best movie i've ever seen.

Absolutely the worst movie.

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

it starts out well - a reasonably interesting premise, albeit not particularly original, and some good shooting of the Indian phantasmagoria. thereafter it's downhill all the way - be warned.some have admired the challenging themes and how they are handled. well, yes, they might have been - in another movie. i found it seriously ridiculous but then wondered if perhaps i was misinterpreting a spoof? either way it doesn't work. as drama it falls absolutely flat - the characters are not even one-dimensional or pantomime - they just bend willy nilly to whatever the writers want them to play in the next scene. there is no complexity here - just a jumble, a pastiche of switching back and forth between free floating exercises from drama school, with straw characters.a few slapstick moments reflect the level of such humour as there is. dumbass ponytail walks into a post; air head mother looks away at (supposedly) attractive male while child leaping into her arms belly flops to the ground; harvey keitel limps around the outback dressed in a frock. insipid.harvey keitel's role seems to be 'bad cop' transposed via an absurd portrayal of a cult-buster to the outback.kate winslet takes her clothes off, full frontal. big deal. maybe this had more market appeal in 1999, just before every form of sex/erotica/porn was freely available over the internet.suspending disbelief is inherent to much of movie enjoyment, but beggaring belief (except in fantasy)poisons any potential enjoyment. the scripted puppetry with which kate winslet moves in no time at all from sannyasin to being groped by two drunks in a bar is awful. it does not portray a confused young woman worth taking seriously - it is just another scene utterly manufactured out of sheer vacuity on the part of the campions.etc.

I wanted to like Holy Smoke more than I did. There is a clear study in the film, a likable element about it that establishes one thing, develops that and then has the audacity to spin things around onto its head for our own amusement. The film isn't bad as much as it is a little misguided and inconsistent in tone; thus, a tad frustrating by the end. It would have been nice for the film not to have spilt out into a realm of comedy and not get so over-rawed by itself when it relies purely on the image of Harvey Keitel in a dress to get across feeling instead of developing what new level it's attempting to lever up onto.The film is principally a study of the power certain people or 'texts' can have over others, or those of a weaker, more naive, disposition. The one thing the film does tell us is that it can be anybody who falls for the charms or tricks of anybody else, even macho PJ Waters (Keitel) who is supposed to be this ego-driven; ever immune; hard-as-nails; 'never takes no for an answer' and 'nobody puts one over him' caricature. The film's other victim of texts or ideation's that have 'influenced' them to act in artificial ways is a certain Ruth Barron (Winslet), a simplistic and relatively likable Australian girl with a steady life and a family that is very fond of her.PJ exists in the film because of Ruth's inability to deal with the influence a certain Indian guru's image and ideas have on her. Ruth exists in the film to bring PJ into her life and furthermore influence him in both a spiritual and sexual sense. For the best part, the film looks at what affect certain texts and teachings can have on the young and outgoing plus whatever affect those attempting an anti-thesis on these beliefs can further suffer at the hands of their own patient. Unfortunately, the film cannot hold it all together and incorporates elements including, but not limited to: slapstick comedy; loose, sexy women as a drive for potential humour; well-known, female global stars in the nude for sake of hearsay as well as well known, male global stars dressed as women for a similar sake.The film begins with Ruth in India. Whilst there, she falls under the influence of a popular Indian guru at the tapping of a forehead and a staring into the eyes. Job done, it would seem. Following this, she becomes trapped in the mindsets and ways of life so much so, that her mother has to fly out in order to 'rescue' her. Ruth doesn't come home initially, but after some banter and some comedy revolving around what a supposed dump really India is, she returns to Oz. Once home, there is a particularly eerie scene in which members of her own family have gathered as one to subdue her, thus refraining her from escaping back to the 'evil' world of India with all their 'evil' influential practises that they do on young, Western women. Could have been worse; they could've conned her into giving away her credit card details as well.Hark, when there's something strange – and it don't look good, who are you going to call? Why, PJ Waters of course – a man listed somewhere in the phone-book under 'exorcist', I imagine. PJ is charged with ridding Ruth of these Hindu beliefs. I didn't think it would be so easy, otherwise we wouldn't have had a film, would we? I was expecting it to bed down and become a struggle of sexual politics as this gum chewing, snake skin boot wearing, shades wearing person, who's given all the build up he needs, went up against this young woman out to discover herself in the big, wide world. I was expecting a study of identities, a look at the role of one's self in contemporary Australia and how the Indian 'beliefs' perhaps elevated her to a new spiritual sense thus helping her see things the way she wanted.What we get is a bizarre passage of events. The 'exorcism' plays out and mutates into a sort of 'patient begins to become object of doctor's desire' relationship between the two that further aids in bringing out PJ Waters' feminine side, so to speak. I found it quite amusing at how female director Jane Campion turns the tables on us; how she presents the female of the piece as weak minded and foolish, while the male is the battle-weary, intellectual individual out to 'correct' the female before mixing it all up and turning it on its head. Alas, on the whole, Campion is more interested in shooting Winslet in an array of skimpy outfits (before Kietel gets a chance of his own); she is more interested in a young boy dressed as Batman jumping off a car roof and smacking into the ground as a guardian fails to catch him; she is more interested in the flirtatious attitudes of Yvone (Lee) to act as humour and when lines like "I'm sorry Ruth, I should never have slept with you." from PJ evoke guffaws more than anything else, you sort of realise things are not all well.There were some things I liked about Holy Smoke, but they aren't focused on enough for me to recommend it. Once Ruth becomes PJ's object of desire following a bizarre scene in a night club, the film falls apart somewhat and just becomes a slightly unconventional love story with very un-cinematic, and un-likable in equal measure, words like 'quirky' and 'kooky' being able to be attributed to it. The premise has been solved, we're heading off in new directions and the whole thing just fizzles out in a misery-strewn manner. Not a disaster, but not focused and even enough to be fond of.

Holy Smoke (1999) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Extremely bizarre story of a young woman named Ruth (Kate Winslet) who gets involved in an Indian cult, which worries her family. The family brings in a deprogrammer (Harvey Keitel) who is a specialist at breaking young woman who have fallen under the spell of cult members. I can't say this is a totally winning film but it did keep me entertained from start to finish and just when you thought it couldn't get any stranger it certainly does in its second half. This film really isn't about cults but instead the struggles between men and women. The first film has Keitel pulling his magic on Winslet who, in the second half, gets her revenge by putting her hooks into him. Whereas the first film has some sort of religious undertone the second half is a weird sexual journey, which includes Winslet in a full nudity scene, one with her kissing a woman and we even get to see Keitel in a dress walking around a desert in one boot. I'm really not sure what the film is trying to say or if its even trying to say anything at all. Campion is best known for The Piano, which also had Keitel but that film seems normal compared to this one. I've heard people call this a feminist movie, which might be correct but again the ending would lead you to believe this isn't correct. The movie is all over the map in terms of what it's trying to say and do so I guess it's going to be up to the viewer to try and make up their own mind. I'm sure many people will find the film slow and boring but the pacing is what dragged me into the movie and got me caught up with the characters. I think fans of Keitel and Winslet will be the ones walking away entertained because both give great performances and really work well together. Both are so deep into their roles that you can't help but be fascinated by each step they make and in the end they're what saves an otherwise pointless film.

Contains some spoilers. I will say right out that the movie is well worth seeing. It is interesting and engaging. The two stars, Kate Winslet and Harvey Keitel are both excellent actors, and they have some challenging material to work with. Some stars are lovely to watch. They radiate a presence that is engaging and enjoyable. Their acting skills may be limited but we always enjoy seeing them. Others are good at their craft, excellent actors who can create a mood and scene and a believability that draws you into the film. Then there are a few that have both the charisma and the skill. When that happens they can take just about any script and make it interesting. Both these actors are in that category.As you may have guessed the problem with the film is the script. Not so much the actual dialog, which is good, but the plotting and character development. Due to the skill of the stars you may not even notice flaws, but then again you might. It may be that the writer/director simply took on more than she could handle. Although it would have been a bit dull and predictable, the movie would have worked quite well as a simple movie about "deprogramming" a girl who got taken up in a cult in India. However, the writer/director wanted to go beyond that. We all have our addictions. Sometimes it's a substance but more often it is an emotion, or a certain kind of thrill, self pity, a desire for power and dominance. I call these kind of addictions "character addictions." We all have darker things in our soul that we try to wrestle with. Deep seated desires and flaws. When people get caught up in a cult or a substance addiction it is usually an effort to handle or exploit these character addictions and character flaws. In the film the writer director attempts to explore this darker side of addiction, and in doing so delves into the emotions, desires and drives that we all have which we desperately try to manage and cover up. What starts out as a Macho American trying to deprogram a sexy but foolish Australian girl turns into a soul searching, and at times terrifying exploration of the darker side of both of these people.Oh, if only Jane Campion, the writer/director, had been able to pull it off. However, she doesn't. As the characters descend into their darker thoughts and emotions the steps are abrupt and unconvincing. Kate seems to go from having some doubts, to grief, to insanity and voracious sexual desire - all in a flash with no real convincing turning points. Harvey, who knows he stepping into very dangerous territory and has had enough experience not to resist it, suddenly succumbs. We don't really see the reasons for this in his previous behavior.Despite all this and other plotting issues, the movie does work, mainly due to the skill and charisma of the stars. I give Jane Campion a 10 for wanting to go beyond the ordinary, but a 3 for not realizing it was inadequate. The stars get 10's. The supporting cast gets about a 4. They are meant to be comic relief but come off as too silly for real life. The exception is Julie Hamilton as mum. She perfectly plays a deeply loving mother who, if not very bright, has a heart as big as the world, and would do anything, and give anything for her child.Enjoyable, even if it is a bit confused and disturbing; a must see if you like these stars.