the type of statement it is trying to make. The problem however, is the feeling of emptiness I got the more the movie progressed. Not a feeling of sadness mind you, as I found myself not connecting with the characters in the least, but the feeling that the director for the movie was just as blind in what he wished to portray as the characters in the movie. I got the feeling that it wished to tell a story of dehumanization and disease, but refused to delve deeper into social commentary and felt stunted when watched.Few scenes stuck to me when watching this movie, with only two of them being intentional. The first was the roughly 5 second part played by Sandra Oh from Grey's Anatomy. The second part of the movie which stuck to me was the grossness of the asylum to which they are confined. Fake poop everywhere, trash littering the hallways, layers of grime covering both the people and the walls, all contributed to my feeling of sickness when watching. Although some might say that the director went overboard, I commend him for really immersing me in the setting during the period of the asylum. The only two scenes that was intentional and not just my reaction was the scene of the man and scene of the radio. The part of the "man" which I reference is the part where we see a naked man walking down a road, naked and sunburned, lost. I loved the position of the camera, I loved it all. The other scene, the radio, was more heart-warming. The blind staying still, not making a sound but aware of everyone around them, while music which they have not heard in ages reminds them of the outer world which they are restricted from contaminating.Other than that, I found the movie to be very average. I would like the say "the book was better" but I have not finished the book so I will just keep my mouth shut.
Okay, I admit it. I watched this movie twice, but only because I had read the book. The first time watched it I just switch on the subtitles and played the movie at x4 speed, as I can read fairly fast. Even then it was slow and boring, but for some reason I felt I had missed something and did not get the full effect of the film. So I watched it a second time with a friend, at normal speed, and I realised what I missed was a torturous 2 hours where I could have been doing something else. The film was simply terrible. At least at x4 speed it is over in 30 minutes, but at 2 hours the agony is simply prolonged. I wished I had read the reviews here first. I might have avoided this train wreck. The sad part is it is not that much different from the book, which I always had an issue with. I felt it was written from one man's very limited perspective on humanity and his complete lack of understanding of actual blindness. Blind people do not behave like retarded farm animals, and a caring wife would not so easily allow herself to get raped for food. It just goes to show the writers imagination is quite limited, if he thinks people behave in such a way. It also shows he has little life experience, which is strongly reflected in the film. Simply put; this film is neither realistic nor is anything in it believable. Things happen very randomly and the characters are simply cardboard cutouts. I would avoid this film at all costs, unless you enjoy 2 hours of torture. If you insist on watching it, maybe do what I did the first time and play it at x4 speed. It is actually bearable that way.
This movie is horrible the fact that the Main character can see and she still Let's woman get raped The only emotion that comes from this junk Is how one person can justify the suffering of oths Rape scene is hilarious with a bunch of People clinking there walking stick into the wall Love the idiots that say others didn't get the point of this movie. The plot holes are way to many for this movie to watchable What kind of horrible person would allow this to go on when she has the ability to stop it Biggest insult was The idea that an already blind man is any different, was to funny. Try not to laugh at the blind people in this movie to much all just hilarious